Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Feb 2013 21:18 UTC
Microsoft "Although Bill Gates stepped away from his day-to-day role at Microsoft nearly five years ago, he still keeps a close eye on the company he co-founded - and he isn't always happy with what he sees. During a recent interview broadcast this morning on CBS This Morning, the Microsoft chairman was asked by Charlie Rose whether he was happy with Steve Ballmer's performance as chief executive. Noting that there have been 'many amazing things' accomplished under Ballmer's leadership in the past couple of years, Gates said he was not satisfied with the company's innovations." It's impossible to deny by this point that Microsoft hasn't done well in mobile. It would be more surprising if Gates had denied it.
Permalink for comment 552944
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Well
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 17:13 UTC in reply to "Well"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Windows was their best selling product and they did poor in the mobile space so they decided to sell Windows on mobile devices, too. Bad idea.


Windows Mobile actually achieved decent sales success and Windows Phone has sold millions of devices. The only issue is that it is not hundreds of millions of devices, but hey, things are improving.

I'm not entirely sure its a bad idea, and people who have tried Windows Phones find they generally review very well, perform very well, and have acceptable battery life.


Unifying desktop and mobile operating systems might be a nice idea but not if you do it at any cost.

Cramming Windows on mobile devices sucks and forcing desktop users into using a mobile UI like Metro is a terrible idea, too.


I don't think Desktop users are forced into using Metro at all, in fact, I'm writing this comment on IE10 running on the Windows 8 desktop. This is a myth.


They should have gone the Apple way: one OS for the desktop with a desktop UI and one very slim OS for phone and tablet. Try to unify mobile and desktop OS little by little.


Apple's strategy made sense for Apple. They bootstrapped their Tablet OS on their Phone OS. Microsoft has bootstrapped their Tablet OS on their Desktop OS.

Both leveraged success in one area to attempt to create success in another area. Its paying off for Microsoft. Their Windows Store is still growing at an astonishing rate.

What has actually happened is amazing. Now any developer, be it a student, or just a hobbyist in their basement, can write a good app using very good tools, and make some additional income through the Store. This has significantly lowered the barrier to entry on Windows when it comes to software development.


They still don't have a native framework for GUI RAD like Qt. MFC is a joke in 2013. WPF is cool but you can't develop native apps, which is a shame. Why not enable WPF for native apps? And if you kill XNA, why don't let C# programmers use DirectX?


WPF is a large, complex, largely managed code beast. It is amazingly powerful, but with that power comes a complexity that boggles the mind. You can do anything in WPF, including shoot your foot off.

Metro takes WPF slims it down, simplifies it, and makes it suitable for development in 2013. It also enables you to use it from C++ which is something you asked for.

As for DirectX, Windows 8 has made this easier with the Windows Runtime. Now you can just write a simple DirectX wrapper in C++/CX, deploy it as a Windows Runtime component, and project it into C# and use it as if it were a C# class.

In fact, this is exactly what SharpDx does on their Metro profile. If you're looking for something close to XNA, try MonoGame which is Mono's implementation of XNA and works on Windows 8.

Reply Parent Score: 3