Email companies about porting Android/iOS apps now!

[mikewp]

True, I had an interest in the Real Madrid app.. One email and two months later... voila xd

Cool, so here's how you can continue to keep that ball rolling. Email those same people and let them know they can possibly reduce their development/maintenance effort by porting one of their apps using the Microsoft porting tools using the links in my initial post. They might be able to get in early by enrolling in their Developer preview. Let's say that ends up being a good experience, think of the goodwill that might be generated. Of course... the porting tools could be absolute crap. Either way, Microsoft, at this point deserves any good (from a lot of hard work) or bad (from overpromising ad underdelivering) that comes its way.

Late here now. Thanks for the dialog.

Cheers

 

[ohgood]

You made a thread on this site? That explains why you didn't get any developers responding lol. If you're on this site, and a developer, you've probably already got an app on Windows.

the logic was, a developer would create an account here, xda, msdn, and other windows specific places, prior to releasing their application on the platform.

ice searched other forums and found no interest in doing so, yet.

 

[Blu3V3nom07]

I would like a This American Life app, please..

I've emailed them before about putting out a Windows Phone 7/8 app, and they responded just no. So, maybe I'll go ahead and email them again anyway using your email prompt thing. Thanks.

 

[mikewp]

I would like a This American Life app, please..

I've emailed them before about putting out a Windows Phone 7/8 app, and they responded just no. So, maybe I'll go ahead and email them again anyway using your email prompt thing. Thanks.

Do it man!

Feel free to personalize that email template however you see fit...sort of tailor it a bit for the company you are targeting. For example. I looked at the website for This American Life. My last paragraph reads "I urge you to seriously investigate and consider the opportunity to service a platform that has been responsible for a large part of your success in business. There is a great opportunity to significantly increase your user base as Windows ported apps will run on phones, tablets, and PCs." In your case, I would remove the first sentence and just have it read "There is a great opportunity to significantly increase your user base as Windows ported apps will run on phones, tablets, and PCs."

Edit..Ya, so I did some investigating and poked around the prx.org site (they do the app development). I have a feeling that companies such as this are going to be the stragglers and may never port an app regardless of how easy. Just a vibe. Seem to be VERY Apple oriented and also supportive of Android. Still, need to have our voices heard.

Cheers

 

[Kevin Rush]

Great idea. I'll send the email to Wings Credit Union.

 

[mikewp]

I posted on the Windows Developer forum here: https://wpdev.uservoice.com/forums/...ng-ios-and-android-apps-via-project-islandwoo Not sure if that is the correct place, but that's a start anyway.

 

[Elitis]

I think many of you may be forgetting a few things. Porting existing apps isn't the problem. Its already pretty easy for developers to port their apps. The problem is, again, the market share. It's just not worth the effort at long as Windows Phone's market share continues to hover around 5%. There's also the issue of apps ported using Project Astoria are incapable of being Universal Apps. They will run only on Windows Phone. Apps ported using Project Islandwood have a similar limitation. They will only work on tablets. PCs are excluded. So, again, developers run into the issue of low market share. If you want more apps, then Microsoft's flagships need to be smash hits.

 

[chmun77]

I think many of you may be forgetting a few things. Porting existing apps isn't the problem. Its already pretty easy for developers to port their apps. The problem is, again, the market share. It's just not worth the effort at long as Windows Phone's market share continues to hover around 5%. There's also the issue of apps ported using Project Astoria are incapable of being Universal Apps. They will run only on Windows Phone. Apps ported using Project Islandwood have a similar limitation. They will only work on tablets. PCs are excluded. So, again, developers run into the issue of low market share. If you want more apps, then Microsoft's flagships need to be smash hits.

Also, are they going to continue with their supports after porting the very first version due to the pathetic market shares?? If not, the app gaps issues will just continue to rot away Windows 10.

