The Windows 10 April 2018 update has arrived! Get the new Dell XPS 15, starting at $999.99
11-15-2014 06:23 AM
74 123
tools
  1. purefire21's Avatar
    I think its mostly the WP languages C# C++ I'm not a developer but may that language is really hard for so to make apps
    11-04-2014 06:49 PM
  2. purefire21's Avatar
    After some research it's really C++ not marketshare! C++ is difficult compared to apples c and android Java. That's really the problem. If Microsoft developed WP base on C like apple we would have the same amount of apps
    11-04-2014 07:14 PM
  3. a5cent's Avatar
    Facebook? Snapchat? Even Instagram's half hearted effort could be in this list. What about them?
    You can find exceptions to any rule. That doesn't mean much. Admittedly, I'd also like to know what is up with them though.

    What matters is the general trend, and I do think it's fair to say that WP has most of the major apps now, and is still getting more every day. That definitely wouldn't be happening if market share was a general problem. If market share was still a major obstacle, then NOBODY would be delivering apps for WP, which clearly isn't the case.

    Edit:
    Tying this to "market share" is probably misleading. It's really about having a user base that is, in absolute numbers, large enough to make app development worthwhile. Whether that is 2% or 20% of the market isn't really the issue. Maybe that's what is bugging you?
    Last edited by a5cent; 11-05-2014 at 07:47 AM. Reason: formatting + edit
    11-04-2014 07:58 PM
  4. colinkiama's Avatar
    But then why not just dual boot W8.1 on your Mac? Like I said, you can already develop WP apps on a Mac. That works great. What you can't do is develop WP apps on OSX, but if someone is such a fanboy that installing W8.1 on their Mac is an insurmountable obstacle, then how likely is it that MS providing the SDK will change anything? I think pretty much zero.

    Also note that just providing the SDK isn't nearly enough. MS would also have to port Visual Studio and their entire tool chain over to OSX. That's a gargantuan amount of work.
    But they don't want to dual boot to Windows 8. That's the problem
    11-05-2014 12:14 AM
  5. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    But they don't want to dual boot to Windows 8. That's the problem
    Out of curiosity and just asking. How many developers do you know personally that are totally Mac centric?

    I know a few Mac users who dual boot W8.1. Either that or use VM. It's not that hard to accomplish, actually very easy. So either the developers are stuck up or just can't be bothered.

    That's basically what it comes down to. It's not hating W8.1, it's just finding an excuse. That's what a5cent is getting at. If they can't go so far as to dual boot or use VM then they obviously have no interest in making an app in the first place. So it's not W8.1 being the problem it's the image of Windows Phone as the problem. If they felt that it was worth while they would do it.
    Last edited by N_LaRUE; 11-05-2014 at 04:16 AM.
    11-05-2014 02:53 AM
  6. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    After some research it's really C++ not marketshare! C++ is difficult compared to apples c and android Java. That's really the problem. If Microsoft developed WP base on C like apple we would have the same amount of apps
    Could you provide links to your amazing revelation?

    What iOS, WP and Android use is a form of object oriented programming. Syntax is of course different but the concepts are the same. C++ has been around a lot longer than iOS.

    If you know an object oriented programming language you can usually pick up the others rather easily with some basic tutorials easily found on the internet. Also good programming tools help a lot in this instance.
    a5cent, Laura Knotek and jmshub like this.
    11-05-2014 04:02 AM
  7. tgp's Avatar
    You can find exceptions to any rule. That doesn't mean much. Admittedly, I'd also like to know what is up with them though.



    What matters is the general trend, and I do think it's fair to say that WP has most of the major apps now, and is still getting more every day. That definitely wouldn't be happening if market share was a general problem. If market share was still a major obstacle, then NOBODY would be delivering apps for WP, which clearly isn't the case.

    Edit:
    Tying this to "market share" is probably misleading. It's really about having a user base that is, in absolute numbers, large enough to make app development worthwhile. Whether that is 2% or 20% of the market isn't really the issue. Maybe that's what is bugging you?
    For some reason it's become generally accepted here that apps are missing because of low market share, except for Google.

    Google probably barely notices WP. Sure, they know WP is there, but I'm sure they're not scared of them. 3% market share after 4 years? You really think Google is quaking in their proverbial boots? WP sales for one month are equal to Android's for one day.

    So answer this: if Google is scared of WP as you say, then why do they provide some of their best apps for iOS? Google could probably pull those apps and get a few iPhone users, but they've calculated that the gains from having their apps on iOS are greater than the gains from pulling over a few of their users.

