WM10 Going for Broke Strategy

[rocketboy]

Pardon the American Football analogy, but there's probably 5 minutes left in the Superbowl and Team WM10 is down by two scores. We've hung tough, but it's time to throw away the playbook, hope to score quick, and force overtime.

Why not go for broke? Developers get 100% profits for 4 years across the entire UWP when you release a mobile version of your app. No registration fees for developers (if there still are any). All Lumias are $99 unlocked while supplies last. No licensing fees to any OEM (if any still exists) for 3 years. Open up Android emulation. Allow android mobile app sales in the Windows Store for mobile. MS takes 30% for non-UWP apps sales. UWP apps will probably get better ratings and naturally bubble to the top over time. When the WM platform is re-established DEVs will have greater incentive to get more into UWP.

Oh. And one more thing - WM10 is open sourced (in the way Android is steered by The Company and provides the reference implementation, but it can be forked or skinned).

Throw the Hail Mary. There's nothing really to lose at this point.

 

[PGrey]

It's not a bad idea, now talk to the marketing team at ALL the right places ;-]

Being a tech-PM was as close as I ever got to that side of things, I never could understand (or wanted to anyway), all the ins/outs of the margins and the whole works, I was much better at debugging one-off driver crashes and the like, simpler stuff, in the day ;-]

I'm with you though, maybe something like this would be a shot-in-the-arm
On the other hand, it's a bit of a not-so-friendly gesture to companies the HP, with their new device (and any others, maybe there are some...), that would need to be "covered" somehow, it's a tricky dance. This part of things can get really sketchy, trying to figure out how to not tick them off, yet not look like they're getting "special treatment" too. Same with Alcatel, and hmm, not sure what others.

Ideally, this would be driven by a (very quickly) pulled together consortium, or similar, not MS.

 

[EspHack]

or.. just dump ARM and go for x86 phones, like tablets did, see how the media stopped bashing windows tablets and now they are the real cake, if intel can at least match ARM's standby battery life that'd be enough

 

[kaktus1389]

Pardon the American Football analogy, but there's probably 5 minutes left in the Superbowl and Team WM10 is down by two scores. We've hung tough, but it's time to throw away the playbook, hope to score quick, and force overtime.

Why not go for broke? Developers get 100% profits for 4 years across the entire UWP when you release a mobile version of your app. No registration fees for developers (if there still are any). All Lumias are $99 unlocked while supplies last. No licensing fees to any OEM (if any still exists) for 3 years. Open up Android emulation. Allow android mobile app sales in the Windows Store for mobile. MS takes 30% for non-UWP apps sales. UWP apps will probably get better ratings and naturally bubble to the top over time. When the WM platform is re-established DEVs will have greater incentive to get more into UWP.

Oh. And one more thing - WM10 is open sourced (in the way Android is steered by The Company and provides the reference implementation, but it can be forked or skinned).

Throw the Hail Mary. There's nothing really to lose at this point.

Sorry but I really don't get people who say enable sale of Android apps in Windows Store - Android apps are already in Google Play store and they're not going anywhere as if MS would want to do such thing, they would probably have done it already. But that's not their goal. Their goal are UWP apps available in the store for all of their products - from phones to tablets to PCs to Xbox to HoloLens... Android apps can't do that. There might be more apps in the Android store, but Windows 10 definitely still has a big user base on desktops and tablets/2 in 1 devices, so there definitely development of UWP apps IS profitable. Of course it still depends from app owners if they will develop it, but here MS should step in and convince them to do so.

 

[techiez]

or.. just dump ARM and go for x86 phones, like tablets did, see how the media stopped bashing windows tablets and now they are the real cake, if intel can at least match ARM's standby battery life that'd be enough

But Intel has already dropped plans for mobile

 

[ttsoldier]

or.. just dump ARM and go for x86 phones, like tablets did, see how the media stopped bashing windows tablets and now they are the real cake, if intel can at least match ARM's standby battery life that'd be enough

Omg when are you people going to give this up. X86 programs on a 5inch screen makes NO sense. This is THE worst idea ever.

The proper thing would be to convert your x86 programs to UWP apps via the tools Microsoft has provided to do so.

 

[Chintan Gohel]

Pardon the American Football analogy, but there's probably 5 minutes left in the Superbowl and Team WM10 is down by two scores. We've hung tough, but it's time to throw away the playbook, hope to score quick, and force overtime.

