Windows 10 Mobile: The Beginning or the End?

[c0wb0ycliche]

Wrote this short piece on my thoughts about the future of the platform, curious what you all think.

Windows 10 Mobile: The Beginning or the End? | mike burns

Suffice to say, I haven't yet abandoned all hope - but I'm getting concerned.

 

[paulxxwall]

With this IOS and android app bs .....it doesn't feel real or genuine! Like ms is in a desperation attempt! So no more official WP apps or " win 10" apps just a bunch of port overs and left overs. Microsoft isn't trying to get devs on board no way " just stay there and you can kinda squeeze one out for windows and well work with it" . Really seems desperate.

 

[c0wb0ycliche]

I just don't know if devs will make the effort, however easy Microsoft makes it.

 

[Cleavitt76]

With this IOS and android app bs .....it doesn't feel real or genuine! Like ms is in a desperation attempt! So no more official WP apps or " win 10" apps just a bunch of port overs and left overs. Microsoft isn't trying to get devs on board no way " just stay there and you can kinda squeeze one out for windows and well work with it" . Really seems desperate.

Do you think that other multiplatform apps aren't ports from the original code? Do you think that developers write an iOS app and then start from scratch and write an Android app instead of "porting" their original code? There are probably a large number of iOS and Android apps that were ported from original Windows Desktop code. The tools that MS is providing simply make the porting process mostly automatic vs. mostly manual. There is nothing "desperate" about it. MS is catering to developers by providing better tools as they have always done. The end result is "official Win 10 apps" regardless of how the developer decides to get there.

 

[c0wb0ycliche]

The end result is "official Win 10 apps" regardless of how the developer decides to get there.

This is my concern though - will this be the end result? Were there huge roadblocks preventing developers from making their apps on Windows? Will Snapchat say "oh it is easy to port this to Windows so now I will?" I'm not so convinced. I don't think it was that tough before.

 

[paulxxwall]

This is my concern though - will this be the end result? Were there huge roadblocks preventing developers from making their apps on Windows? Will Snapchat say "oh it is easy to port this to Windows so now I will?" I'm not so convinced. I don't think it was that tough before.

Exactly my point ! Was it really impossible to make apps on windows? Really? Ok why haven't they developed for WP in the past? But now all of a sudden they'll start now? But at the end if this is all Microsoft has left then ...its all they've got.

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

The fact people are so blindly supporting this reminds me of people who are held captive and are gracious for the scraps thrown down to them from their captives lol.

 

[Cleavitt76]

This is my concern though - will this be the end result? Were there huge roadblocks preventing developers from making their apps on Windows? Will Snapchat say "oh it is easy to port this to Windows so now I will?" I'm not so convinced. I don't think it was that tough before.

Exactly my point ! Was it really impossible to make apps on windows? Really? Ok why haven't they developed for WP in the past? But now all of a sudden they'll start now? But at the end if this is all Microsoft has left then ...its all they've got.

If you are experienced at programming with languages and frameworks for iOS or Android, but you aren't familiar with MS programming technologies, then yes, there is a pretty big learning curve if you want to manually port your code to Windows Phone. Having to read very long books to get up to speed on how to get started. Having to look up nearly every bit of equivalent syntax, method calls, and APIs for almost every line of code while you get up to speed. It's very time consuming to learn enough to pull off a successful manual port to an environment that you are not experienced in as a developer.

Having tools that do most of the syntax and API translations for you automatically is a huge time saver. Now the developer can see how the equivalent code would look for their own application. Not some lame oversimplified example of a fake news app, game, whatever, but their own app that they understand the logic and functionality inside and out. Except now they have a version of it written for the environment they are trying to learn. I can't think of a better way to learn a new programming syntax/framework than that. Even better, the developer can skip over any parts that just work and focus on the parts that require customization of some kind.

To address some of your specific points...

No, this probably won't fix the SnapChat issue. That is clearly a political issue not a technical issue.

Windows Phone had a small market share which made the investment I described above difficult to justify. Windows 10 universal apps target a lot more than just Windows phones and the automated conversion tools lessen the investment. It's the combination of those two factors that could very well make a difference.

 

[svaethier]

Good thing that only thing being released first officially is the pc build on win10, everything will follow months after giving Microsoft time to get the OS set straight to where a majority of their users are satisfied.

 

[Cleavitt76]

The fact people are so blindly supporting this reminds me of people who are held captive and are gracious for the scraps thrown down to them from their captives lol.