    Why does Microsoft itself put their own platform on the back burner? Those complaints are all over this forum. Are they scared of WP taking over and trying to kill it as Google is accused of?
    FinancialP likes this.
    11-05-2014 07:14 AM
  8. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Just a general comment and nitpick at the title of this thread.

    It should be a hypothesis not a theory. Theories are proven where hypothesis are not.

    Just saying...
    a5cent and jmshub like this.
    11-05-2014 08:20 AM
  9. a5cent's Avatar
    So answer this: if Google is scared of WP as you say, then why do they provide some of their best apps for iOS?
    You are putting words in my mouth tgp. Nowhere did I say Google is scared of WP. MS and Google are direct competitors however (Google and Apple not so much), and it would be stupid for Google to support a direct competitor if they don't have to. That's all this is. It's a completely rational business decision and has nothing to do with fear.

    You appear to be saying that WP's market share isn't big enough for Google to care or even notice. I'd say that is most certainly wrong, because WP's market share is easily large enough for Google to earn a handsome profit from its user base. Even if we assume that WP's ecosystem allows Google to extract only 1/10th of Googles alleged average per-user profit , then those 50 million users are still worth over 300 million dollars. Annually! The cost of developing a few apps is a ridiculously small investment compared to that earnings potential. In my book, that ROI is pretty much the opposite of a market that is too small to notice or care about, which is why I say the market share argument is false.

    There is obviously a market share threshold, where Google could no longer afford to ignore WP. If that is all you are looking at, then yes, we could say market share is the problem. However, we aren't asking at what point Google has no choice but to service WP! We are asking at what point WP's market share is big enough to make it economically viable for Google to pursue WP's user base! Those aren't the same thresholds. WP is still far from the former, but has surpassed the later, which is why most of the internationally relevant apps are now reaching WP.

    For some reason it's become generally accepted here that apps are missing because of low market share, except for Google.
    It's not blind Google hatred tgp, or at least on my part it's not. The argument is more nuanced than that. Go back and re-read my earlier posts. It depends on how large your potential user base is. If your apps are marketable internationally (like all of Google's services), then WP is already worth developing for. If it's interesting only to a subset, say WP users in Buford Wyoming, then not so much.
    Last edited by a5cent; 11-05-2014 at 08:57 AM. Reason: spelling
    N_LaRUE likes this.
    11-05-2014 08:43 AM
  10. a5cent's Avatar
    Just a general comment and nitpick at the title of this thread.

    It should be a hypothesis not a theory. Theories are proven where hypothesis are not.

    Just saying...
    Absolutely. I should have seen that. Thx.
    N_LaRUE likes this.
    11-05-2014 08:45 AM
  11. tgp's Avatar
    You are putting words in my mouth tgp. Nowhere did I say Google is scared of WP.
    I didn't clarify, but I didn't mean you specifically. I meant "you" in a plural form, as in general Windows Central posters. There is a general hatred of Google on this forum, as well as the mindset that Google is scared of WP. I use both platforms side-by-side, so I'm in the neutral zone.

    I understand what you mean by Google's services being usable by all WP users and not just a subset. And let me back peddle a bit here: I also do actually agree that the negative effect on WP sales has something to do with Google's decision. But somewhere, there's a line where overall it's more detrimental to Google's bottom line to withhold apps than to provide them. That line has been crossed with iPhone. WP's market share is still small enough that it hasn't been crossed.

    Google wouldn't let potential $$$$$$ lay on the table. WP's market is a total of what, around 50 million. iOS's is pushing 1 billion, which is 20x as many. If Microsoft sold 950 million WPs today, we would see top notch Google apps for WP tomorrow. Even if Google is accounting for the negative effect on sales, it still comes down to market share, or absolute numbers, or whatever you want to call it.
    FinancialP likes this.
    11-05-2014 09:03 AM
  12. colinkiama's Avatar
    I think its mostly the WP languages C# C++ I'm not a developer but may that language is really hard for so to make apps
    Apple used C now they use Swift since iOS 8. Android uses Java. And Windows Phone uses XAML and since WP8.1 it has gained support for C# for WinRT/Universal apps.
    11-05-2014 12:06 PM
  13. colinkiama's Avatar
    Apple used C now they use Swift since iOS 8. Android uses Java. And Windows Phone uses XAML and since WP8.1 it has gained support for C# for WinRT/Universal apps.
    Which is the hardest here developers?
    11-05-2014 12:08 PM
  14. Mike Gibson's Avatar
    WP8+ has, by far, the broadest support for programming languages. You write programs in C#, VB, C++, JavaScript, etc. And Visual Studio is *far* superior to the iOS and Android development environments. The Win8 requirement isn't a obstacle for anyone but the most casual developer.