 

[mikewp]

... There's also the issue of apps ported using Project Astoria are incapable of being Universal Apps. They will run only on Windows Phone. Apps ported using Project Islandwood have a similar limitation. They will only work on tablets. PCs are excluded. So, again, developers run into the issue of low market share. If you want more apps, then Microsoft's flagships need to be smash hits.

Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of the Android limitation (Why is that?). However, what do you mean by "Apps ported using Project Islandwood have a similar limitation."? From https://dev.windows.com/en-US/uwp-bridges/ "For existing iOS? developers, ”Project Islandwood” will enable you to build a universal Windows app from within Visual Studio 2015 using your existing Objective-C? code." I"m not a developer, so I take that statement on face value. Can you explain where that statement by Microsoft is not true? Looking forward to your reply here as I don't want to be emailing out false information.

Microsoft will never come out with a phone that is going to pull any significant amount of customers from iOS or Android platforms until there are apps. Period. Microsoft knows this. Heck, Apple could come out with an iPhone that ran Windows and Samsung could come out with an S6 that ran Windows and they would sit on the shelves.

 

[mikewp]

Also, are they going to continue with their supports after porting the very first version due to the pathetic market shares?? If not, the app gaps issues will just continue to rot away Windows 10.

Well...I think that is the point of the projects. Porting is (supposed to be/better be) extremely easy using the existing codebase. Write once, compile twice. How hard can that be to maintain?

 

[mikewp]

20k+ posts...Laura Knotek, judging from the posts you "like" in this thread, I'm beginning to think you are not a fan of Windows growing and thriving on phones and tablets. I won't go as far as saying you are a Google hack since you do use some Windows devices, however, you do not have a Windows phone.

Since you are liking certain posts in this particular thread, there is an interest on your part. Instead of lurking in the shadows, how about you sharing your opinion? Coming from a moderator and someone with 20k+ posts, I would find your insight of value.

 

[Elitis]

Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of the Android limitation (Why is that?). However, what do you mean by "Apps ported using Project Islandwood have a similar limitation."? From https://dev.windows.com/en-US/uwp-bridges/ "For existing iOS? developers, ”Project Islandwood” will enable you to build a universal Windows app from within Visual Studio 2015 using your existing Objective-C? code." I"m not a developer, so I take that statement on face value. Can you explain where that statement by Microsoft is not true? Looking forward to your reply here as I don't want to be emailing out false information.

Microsoft will never come out with a phone that is going to pull any significant amount of customers from iOS or Android platforms until there are apps. Period. Microsoft knows this. Heck, Apple could come out with an iPhone that ran Windows and Samsung could come out with an S6 that ran Windows and they would sit on the shelves.

I couldn't tell you why these ported apps have limitations. At this point, not much is known about these projects by the public. While I look for the exact source (I may have mixed the words up from it since I posted from memory), it should be noted that on the Microsoft Project Islandwood page says, "Make minimal changes to your iOS?/Objective-C code to build a Windows app". It says Windows app, not Universal App. Similarly, on the Project Astoria page, it explicitly says Windows Apps for phones. I'll update later when I find the source.

UPDATE: Found it: http://www.techradar.com/us/news/software/applications/how-will-android-support-work-in-windows-10-mobile--1293295

After going through a lot of articles about the two projects, I found out a lot of users theorize that the (Android) limitation is due to Android mainly being written to work with ARM processors (despite working with Intel processors) or because most Android apps for tablets don't utilize the extra space available for the UI. They're just scaled-up phone apps, which doesn't look good. However, the real reason is simply because the Android subsystem that makes Android apps work will only be available on Windows 10 Mobile (at least initially).

Also, I was wrong about the iOS limitation. I had confused Continuum with Universal. iOS apps will have the capability to be universal (final decision still rests with the developer). The limitation is that they (along with ported Android apps) will not support Contiuum. In other words, ported apps will not scale and change their UI based on screen size, interaction model (touch vs mouse/keyboard), etc when using Continuum (i.e connecting a phone to a monitor or attaching a keyboard to a tablet)

UPDATE 2: At this point, I think WP has enough of the most popular/used apps that Microsoft could steal a significant portion of iOS or Android users away regardless of the store not having as many apps. Hardware is pretty much the same across the board, so it's really software that sells now. The flagship is going to need monster specs (2K display, Intel Atom x series/Snapdragon 820, 4GB RAM, 3000+mAh battery, amazing cameras, biometrics, etc) of course, but if Microsoft:
1) spent as much money marketing their flagship as Samsung and Apple do (i.e billions). Maybe market it as a phone that can replace your PC (through Continuum). "Your phone when it want it to be, your PC when you need it to be").

2) gets the Xbox controllers (360/One) working with it to market to gamers. Maybe have a commercial showing the flagship connected to a TV (Continuum either through Miracast or USB Type-C port) while the user plays a game using a controller, then disconnects it from the TV and clips the phone to the controller for mobile gaming on the go, and then just using the touchscreen. Why the Xbox controllers? Because people already have them. The mobile gaming controllers right now are kind of expensive and no one wants to buy them when they already have a gaming controller that should be able to work with their phone.

3) brings Windows 8's Snap to Windows 10 Mobile (i.e two different apps running split-screen).

4) makes it universally available.
I'm sure Windows 10 Mobile's (Windows Phone's) market share would rise exponentially. Enough to really compete with Apple and Google. Just point one and two capture the attention of gamers, businesses, and spec nerds. The novelty, coolness factor, and point 3 bring in the average users.

 

[mikewp]

Elitis, Thanks for that very detailed reply. Ya, when I looked at the Project Islandwood developer page, I noticed that it did not spell out the capability to build Universal apps. I forgot how I got over to the other page I linked to that spelled out the capabilities for both projects.

I agree with your 4 things Microsoft needs to do to steal marketshare. As far as marketing goes, that's a gamble. I mean that only that yes, they need to spend big money, but somehow they need to do it differently. Right now, watching anything Microsoft related makes my skin crawl. But...maybe they have done market research and they are hitting their target audience. All I know is it doesn't work for me. Apple's marketing as much as I don't really like it (Because it is Apple! )...deep down, I know it works. Microsoft stuff isn't sexy or cool (the way it is marketed)..They market to people like "Hey boring and dull, everyday folks...We get you! We have designed stuff just for you" Or, "Apple may have the cool music and pretty colored phones, but we have dancing tablets with clicky tops" Microsofts marketing just feels very awkward, But I suppose it is hard to find a spot to occupy between "Beautiful and Slick" and "Cool and Sarcastic".

So...let say they somehow figure out a way to redefine themselves and come out with some universally appealing marketing and a mega cool phone that is even just a bit cheaper than the competition. So...that marketing and phone appeals to people from all walks of life. Apps are still missing. I know you think that having a large portion of the most popular apps is enough and that great marketing and a great phone (and OS) will be enough. I disagree.. and is why I created this post and why I feel it is very important that Microsoft get these Islandwood and Astoria projects working. I'm not a heavy app user by any stretch. But I have listed 6 apps, a few of which I actually NEED. Microsoft will have to bring more to the table than slick marketing and a great phone to lure away *most* any iPhone user. Same with Android. Apps just are not there and of the apps that are there, many do not function as well as apps on the other platform. LINE and Facebook (I'm not a big facebook user, just commenting on the functionality) are two examples that I can compare from when I used an Android phone for a while. Just thinking about it now..the other problem with luring folks away from Android is Google services to include gmail. I have helped a few tech-challenged people through some challenges and all wanted to change from their Hotmail address to gmail because "everyone has one". I have spent quite a bit of my free time helping one tech-challenged individual in particular. I also got my girlfriend's email addresses cleaned up and have her setup now with Outlook.

IMO, the problems are very real. Microsoft MUST do something that will remove any roadblock for a developer to build apps for the Microsoft platform. If Microsoft gets it right, write once (hopefully) and compile twice seems like a great way to win some developers. Couple that with everything you said and then Microsoft can start building marketshare.