Stockholm syndrome is what you are describing. I don't have it and I'm not blindly supportive either. One thing I have noticed is that nearly all of the people criticizing this approach have little or no understanding of software development. If the MS solution had been an emulation layer for iOS or Android I would not have been supportive at all. However, tools to help developers covert their existing code to native code is a whole different beast. I would be supportive of those tools even if WP had 99% market share. There is nothing wrong with providing good tools to developers. It is a big reason why the Windows desktop platform is so successful.

 

[tgp]

My question is this: does simplified porting do anything for ongoing support? I would think that the original development of an app is only part of what plays into a developer's decision whether or not to provide a WP app. There's also support and maintenance to consider.

So now the original development may be simplified. But how does it help with maintenance? Does the developer simply re-port the iOS or Android app when they update it? Or will maintenance be a completely separate project?

What I see happening is more of what we already have too much of; an app is put in the Store, but nothing more, with little to no updates after that.

 

[Laura Knotek]

My question is this: does simplified porting do anything for ongoing support? I would think that the original development of an app is only part of what plays into a developer's decision whether or not to provide a WP app. There's also support and maintenance to consider.

So now the original development may be simplified. But how does it help with maintenance? Does the developer simply re-port the iOS or Android app when they update it? Or will maintenance be a completely separate project?

What I see happening is more of what we already have too much of; an app is put in the Store, but nothing more, with little to no updates after that.

That's a good question. I'd like to know the answer too.

Sent from my Nexus 7 (2013) using Tapatalk

 

[Zulfigar]

In thinking it might be a little bit of both. Update on IOS/ Android, port it over to Windows, a bit of trial and error in Visual Studios (since you can mess with the app in the preview window. Change a couple codes if need be, then submit the final product for Windows users to use.

That's just a guess though.

 

[jmshub]

I read Paul Thurrott's article regarding Android apps on Windows Phone prior to the announcement and I got rather disappointed myself about the future of the platform. But what was announced was very different from what Paul had predicted, and not what Blackberry did...build a runtime to run Android apps on the Blackberry platform. It may not seem like a big difference, but the implications are vastly different.

Blackberry decided to basically emulate Android on their devices. In theory, this would open many apps to Blackberry handsets in cases where developers had not written BB apps. It seems like a good plan. Except in practice, it allows developers to be lazy, thinking "why would I write a Blackberry app if it will run the Android version?" So, BB app development suffered. The other side of that story is the fact that many Android apps don't work properly on Blackberry because of an important fragmentation issue on Android. There is the open source Android Open Source Project, AOSP, which entails all of the APIs needed to write apps that will run on Android. But, if the app is in the Google play store, chances are good that it doesn't use only the open source Android APIs, it uses proprietary, closed-source Google APIs. And these APIs are prohibited from being emulated on Blackberry, so many "Android" apps can't run, or cannot run well on Blackberry devices.

Microsoft has chosen a different method. This allows a person who is writing an iOS or Android app to easily convert the app to Windows and Windows Phone. This isn't emulation on the phone, this is a tool that assists a developer in making an app that is written in a language that they aren't used to programming with. This will allow a small app developer, with little or no experience at writing an app for Windows to take their existing app and turn it into an app that is native to Windows devices.

I think this will potentially help bring a lot of missing apps to the Windows ecosystem. You do mention a good point in your post, however. There are certain apps, like Snapchat, who are actively shunning Windows as a platform. You are right that this is an entirely political, and not technical, decision. And a decision like that cannot be fixed by creating an easier method to creating Windows apps...but, it could get the ball rolling. If bank apps start coming to Windows devices due to ease of app development, people may have less reason to avoid Windows, and choose a Windows powered phone if they get fed up with their existing phone. Enough people do that, and market share may reach some arbitrary number that is hard to ignore, even for a hard headed group like Snapchat or Google.

Crazier things have happened.

 

[Spectrum90]

Microsoft has chosen a different method. This allows a person who is writing an iOS or Android app to easily convert the app to Windows and Windows Phone. This isn't emulation on the phone, this is a tool that assists a developer in making an app that is written in a language that they aren't used to programming with. This will allow a small app developer, with little or no experience at writing an app for Windows to take their existing app and turn it into an app that is native to Windows devices.

No, that's wrong. Microsoft is using the same approach that BlackBerry used. All the bad consequences that Thurrott described are possible.

 

[Nogitsune Micah]

Stockholm syndrome is what you are describing. I don't have it and I'm not blindly supportive either. One thing I have noticed is that nearly all of the people criticizing this approach have little or no understanding of software development. If the MS solution had been an emulation layer for iOS or Android I would not have been supportive at all. However, tools to help developers covert their existing code to native code is a whole different beast. I would be supportive of those tools even if WP had 99% market share. There is nothing wrong with providing good tools to developers. It is a big reason why the Windows desktop platform is so successful.