    IMO, the app gap on WP8+ is due to:

    1. Lack of mindshare in the public
    2. Lack of marketshare
    3. No easy way to generate a WP8 app from iOS or Android source
    4. For games, lack of OpenGL ES in WP8

    Items #3-4 are more nitpicking; items 1-2 are the biggies. No one cares about WP other than the people on this website. I don't know how MSFT can fix that public perception problem. From the ISV perspective, I think it would be worthwhile for MSFT to create a Xamarin-like version of Visual Studio that can generate apps for all three platforms (get as close as possible to creating an app for iOS, Android, and WP8+ with click of a button).
    11-05-2014 01:03 PM
  15. colinkiama's Avatar
    WP8+ has, by far, the broadest support for programming languages. You write programs in C#, VB, C++, JavaScript, etc. And Visual Studio is *far* superior to the iOS and Android development environments. The Win8 requirement isn't a obstacle for anyone but the most casual developer.

    IMO, the app gap on WP8+ is due to:

    1. Lack of mindshare in the public
    2. Lack of marketshare
    3. No easy way to generate a WP8 app from iOS or Android source
    4. For games, lack of OpenGL ES in WP8

    Items #3-4 are more nitpicking; items 1-2 are the biggies. No one cares about WP other than the people on this website. I don't know how MSFT can fix that public perception problem. From the ISV perspective, I think it would be worthwhile for MSFT to create a Xamarin-like version of Visual Studio that can generate apps for all three platforms (get as close as possible to creating an app for iOS, Android, and WP8+ with click of a button).
    Omg this guy cracked the main reason.
    11-05-2014 02:24 PM
  16. JamesPTao's Avatar
    WP8+ has, by far, the broadest support for programming languages. You write programs in C#, VB, C++, JavaScript, etc. And Visual Studio is *far* superior to the iOS and Android development environments. The Win8 requirement isn't a obstacle for anyone but the most casual developer.

    IMO, the app gap on WP8+ is due to:

    1. Lack of mindshare in the public
    2. Lack of marketshare
    3. No easy way to generate a WP8 app from iOS or Android source
    4. For games, lack of OpenGL ES in WP8

    Items #3-4 are more nitpicking; items 1-2 are the biggies. No one cares about WP other than the people on this website. I don't know how MSFT can fix that public perception problem. From the ISV perspective, I think it would be worthwhile for MSFT to create a Xamarin-like version of Visual Studio that can generate apps for all three platforms (get as close as possible to creating an app for iOS, Android, and WP8+ with click of a button).
    I believe windows 10 will circumvent this issue. For app writers being able to write one app and then easily be able to release it to the actual 10 os, WP, and rt (if it still exists, will instantly dramatically increase the consumers reached with the app thus increasing profitability and lowering development cost. I believe this will benefit WP strongly as it wont matter if it is still at 4% market share, being able to do this will make the apps profitable for big companies and if you are going to write the desktop metro app why not do minimal work and release it to WP and increase profitability. For Ms this move was brilliant and will strong benefit WP!
    11-05-2014 02:44 PM
  17. Mike Gibson's Avatar
    I believe windows 10 will circumvent this issue. For app writers being able to write one app and then easily be able to release it to the actual 10 os, WP, and rt (if it still exists, will instantly dramatically increase the consumers reached with the app thus increasing profitability and lowering development cost. I believe this will benefit WP strongly as it wont matter if it is still at 4% market share, being able to do this will make the apps profitable for big companies and if you are going to write the desktop metro app why not do minimal work and release it to WP and increase profitability. For Ms this move was brilliant and will strong benefit WP!
    I'm not sure why there's this belief that Win10 will suddenly change things with WinRT/WP and developers. Right now you can already create a shared solution that will generate WinRT81 and WP81 app executables. The problem is that there is no demand for Metro/WP apps. Desktop users want Win32 programs because they have more functionality than Metro apps. Developers don't want to spend precious development time dealing with the huge differences between Win32 and WinRT (which goes all the way down to simple things like reading, writing, and enumerating files).

    MSFT blew it with WinRT/WinPRT. They already had a portable OS and API in Win32. All they had to do was create a scalable UI API for Win32, tighten up security in the API, and, most importantly, backport those changes to Win7.
    11-05-2014 07:56 PM
  18. a5cent's Avatar
    <snipped>
    But somewhere, there's a line where overall it's more detrimental to Google's bottom line to withhold apps than to provide them. That line has been crossed with iPhone. WP's market share is still small enough that it hasn't been crossed.

