Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Dec 2010 22:56 UTC, submitted by fran
Windows Very light on details, but this is interesting nonetheless - very interesting, and potentially one of the biggest things to have hit the operating systems business this decade. Bloomberg is reporting that Microsoft plans to announce Windows for ARM processors at CES in January 2011.
Thread beginning with comment 454512
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29


Problem here. OpenKode. Works on iOS. Also works meego and symbian and windows ... Basically everything bar the Xbox 360 (unless you pay for development kit for native program then you can make OpenKode stuff work) Thinking it worth while paying for native on the Xbox 360 since native runs a lot better than XNA, blackbery and the Windows Phone 7.


Except that OpenKode is built upon the same set of dodgy standards which have variable support across devices. I take it you've never tried to implement OpenGL ES across more than one Android device? I have. Surely you're aware of the missing vendor extensions, different texture depths to accomondate, and outright quirky behavior of some popular handsets, right?

You've seen the differences in the OGLES implementation of Tegra SoCs vs the Snapdragons or TI SoCs right? No? Okay then.

It's a pain in the ass, a big fucking pain in the ass.


QT also has the same kind of everywhere coverage and its growing. QT is a broader API than OpenKode.


QT is decent, and I've dabbled in Qt Quick, but you're still going to run into a practical limit of productivity. A lot of the Qt stuff is in its infancy when it comes to rich media presentation, and even so, the maturity of the platforms, not to mention the tooling, is woefully inadequate.


The simple point here you are productive in the most non cross platform solution. For me spittng out a OS X/Windows/OSi/Windows mobile 6.5/Android/sybmian application is basically code all the same things and just build for each platform.


I think that's a huge problem. Sure, you're cross platform, but you're forced to shoe horn experience into a least common denominator across all of them.

You're not as cross platform as you think, and even if you are, quality suffers.


I don't call you productive. In fact I call you non productive since you cannot build effectively for 90 percent of the market out there. Sorry 90 percent of desktop is less than 50 percent of the total market out there for graphical apps.


The slice of the market we target is not as relevant as is the amount of returns we get on our investment. We had to spend very little money to get our existing code to go from working on Windows and OSX to working on Windows Phone 7. So in one month we were able to create a new stream of revenue at a cost of very little man hours.

And not just that, we were able to, due to the power of Silverlight, deliver a consistently compelling experience to our customers.


I don't class webos as a competitor to worry about. Market share is too small. .net skills don't help you at all with webos. HTML 5 skills do. So to support it you support web users again. Not coding for a single set of platforms from 1 company.


webOS was actually trivial to do, since web technologies mesh well with how our service pushes data to our clients. Again, a testament to the interoperability of Wcf and its web services.


If what you are coding in is not proper cross platform you are wasting your dollars these days.


I think that's really a cop out, and it's cutting corners. I'd rather be really good on a handful of platform, than mediocre on all of them.

Our returns relative to our investment are good enough for it to be considered a success story in house.

Reply Parent Score: 2

TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

I have no idea what any of this post is trying to say, because it reads like copypasta from a corporate buzzword cookbook.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Haha, you hang around people in my field you start to use their lingo "experiences, immersive, compelling" but the substance of my post is still sound.

Things may be cross platform, ideally, but they're also pieces of crap on each and every platform they exist on.

I'd rather write something good on a few platforms vs writing something bad on a bunch of platforms.

Reply Parent Score: 2

oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30

"
Problem here. OpenKode. Works on iOS. Also works meego and symbian and windows ... Basically everything bar the Xbox 360 (unless you pay for development kit for native program then you can make OpenKode stuff work) Thinking it worth while paying for native on the Xbox 360 since native runs a lot better than XNA, blackbery and the Windows Phone 7.


Except that OpenKode is built upon the same set of dodgy standards which have variable support across devices. I take it you've never tried to implement OpenGL ES across more than one Android device? I have. Surely you're aware of the missing vendor extensions, different texture depths to accomondate, and outright quirky behavior of some popular handsets, right?

You've seen the differences in the OGLES implementation of Tegra SoCs vs the Snapdragons or TI SoCs right? No? Okay then.

It's a pain in the ass, a big fucking pain in the ass.
"
And I had the same quirkness with Windows Mobile as well. Its normal chipset hell. Windows Phone 7 will have equal issues from the chipset if it ever gets large enough production. You think .net some how protects you from defective batches of hardware where most of the quirkiness comes from.

Thing is I am tooled up to deal with those differences you are not. Its only a pain in the ass once per problem if you code is implemented right. So all those defects are to me these days is a minor annoyances.