The reason why Windows desktop platform is so successful is due to the fact that Microsoft CREATED and lead a revolution by creating products such as WINDOWS and Office. It worked to make their products work from the little man to the big corporations. Not by simply copying what their competitors are doing and taking their apps lol. Microsoft was a LEADER and that is why they had the success they had and still rely on today.

The tools they have provided are great but from what I read from developer's it was never about the tools before or it being difficult creating apps for Windows(phone)...it was simply because they didn't care or want to. Same with Snapchat.

Snapchat had the opportunity to work with Rudy and they chose NOT to do so. An app BUILT for them that they could review and have a say in but no expenses really and they chose not to.

These tools aren't going to change that.

 

[UncleGrandpa]

The path of least resistance can lead to positive results. Time will tell.

 

[c0wb0ycliche]

At its most basic level, it's like what they have proposed is a solution for the problem "it's too difficult/takes too much time to bring my app to Windows."

But that isn't the problem for most developers.

The problem is "I don't care." And that's much harder to fix.

 

[jmshub]

No, that's wrong. Microsoft is using the same approach that BlackBerry used. All the bad consequences that Thurrott described are possible.

I encourage you to read this post How to sign, convert and install Android files for your BlackBerry PlayBook using Windows or Mac | CrackBerry.com on our sister site, Crackberry. It explains how the onus is on each Blackberry user to acquire any Android APK (Android app file) that they wish to run on their Blackberry device, run it through a PC based app converter that requires that THEY have a developer account, put their Blackberry device into Developer's mode, and install the app to run within another app, Android Player.

Microsoft's method is completely different. As the user, you go to the app store, find the app and download it and run it. It works like every other app on your phone, because it is a Windows Store app, with all the rights and permissions of a native Windows app.

The app will be built using Microsoft's SDK, Visual Studio and the developer will need a Microsoft Developer account. They will basically become a Windows developer. The benefit of this is that it will allow an app or game developer to build an app in Windows, even if they have no experience with C# or .NET (the language of Windows apps).

Again, this won't help in every situation. If the developer is choosing to not develop to the Windows platform as some sort of political statement. But, if it is a developer who chooses to not develop for Windows because they simply lack the knowledge or resources, this clears that hurdle.

Did you even read Thurrott's actual announcement of this ( https://www.thurrott.com/windows/wi...d-apps-on-windows-sure-but-how-about-ios-apps ), instead of only his commentary based on the rumors before the actual product was announced?

 

[jmshub]

The reason why Windows desktop platform is so successful is due to the fact that Microsoft CREATED and lead a revolution by creating products such as WINDOWS and Office. It worked to make their products work from the little man to the big corporations. Not by simply copying what their competitors are doing and taking their apps lol. Microsoft was a LEADER and that is why they had the success they had and still rely on today.

That was a different time. Windows was the single world-wide dominant personal computing platform. Much of it had less to do with Windows, and more to do with the inexpensive availability of Windows based PCs, at that time called IBM clones. Everybody wanted to build computers, and it just so happened that they all ran DOS and Windows. Windows then used it's market position to assert itself into the business market, and it has remained there ever since. Windows is always the safe choice for corporate environments.

Today is a vastly different story. Most people don't even use a desktop or laptop computer as their primary computing device. Tablets and smartphones now are where the majority of computing is done, and Microsoft is behind. Do you know why Android has such high marketshare? By being the Windows of this decade...Android is the (free) operating system that powers the glut of inexpensive tablets and smartphones that are built by every variety of maker, from tier 1 companies like Samsung, LG, Motorola, etc to the really cheap and often junky $50 tablets you see on the end-cap of an aisle at CVS or Walgreens.

The tools they have provided are great but from what I read from developer's it was never about the tools before or it being difficult creating apps for Windows(phone)...it was simply because they didn't care or want to. Same with Snapchat.

Snapchat had the opportunity to work with Rudy and they chose NOT to do so. An app BUILT for them that they could review and have a say in but no expenses really and they chose not to.

These tools aren't going to change that.

At its most basic level, it's like what they have proposed is a solution for the problem "it's too difficult/takes too much time to bring my app to Windows."

But that isn't the problem for most developers.

The problem is "I don't care." And that's much harder to fix.

Snapchat is a case where the developer actively chooses to avoid Windows. Rational developers don't want to intentionally avoid millions of potential customers. Many small developers just don't want to write their app from scratch for a platform that currently is relatively low marketshare. The effort/reward level isn't there, particularly because it requires learning a new language. But this app takes away a lot of the heavy lifting by converting their existing iOS and Android app.