    Google wouldn't let potential $$$$$$ lay on the table. WP's market is a total of what, around 50 million. iOS's is pushing 1 billion, which is 20x as many. If Microsoft sold 950 million WPs today, we would see top notch Google apps for WP tomorrow. Even if Google is accounting for the negative effect on sales, it still comes down to market share, or absolute numbers, or whatever you want to call it.
    I think the part about "Google not leaving money on the table" may not have been exactly what you wanted to say, because it's clear that is exactly what Google is doing, by not perusing the WP user base. Even an extremely conservative approximation suggests Google is leaving hundreds of million of dollars on the table, annually. I suspect what you meant to say is simply that this uncollected revenue isn't going to waste, because Google is getting something in return, namely suppressed WP growth. That I would agree with.

    Otherwise I think we agree on all the substantive issues. I think our disagreement is really only about presentation:

    I agree that "if Microsoft sold 950 million WPs today, we would see top notch Google apps for WP tomorrow". However, Google would do so not because that's the point at which it first becomes profitable (that point we already passed), but because ignoring a user base that size poses a huge risk that Google can't afford to ignore. Twisting that into the statement "Google is ignoring WP because its market share is too low" just isn't intellectually honest. That's not why Google is ignoring WP. That's just one circumstance that allows them to ignore WP.

    Like you said, nobody leaves money on the table for no reason. Whatever those reasons are, that's why Google is ignoring WP.
    11-06-2014 01:27 PM
  19. tgp's Avatar
    I think the part about "Google not leaving money on the table" may not have been exactly what you wanted to say, because it's clear that is exactly what Google is doing, by not perusing the WP user base.
    No, that's exactly what I wanted to say. You could call it a short-term loss for a long-term gain. Overall the advantage goes to Google. Otherwise they wouldn't do it. You have to look at it from a point of view other than I-love-WP-but-I-wish-it-had-more-apps-including-Google's-so-it-would-gain-market-share-because-even-though-I-wouldn't-admit-it-under-torture-I'm-secretly-afraid-Microsoft-will-pull-the-plug-if-it-doesn't-take-off-soon.

    Like you said, nobody leaves money on the table for no reason. Whatever those reasons are, that's why Google is ignoring WP.
    OK, if you want to put it that way, I guess you could say that Google is leaving a bit of money on the table now, but down the road they figure they'd lose more. Your reasoning would be like a business not investing money even though the investment would eventually profit in the future. Let's say that Google is "investing" the money they're losing out on now.

    Anyway, this is all armchair quarterbacking. None of us know. Your guess is as good as mine, and likewise mine is as good as yours. We don't even know for sure if the amount of WP users is worth it for Google in the first place, not counting the effect on WP adopters. It might be, but it might not be.
    11-06-2014 01:43 PM
  20. mccririck's Avatar
    I think when Windows Phone has such a small market share it makes it more important that they make sure their own apps are top quality. There are too many apps from Microsoft that lack some thought and effort.
    11-06-2014 02:14 PM
  21. a5cent's Avatar
    You have to look at it from a point of view other than I-love-WP-but-I-wish-it-had-more-apps-including-Google's-so-it-would-gain-market-share-because-even-though-I-wouldn't-admit-it-under-torture-I'm-secretly-afraid-Microsoft-will-pull-the-plug-if-it-doesn't-take-off-soon.
    I've never looked at this issue from that point of view, and I see no reason why anyone should. I'm starting to think you suspect bias in every one of my sentences and you're misunderstanding some of them as a result.

    OK, if you want to put it that way, I guess you could say that Google is leaving a bit of money on the table now, but down the road they figure they'd lose more. Your reasoning would be like a business not investing money even though the investment would eventually profit in the future. Let's say that Google is "investing" the money they're losing out on now.

    Anyway, this is all armchair quarterbacking. None of us know. Your guess is as good as mine, and likewise mine is as good as yours. We don't even know for sure if the amount of WP users is worth it for Google in the first place, not counting the effect on WP adopters. It might be, but it might not be.
    You're just not understanding my reasoning. You're not saying anything different than I am really. I don't understand why you don't see that. Whether Google is metaphorically leaving money on the table or not (whatever that means) isn't really important. We both agree there is money to be made that Google isn't pursuing, because it's tactically advantageous not to offer their services to a specific user base. I completely agree that can be viewed as an investment in securing their own ecosystem. I've never said otherwise.

    Anyway, I disagree that this has anything to do with armchair quarterbacking. We're not surmising to know what these companies should be doing or second guessing their CEOs. We're just looking at the market and the numbers and interpreting them. That's not the same thing.

