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.
Thread beginning with comment 552961
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Well
by twitterfire on Tue 19th Feb 2013 18:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Well"
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11


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.
No, I didn't ask for this. WinRT is forcing me to distribute an application trough Windows Store, which is something I dislike.

What I asked for, is a quality (as in Qt) framework with RAD tools for developing GUI apps which is usable from both C# and C++ and which is available to both managed and native applications. Metro/WinRT isn't something like that.


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.

I know that and I dislike it. I also know about SharpDx and I dislike the fact that I need it to write DirectX apps using C#. I want Microsoft to add official support of C# to DirectX.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Well
by Nelson on Tue 19th Feb 2013 19:02 in reply to "RE[2]: Well"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No, I didn't ask for this. WinRT is forcing me to distribute an application trough Windows Store, which is something I dislike.


I'm sorry, but this is a reality you'll have to accept. The Windows Store is the future of application development on Windows.

You wanted a native XAML stack, sure, you got it, Microsoft agreed with you. With the Windows Store, you come to a fundamental disagreement with their vision for the future.

That's fine, you can't please everyone on everything they want. I'm with you on the need for a native XAML stack though, and for me, I'm pleased I got it.


What I asked for, is a quality (as in Qt) framework with RAD tools for developing GUI apps which is usable from both C# and C++ and which is available to both managed and native applications. Metro/WinRT isn't something like that.


Metro is exactly that. I just don't think you've used it enough. Everything in that paragraph I can do using WinRT.

In fact, I can do even more. I can write half of my app in C++, and have it seamlessly project itself into C# where I don't need to do any interop.

A C++ WinRT component would still be new'd up like a C# object. That's amazing.


I know that and I dislike it. I also know about SharpDx and I dislike the fact that I need it to write DirectX apps using C#. I want Microsoft to add official support of C# to DirectX.


It'd be nice if they did, and they might in the future. I just don't know if the performance hit would be worth it for a lot of scenarios.

The mapping of types in WinRT would make writing a low level API component pretty much a non-starter. But who knows.

I do hope they write a nice fill-in for XNA.

Reply Parent Score: 3