I want to be, but I'm not convinced - Universal Apps

[spaulagain]

Very true. I doubt the Xbox app will be universal. Else people would start the Xbox app on the Xbox One.

Huh? They've already stated the new Xbox app is a Universal app.

 

[tiziano27]

I remember playing with a Turing machine, so cool, but It required a lot of tape and imagination.

 

[rhapdog]

I remember playing with a Turing machine, so cool, but It required a lot of tape and imagination.

I thought Turing machines were just hypothetical, and it was all done in mathematics. At least that's what I learned in my Advanced Algorithm Analysis classes. Are you talking physical machine or concept?

 

[Zica Pantaneira]

Just a bit more of history, as food for thought. (I'm immensely enjoying our discussion, by the way. Nice to discuss without name calling and still be able to be respectful of one another.)

Windows never really was fully adopted by power programs until Windows 98 came out, and they showed how stable it could be, and they showed that power programs could be handled so well with it without having to implement your own graphics drivers for every non-standard graphics card on the market. Windows took care of that. People doubted that the Windows API could be as fast as a DOS program, and when a few high-end graphics intensive games came to the platform, everything started to change. I suppose if a game like Tomb Raider 2013 came to WinRT, and WinRT handled it as well as the Win Desktop, then it would convince a lot more people of the capabilities, much like when Tomb Raider initially came to Windows and surprised a lot of people with what Windows could do. I use Tomb Raider 2013 for the modern example, because it was known for many years as the one to push the envelope of what could be done, and when it came to Windows the first time, people were truly impressed with what Windows could do. I remember it was after that release that I actually started to use Windows more full time and stopped doing so much in DOS.

I am sorry, but I dont see you saying nothing about linux in your posts? What do you think about it, may I ask.

 

[rhapdog]

I'm not sure how the history of Linux has anything to do with the history of DOS/Windows. DOS was Windows predecessor, so it was relevant to mention. You didn't see me talking about Unix, Amiga OS, or early Apple OS, CP/M or any of the other numerous OSes for that matter. What difference does it make to this discussion of Universal apps discussing my opinion of Linux?

 

[Mike Gibson]

Windows 95, not 98, was what made "power programs" possible. It added a 32-bit flat memory model, true preemptive multithreading, high speed file and directory access, quality OpenGL support, and a bunch of other things that made high speed large programs possible. It tremendously expanded what a programmer could do ... and was incredibly easy to get into.

The WinRT API and framework is nothing like that. It has terrible file performance, a terrible file and directory access pattern (Async), a terrible "app model" where programs are constantly stopped/suspended/started, poor support for complex configuration dialogs (no real concept of modular programming), poor support for text output (especially in WinPRT80), limited memory space (in WinPRT), etc., etc. It is the exact opposite of the Win16->Win32 transition in Win95. It's only good for applets, not programs. If you want to make a simple craplet, WinRT is your ticket. If you want to make a complex program with lots of user configurable settings, not so much.

My guess is that in five years or so WinRT will claw its way back a reasonable imitation of the existing Win32 API ... but it will be far too late to save MSFT. They will become an application vendor then retreat back into the enterprise space for good. I hate to see it happen.

 

[rhapdog]

Windows 95, not 98, was what made "power programs" possible.

Agreed. But, I never said Windows 98 is what made it possible. I stated there wasn't full adoption by power programs to go that route until then. Many were still producing their programs in DOS. Windows 95 was not stable, and critical programs were often still done in DOS. Windows 98 made things much more stable, and, by then, adoption of the Windows platform was more wide spread. A combination of stability and adoption is what brought in the power players.

As far as the rest of what you said, you may be right. We'll have to wait and see how things actually play out. There is only one who knows the future, and he's not giving anyone any input on what will happen with Microsoft as far as I know.

 

[RavenSword]

Here's the problem with universal apps: you need to get deva to care enough to do it. That's the issue. If deva have absolutely no interest in developing modern and windows phone apps, what difference does it make?

 

[Grimlock]

Here's the problem with universal apps: you need to get deva to care enough to do it. That's the issue. If deva have absolutely no interest in developing modern and windows phone apps, what difference does it make?

Youre right, its a big gamble by microsoft to think that new developers will come just because they can make apps universal. Devs who don't care about Windows or WP 10 still wont care even if they can make apps universal. Not too many PC user want to use apps on the PC (they want to use browser + programs).