    At a median price of $50,000 per WP app (excl. games), I think it's pretty much irrefutable that Google is ignoring a handsome revenue stream that surpasses any required investment by a significant multitude. Just by charging a dollar for each of their apps on WP, Google could make millions, not to mention that we have numbers which reveal how much a user of Google's services is worth to them (did you follow the link?). If you disagree with those numbers, then yes, we can't discuss further as we disagree on the state of reality.

    I'd say that disagreeing with those numbers describing Google's profit potential (possibly you) and ignorance (not you, but most others) is the only way the sentence: "Google is ignoring WP because its market share is too low" can legitimately make sense.
    Last edited by a5cent; 11-06-2014 at 04:00 PM. Reason: spelling
    11-06-2014 02:22 PM
  22. tgp's Avatar
    OK I can understand your point of view, except for this:

    I'd say that disagreeing with those numbers describing Google's profit potential (possibly you) and ignorance (not you, but most others) is the only way the sentence: "Google is ignoring WP because it's market share it too low" can make sense.
    How do you explain Google having some of their best apps on the iPhone then? Let's pretend that suddenly iPhone & WP switched places in market share overnight. What would Google do?

    Here's what I think they'd do: they might maintain their iPhone apps since they're already there. But were the iOS apps not already there, they probably would never be developed. However, I'm 110% sure they'd have WP apps in the Store ASAP. So, assuming this is true, the problem IS market share.
    a5cent and Laura Knotek like this.
    11-06-2014 02:37 PM
  23. a5cent's Avatar
    How do you explain Google having some of their best apps on the iPhone then? Let's pretend that suddenly iPhone & WP switched places in market share overnight. What would Google do?

    Here's what I think they'd do: they might maintain their iPhone apps since they're already there. But were the iOS apps not already there, they probably would never be developed. However, I'm 110% sure they'd have WP apps in the Store ASAP. So, assuming this is true, the problem IS market share.
    If all things were equal, I'd agree that if your prediction is correct, then it logically follows that I'd have to be wrong about all this. Not all things are equal however.

    Amongst many other differences, just as an example, it's well known that from Google's perspective, Apple and MS are very unequal competitors. Apple operates in very few of the same markets that Google does (Apple's main competitor is Samsung), whereas Microsoft directly competes for almost all of the same customers that Google wants (and visa versa). That will, all by itself, already drastically change Google's calculations in regard to the previously discussed "suppression-investment", meaning it's worth far less money to suppress iOS's market share, than it is to suppress WP's market share.

    However, if we assume in this hypothetical that both Apple and MS are to Google identical competitors, then I'd say that Google would, in that situation, remove their apps from Apple's App Store, because it's tactically advantageous to do so. That is certainly what I'd do.
    Laura Knotek and tgp like this.
    11-06-2014 03:42 PM
  24. tgp's Avatar
    it's well known that from Google's perspective, Apple and MS are very unequal competitors.
    Well know, or a Windows Central hypothesis?
    Last edited by tgp; 11-06-2014 at 10:13 PM.
    11-06-2014 09:57 PM
  25. anon(8985111)'s Avatar
    I totally agree with what a5cent has been pointing out.

    Unless Microsoft comes up with something huge the outlook for Windows Phone will remain lacklustre.

    Let us not beat around the bush: The bottom line is that Microsoft is losing market share every single day, every single minute, every single second. I don't understand how so many industry observers won't understand the simple math of how newly sold device data ends up in the overall statistics. I'm very well aware of the fact that this is everything but a good message but I still hope the responsible people over at Microsoft keep reminding themselves of these hard facts ocassionally.

    If they wanna turn that thing into a sustainable success story, they still need to significantly step up their efforts. Yes, they have already increased the pace that they're going, but since they entered the market that late, I feel it's still way too slow. Reaping the benefits of the mobile market requires full dedication. Windows 10 could help, but I still doubt that they can get everything right by time they unleash that whole project to the market. For some of the Apps overlooked by Microsoft, e.g. Skype, I sincerely hope that they have some major developments running in the background.
    a5cent likes this.
    11-07-2014 12:10 AM
74 123

Similar Threads

  1. 635 Case that shows color
    By 3DPiper in forum Nokia Lumia 635
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-06-2014, 07:33 PM
  2. How do I move my contacts from my phone to a sim?
    By Windows Central Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 02:38 PM
  3. Browser that is almost as good and stable as internet explorer?
    By noersetiawan in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 10:26 AM
  4. Why does my Lumia 1020 keep going into camera mode?
    By Windows Central Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 09:01 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 07:31 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD