Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Dec 2011 21:50 UTC
Windows Fascinating, this. As a Windows Phone 7 user, I can attest that it is every bit as good as iOS and Android - heck, in my experience, it is more polished, more consistent, smoother, and faster than either of those two. Yet, despite raving reviews and glowing user comments all over the web, Windows Phone 7 simply isn't selling. Former Windows Phone 7 general manager Charlie Kindel believes it's because neither carriers nor device makers like the control Microsoft exerts over the platform.
Thread beginning with comment 501378
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not every bit as good.
by reduz on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:26 UTC
reduz
Member since:
2006-02-25

> As a Windows Phone 7 user, I can attest that it is every bit as good as
> iOS and Android - heck, in my experience.


As a Developer it's not only NOT even a bit as good as Android, It's a turd. It's .net only and there is simply no way to port existing iOS and Android apps, since it can't run C++, Java or Objective C. It also does not support OpenGL ES, something Android, IOS, Bada, QNX, nacl, etc support.

If you make a new phone OS, at least make it easy to port your Android or iOS apps to it, that arrogant attitude of forcing developers to use .net and DirectX is their doom.

So, what hopes does that phone hold given that it will probably never be popular with developers?

Reply Score: 13

v RE: Not every bit as good.
by cetp on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:44 in reply to "Not every bit as good."
RE: Not every bit as good.
by moondevil on Tue 27th Dec 2011 22:50 in reply to "Not every bit as good."
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

As far as apps go, WP7 already has lots of them, so .NET is not an issue for the developers and customers won't care as long as their favorite apps are available.

The main issue is what people are buying.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by leos on Wed 28th Dec 2011 00:38 in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

As far as apps go, WP7 already has lots of them, so .NET is not an issue for the developers and customers won't care as long as their favorite apps are available.


Yes there are "lots", but there are some very significant missing players like Skype. That's a direct result of Microsoft "my way or the highway" approach to development that makes it pretty difficult for Skype to bring something to the platform in a reasonable timeframe.

Apple got away with that approach for a long time and even they softened their stance eventually to allow other frameworks and languages to target iOS. Funny how Microsoft didn't learn anything from the history of iOS or Android.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Not every bit as good.
by dastopher on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:00 in reply to "Not every bit as good."
dastopher Member since:
2011-12-27

Lolol!

I love developing for Windows Phone. Waaay better than Android.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by David on Tue 27th Dec 2011 23:06 in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
David Member since:
1997-10-01

I think the way this is breaking down is:

Developers who use/like .NET like developing for WP7
Developers who don't want to use .NET won't develop for WP7.

Microsoft built its empire by building up a vast army of developers for its platform. (Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers! )

But it's not having much luck getting all its Windows developers to rush to WP7, and the developers who've already made an investment in mobile don't want to do .NET development (It was bad enough having their arms twisted into picking up Obj-C)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by reduz on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:38 in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
reduz Member since:
2006-02-25

Some people love being poor.

The point is pretty much that it's not nearly as profitable to write apps for WP7. Even if profits were half the profits of iOS, it still would make little sense because it means rewriting everything and crippling your app because it will run slower on .net.

Edited 2011-12-28 03:40 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Not every bit as good.
by lindkvis on Thu 29th Dec 2011 00:06 in reply to "RE: Not every bit as good."
lindkvis Member since:
2006-11-21

Lolol!

I love developing for Windows Phone. Waaay better than Android.


That may well be, but professional software houses care less about how nice it is to develop for and more about what is going to give them the most sales for the least development effort.

And it just so happens that you can develop a core engine in C++, including OpenGL, to target both iOS and Android. You will have to develop some platform specific stuff on top of this (i.e. GUI in Objective-C for iOS), but depending on which type of app you are developing, you may be able to retain a considerable cross-platform engine.

Not so with WP7. Here you have to ditch almost everything and develop most of your app from scratch, because Microsoft refuses to support C++ and OpenGL.

It is a brain dead decision, that would work if and only if Microsoft was the dominant player in the smart phone market. This is not the case.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Not every bit as good.
by aaronmcohen on Wed 28th Dec 2011 03:18 in reply to "Not every bit as good."
aaronmcohen Member since:
2011-09-19

It is a true that dot net developers who develop for Windows will be able to somewhat easily port to WP7. I say somewhat because majority of dot net applications include unmanaged code. Unfortunately this would have been helpful 4 years ago. We already have two code bases for Android and IOS. Adding a third for a platform that isn't popular yet is not really enticing. Well... unless you are Netflix and need to be on every platform under the Sun whether it is used or not.

WP7 does HTML 5 extremely well (minus a few things) and that is the only common development platform across all the mobile platforms. The funny thing is that IOS was originally intended for apps to be HTML only. The actual opening of the IOS APIs came later. So developing for WP7 via HTML may be more popular than dot net initially.

The best hope WP7 has to succeed is to be cheaper than the rest by a lot. Some people are willing to pay the Apple Premium and the rest are happy with Android. There is a lot of hope on Nokia. There are some really smart people working at Nokia but they seem to be on the defense right now.

On a side note I think the Mobile Metro UI needs to be pulled back a bit. It is neat but eventually gets annoying. Especially the full bleed canvases. As much as the IOS is ugly... my father can use it. WP7 c Anyone that claims it is the easiest UI can simply look at the book that comes with a WP7 Phone on how to use it. Compare that to the 7 page booklet that comes with the iPhone.

You may have noticed that I left out QNX and Blackberry OS.

Reply Parent Score: 2

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

C# is common.... MonoTouch and Mono for Android Allow developers to write a single code base and compile to the correct platform.... and since you are already in Mono, converting to .net and XAML isn't too much work.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Not every bit as good.
by jbasko on Fri 30th Dec 2011 18:43 in reply to "Not every bit as good."
jbasko Member since:
2009-03-17

Or is it just a matter of history i.e. who arrived first? If W7 and iOS landed the same time, I'd develop .NET over Objective C for sure. I've never coded an app for either platform, but the tooling from MS alone would definitely drive me there.

You might complain that you can't port your apps from Apple/Android to .NET. Yeah that's tough, but we know there's no silver bullet and this one isn't even wooden. But that might not be the aim. It's probably much easier to port and slim down an already existent desktop application to W7 though. Maybe, just maybe that's their angle...

Microsoft can build great products. People sometimes love to hate the big guy - maybe it's just human nature.

Reply Parent Score: 1