 

[a5cent]

@mikewp

Thanks for your efforts here! It's never bad when our community is given a new way to help increase awareness and further our interests. I think your idea is good, but I'd recommend you make a few small adjustments to your template:

1)
Remove all the parts suggesting developers owe it to MS to support their ecosystem. Specifically, those parts where you mention how MS is a large part of the developer's business success. Even when it's true, most devs would argue that MS owes them, for tying their customers to MS' products and services.

Almost every developer would choke on the idea of morally owing MS anything, when it is them that bring new customers to MS. That is not a good start to a mail that should earn sympathy towards our cause.

2)
Emphasize the porting of iOS apps over Android. I think it probably would be best not to mention Android or project Astoria at all. The two approaches are not equivalent, and porting Android code is increasingly looking to be a lot more work (most of the time). The more I read about this and hear about it from MS employees, the clearer it has become that iOS apps offer a much better code base for porting.

3)
Suggest that devs can't afford not to have a presence on Windows mobile at this time. There is no excuse to leave the ecosystem wide open and uncontested to competitors, when porting existing iOS apps is this affordable.

 

[mikewp]

Thanks a5cent. I like your suggestions.

1. Yes, I agree developers would choke on that. I haven't sent out any other emails besides the one I sent to my bank and another one. I think the email needs to be tailored to the audience and I'm hoping the email reaches someone a level or two above the developer in those cases where the business is big enough. Just trying to appeal on a different level. But ya, I think it can be worded differently or left out altogether (depending on the company).

2. I agree 100% especially as the new information (to me) has come to light from Elitis. Was just thinking that exact same thing today.

3. I agree, but that also has to be worded carefully. Sort of the same concern as #1. Not sure if iOS developers have prejudices so need to word that carefully.

Great suggestions and thanks. I'll work on something and get opinions here before proceeding.

 

[a5cent]

^ Yep.
On a side note, my use of the word "dev" or "developer" above refers not to any specific person or role, but to the development company as a whole.
If asked to be specific, I'd agree that for most companies, it's the product manager that we should be trying to reach, not the engineering team.

 

[Spectrum90]

2. I agree 100% especially as the new information (to me) has come to light from Elitis. Was just thinking that exact same thing today.

Android apps are easier to port, in many cases without any modification of the code. Most ports are going to come from Android.

 

[Jas00555]

Android apps are easier to port, in many cases without any modification of the code. Most ports are going to come from Android.

The Android layer is only on Windows 10 Mobile. Considering 99% of the Windows 10 userbase is going to be using something other than that, I'd imagine that most of the ports would be from iOS. For a mobile only app that would work, maybe a dev would use Android, but I'd be surprised if "most" came from Android.

 

[Elitis]

Mikewp, of course the Windows Store needs to improve app quality and quantity. That point I agree on. When I said, we have enough of the most popular and most used apps already available, I meant to increase market share just enough (or more than enough) to really get developers paying attention. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Microsoft makes the perfect flagship that gets enough people switching over to Windows 10 Mobile regardless of the current app situation that developers start bringing more and better quality apps as well as updating them more frequently, and the cycle repeats. Except that time around, there wouldn't be an app issue.

Also, I was going to mention you taking out the part in the email about developers owing Microsoft anything as well. Just sounds bad. I think following a5cent's advice would do wonders.

Spectrum90, yes that is true for the most part. There will be modifications needed though. The code may run, but there may be bugs that were not present in the original code that will need to fixed. I do agree that most ports will likely be from Android though, as while iOS ports have less limitations, there is a bit more work to be done.

 

[Spectrum90]

The Android layer is only on Windows 10 Mobile. Considering 99% of the Windows 10 userbase is going to be using something other than that, I'd imagine that most of the poets would be from iOS. For a mobile only app that would work, maybe a dev would use Android, but I'd be surprised if "most" came from Android.

The web is the platform for the PC, this could change but It takes time. Apps are primarily needed for mobile devices.