Why not go for broke? Developers get 100% profits for 4 years across the entire UWP when you release a mobile version of your app. No registration fees for developers (if there still are any). All Lumias are $99 unlocked while supplies last. No licensing fees to any OEM (if any still exists) for 3 years. Open up Android emulation. Allow android mobile app sales in the Windows Store for mobile. MS takes 30% for non-UWP apps sales. UWP apps will probably get better ratings and naturally bubble to the top over time. When the WM platform is re-established DEVs will have greater incentive to get more into UWP.

Oh. And one more thing - WM10 is open sourced (in the way Android is steered by The Company and provides the reference implementation, but it can be forked or skinned).

Throw the Hail Mary. There's nothing really to lose at this point.

so basically lose a lot of money for marginal gains :sweaty:

 

[toolman1990]

Microsoft's new CEO is thinking long term. His focus is on Windows 10 and Microsoft Store. Microsoft dominates the PC market and their Surface tablets are popular. Not to mention the 2in1 laptops. They are hoping to attract developer's to make applications for Windows 10. Since those Windows 10 applications can run on multiple platforms under Windows 10 with UWP.

 

[realwarder]

Omg when are you people going to give this up. X86 programs on a 5inch screen makes NO sense. This is THE worst idea ever.

The proper thing would be to convert your x86 programs to UWP apps via the tools Microsoft has provided to do so.

That tool doesn't stop a win32 app being a win32 app and requiring x86 though. It just helps the user modify the app to access some UWP features and wraps the installer to go into the Store. Only way to make an app universal and run on phones is a re-write. The tools have value to help publicize old apps by getting them in the Store and make purchasing and updates potentially simpler.

E.g. Sonos could put their Windows application in the store this way. But it's not magically going to run on a phone or Xbox.

 

[Jakoh]

or.. just dump ARM and go for x86 phones, like tablets did, see how the media stopped bashing windows tablets and now they are the real cake, if intel can at least match ARM's standby battery life that'd be enough

Remember, the iPhone took off because they came out with a powerful phone based on ArmV7 while everyone else was still using ArmV6 in support for better battery life (sure the N800 was around, but Nokia had been defiant to uproot the strangle hold of the Carier, but that was the wrong strategy) . But look what happened.
But i think it was not just the power, but also the ease of use. So i dont think X86 is going to save them now.

 

[Jakoh]

microsoft certainly has the dough to pull this off.

 

[EspHack]

Omg when are you people going to give this up. X86 programs on a 5inch screen makes NO sense. This is THE worst idea ever.

The proper thing would be to convert your x86 programs to UWP apps via the tools Microsoft has provided to do so.

all the UWPs you use on your pc are x86 "programs" and they make a lot of sense when reduced to 5" screen as you've already seen

x86 doesnt mean DIS APPZ MUST BE ADOBE CS6 ON 4K, bruh

 

[PepperdotNet]

The best thing I see in that list is eliminating the 30% cut Microsoft takes - if and only if - the developer makes it available on multiple form factors, one of which must be phones.

If the app only works on PC, or only on Xbox, fees remain in full effect.

 

[sinime]

The only problem with giving developer 100% from app purchases, how do you stop it once it's started? At the end of the 4 years, they will be complaining and getting bad press about it. Even though both Apple and Google keep about the same percentage per app (although MS now keeps a little extra in certain regions when gift cards are used to purchase apps).

Although they could maybe just make special offers to select developers... Niantic, cough, cough.

 

[PGrey]

so basically lose a lot of money for marginal gains :sweaty:

Yeah, but arguably, they already did this, jettisoning the majority of the Nokia branch? It seems like a lot less of a loss, maybe a gain, if they could edge in, in terms of market?

I'm pretty convinced the biggest problem Windows Phone has is exposure, not apps, it's a really easy-to-use platform, only iOS rivals it, but not with desktop integration.
If you ask people which "apps" they use, you get this long tail thing, where most of the people really just use mail, browser, and messaging, and maybe maps and some social apps. After that, it starts to trail off pretty abruptly.

Maybe this could work, everyone who I've ever talked into a Windows phone has ended up loving the platform and ease of use, some eventually left, mostly due to the big "phone gap", when MS bought Nokia and nothing much new came along, for a long time...

 

[PGrey]

The only problem with giving developer 100% from app purchases, how do you stop it once it's started? At the end of the 4 years, they will be complaining and getting bad press about it. Even though both Apple and Google keep about the same percentage per app (although MS now keeps a little extra in certain regions when gift cards are used to purchase apps).

Although they could maybe just make special offers to select developers... Niantic, cough, cough.

They could taper, at the start, 100%, 95%, 90%, 80%, and keep it there, if they stay UWP and mobile-capable.

As noted, UWP isn't JUST about checking a box, you have to actually rewrite, or at least abstract parts of your apps (functionality and other), to make this work, for any app of significant size, particularly the older ones.

Or they could let the whole mess die off, and hope that the desktop/surface/2-1 is enough, along with big cloud-bets. I wasn't all that convinced it would happen, but the past few weeks are sure interesting, in terms of support for the platform, and the OS instability.

 

[jdballard]

Developers get 100% profits for 4 years across the entire UWP when you release a mobile version of your app. No registration fees for developers (if there still are any).

MS could even go 80/20 or 90/10 on what they pay devs and they should def. kill the registration fees (if they haven't).

No licensing fees to any OEM (if any still exists) for 3 years.

I believe Windows is already free on any screen under 8" (or maybe it's 9") and I'm assuming that applies to mobile. It would be insane if it doesn't since they market it as one windows.

Open up Android emulation. Allow android mobile app sales in the Windows Store for mobile. MS takes 30% for non-UWP apps sales. UWP apps will probably get better ratings and naturally bubble to the top over time. When the WM platform is re-established DEVs will have greater incentive to get more into UWP.

I would guess they're worried about lawsuits if they go this route.

 

[rocketboy]

Is there something that says only Google can run an app store for Android? I thought Amazon had their own.

Keep in mind that everything I'm posting fall under the Hail Mary scenario. Radical shifts. Now. As if there's nothing to lose (because there isn't). The Android angle means missing apps appear in short order. Not 2 years from if the next unproven strategy for apps works. It's not like win32 apps quickly migrated will necessarily be more mobile friendly than an Android app. The only interesting angle with Win32 (even assuming hardware is around to power them) is Continuum. In any case these are not mutually exclusive strategies. In fact, MS should be throwing everything they have in their bag of tricks at this if they want any kind of mobile future with their own OS.

The goal is to defeat 98% of the app gap problem in one fell swoop so that resources can be funneled into what makes W10M unique. Continuum. Cortana. Finishing W10M (let's be honest). One Windows Everywhere. It's world class development tools that can target every platform. Bringing MS Research efforts in mobile to market faster. Finish Edge. The reality is that the big thing holding W10M back software wise (sigh - the other is hardware - but the Surface Phone is the playbook for that) are really stupid things like whether Pok?mon Go or Snapchat is available. The Windows Mobile tech is highly competitive as witnessed by its historical performance profile and UWP vision. I know many iOS and Android people who really are intrigued by Windows Mobile, but for some local credit union app or the ability to control their thermostat or car. These things are important to people - people not like us reading a fan site - fulfill that need first then you have an audience for your cool sh--. Right now we're backwards. We have the coolest things that no one has asked for.

MS is already dumping Lumia stock in the market with aggressive price cuts and they've sold Nokia. I would imagine OEMs could only be more incentivized to take up WM10 if they had the ability to customize from source. It's not what I would prefer in an ideal world, but we're so far from ideal now.

Developer royalty splits. I can't imagine that MS makes any kind of significant money on apps at this point. Movies and music, maybe. Apps? No way. The platform could be so lucky as to have that revenue stream be lucrative enough that a revenue split becomes an issue again. There's lots of angles as people have suggested above. In addition you could grandfather in apps for no profit share if you want. Finally, terms and conditions change (*cough* OneDrive), yes people might be ticked. Some may leave, but at this future point the platform is worth more to developers staying than leaving - as opposed to today.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Adding Android apps didn't help BlackBerry 10. All it did was kill any native app development interest. Now BlackBerry 10 is on its way out, since the new BlackBerry devices run Android.

 

[rocketboy]

Adding Android apps didn't help BlackBerry 10. All it did was kill any native app development interest. Now BlackBerry 10 is on its way out, since the new BlackBerry devices run Android.

W10M isn't exactly flooded with native apps under the existing strategy. If tomorrow Pokemon Go showed up in the windows store as an Android app would WP owners not download it based purely on that basis?

Are apps being ported from another OS really doing such a great job of being W10m first apps? I'd really like to know. If not, we're just asking devs to take a longer path to the same end result - an app "native" to another OS that just happen to run here.

For the record I think BB started too late in their shift to android. By that time no move would have made much of a difference. Also the BB ecosystem and MS are not even remotely comparable. There's much greater chance of MS being able to distinguish based on their R&D prowess and resources.

Finally, there's precedent of a similar battle. In 1998 the rise of the web completely caught MS off guard. Did they ignore it and build their own web? No, they started building IE and took the web browser market for the next 10+ years (regrettably with IE6).