"
QT also has the same kind of everywhere coverage and its growing. QT is a broader API than OpenKode.


QT is decent, and I've dabbled in Qt Quick, but you're still going to run into a practical limit of productivity. A lot of the Qt stuff is in its infancy when it comes to rich media presentation, and even so, the maturity of the platforms, not to mention the tooling, is woefully inadequate.
"
Really I don't find that the case. Most likely because I do come from a KDE background and know what I can pinch from it to cover all the weaknesses .net users have ever listed to me. QT is only the starting point there are a lot of libraries that add features on top of it. Just like .net there are a lot of features that if you don't know the right library to add you cannot do simply.

"
The simple point here you are productive in the most non cross platform solution. For me spittng out a OS X/Windows/OSi/Windows mobile 6.5/Android/sybmian application is basically code all the same things and just build for each platform.


I think that's a huge problem. Sure, you're cross platform, but you're forced to shoe horn experience into a least common denominator across all of them.

You're not as cross platform as you think, and even if you are, quality suffers.
"
Really sorry to say it does not. But yes it does require being prepared to spend some money in the past years on decent compilers that could solve out C++ so removing most of the QT bloat and any other feature interface wrapper you do. So its not shoe horn experience. Its the simple case that you have not been doing this so its scary. At lest the next generation Gcc will near decently optimize C++ so I might be able to stop paying for commercial compliers.

"
I don't call you productive. In fact I call you non productive since you cannot build effectively for 90 percent of the market out there. Sorry 90 percent of desktop is less than 50 percent of the total market out there for graphical apps.


The slice of the market we target is not as relevant as is the amount of returns we get on our investment. We had to spend very little money to get our existing code to go from working on Windows and OSX to working on Windows Phone 7. So in one month we were able to create a new stream of revenue at a cost of very little man hours.

And not just that, we were able to, due to the power of Silverlight, deliver a consistently compelling experience to our customers.
"
And you mentioned half assed crossplatform before. Not dealing with vendor extensions to hardware when doing particular operations means that using .Net you don't use the hardware correctly. The exact thing you accused me of earlier. You don't have to use vendor extentions to opengl se to go cross platform. You many need to use them to correct a defective chipset. Now if that is under windows phone 7 the device is basically lemon since the control options will not be exposed. Yes this is another reason why I want Windows Phone 7 dead. Its going to come a big problem as the number of chipsets windows phone 7 increase due to the general chipset defectiveness.

When android was first release we had a nice holiday of no chipset hardware issues. Same with when Windows CE was first released. But with years you know in 12 months the normal hell will be back. Only platforms were we normally don't see this. Is like blackberry and iphone. Where the OS maker is making the device and does not cut corners other wise the dollar signs tempt the makers to use cheaper chips.

Thinking I have been generating a side stream on sybmbian and Windows mobile from before .net existed with very little effort on my part. And the future holds for me android iOS and meego as my side streams in the mobile world. I am really annoyed to lose phone due to MS idea of not providing native API's or means to build C++ effectively.

OS X and Windows production is a basic given. Linux platforms where requested and without legal questions.

Yes I have years of it and my in house stuff is very advanced at dealing with the problems.

"
I don't class webos as a competitor to worry about. Market share is too small. .net skills don't help you at all with webos. HTML 5 skills do. So to support it you support web users again. Not coding for a single set of platforms from 1 company.


webOS was actually trivial to do, since web technologies mesh well with how our service pushes data to our clients. Again, a testament to the interoperability of Wcf and its web services.
"
Remember webOS is a platform by HP. And what you just described does not work with it well at all. No .net at all and applications have to be able to work without web access since they might be a printer or something else strange. I guess you are missing a space. Web OS the term. Not webos the trademarked OS name for the decent-ant of palm os's. That HP is talking about releasing phones containing.

Yes I hate terms that a insanely close to.
GTK and QT both have worked out there mistake on missing website support and are working on correcting that. But for websites I normally use PHP anyhow. Hosting is cheaper.

"
If what you are coding in is not proper cross platform you are wasting your dollars these days.


I think that's really a cop out, and it's cutting corners. I'd rather be really good on a handful of platform, than mediocre on all of them.

Our returns relative to our investment are good enough for it to be considered a success story in house.
"

Really all you are developing is mediocre on a few of them. Where I can develop mediocre on most of them quickly. Focus a bit deeper and and improve particular ones where the most customers are. Yes the very thing you first complained about allows me to focus deeper. Basically you are in a younger firm without enough experience to know better.

Reply Parent Score: 1