Dell’s Cyber Monday in Julysaves you up to 50%!
  1. vt12's Avatar
    Microsoft has indicated many times that they would love to create a successful mobile platform. They have tried and failed many times too. Therefore I think it would be unfair to say that they would not ever want to go down this road again. But once bitten, twice shy.

    We all know the biggest problem was a lack of apps. Many/most app developers, and especially the crucially important utility ones, would greatly prefer a globally unified app development & distribution system like the PWA platform. Although the Android team may resist it, the logic of the market dictates that eventually Chrome will win out and PWAs will emerge dominant.

    This is not just because the Chrome team is responding better to the market. If the Chrome team does not succeed, then someone will eventually fork Android to make PWAs easy and seamless. There is too much for developers to gain by freely accessing a customer (in a seamless way) as opposed to having to go through a store. This free access gives PWA creators, in one way, the kind of freedom that Windows Program creators currently enjoy.

    By preparing for this potential future, Microsoft allows its own platform to naturally piggyback on the Android platform in a way that cannot be reciprocated. Edgium will allow Windows to natively run PWAs, but Android/Chrome will struggle to run .exes, most likely having to use an emulator. If Google is smart, they will try to replicate Continuum on Android with Windows. But that requires Microsoft's consent, unlike with open-source Chromium. The strategic advantage clearly lies with Microsoft. (Do they realise this? Like many of you, I am not sure if Satya Nadella is a genius with a long-term plan, or is pursuing foolish short-term profits.)

    Is it thus gainful for Microsoft to release a portable Windows (e.g. Andromeda) without Edgium first proving successful? I think it is pointless for them to even try until PWAs are strong enough to make the google store much less important. And if so, are MS critics being premature in claiming that portable Windows is well and truly dead?
    04-25-2019 03:10 PM
  2. ven07's Avatar
    The gripe people have with MS is that they haven't been honest. If they wanted to, WM could have been a succes. Maybe not a major succes, but it would have been a moderate succes. This however does not sit well with Satya. The man wants his company to lead the way. That's not a bad thing, but it wasn't a good thing for WM lol

    A team of hackers figured out a way to port full windows 10 onto a smaller device (950's) in less than a year. Do we honestly believe that an entire team dedicated to WM and backed by the millions MS has, could not have emulated this success?

    Porting android/ios apps wasn't the best, but for a brief moment it allowed developers to bring over their apps without a lot of fuss and apps were coming. They weren't native obviously and this caused some issues, but we were getting attention. That could've been the opening developers needed to feel out the environment and its users before fully plunging in.

    MS was adamant to build its base in the US, while WP had a much stronger presence outside of the US. Those people were alienated.

    I'm not saying that if they simply pushed through with any of these it would have eventually netted them success, but there were different approaches available. Each with their own inherent downsides nonetheless...

    Coming back to your point. MS needs 'Edgium' to succeed. MS never said that they weren't coming back to the mobile game. If they want complete dominance, they will need some kind of mobile device. Dan and Zack have been shouting this from every available rooftop lol. MS said that they will return with some kind of 'mobile device', but it won't be anything in the tradional sense. They want it to have its own space. Think Surface when it first launched.

    The problem with this? Exactly what I started with. MS has lost the trust of many die-hard fans. These are the same people that would've happily forked out a couple of hundreds to get the latest and greatest.
    N_LaRUE likes this.
    04-25-2019 08:05 PM
  3. vt12's Avatar
    The gripe people have with MS is that they haven't been honest. If they wanted to, WM could have been a succes. Maybe not a major succes, but it would have been a moderate succes. This however does not sit well with Satya. The man wants his company to lead the way. That's not a bad thing, but it wasn't a good thing for WM lol

    A team of hackers figured out a way to port full windows 10 onto a smaller device (950's) in less than a year. Do we honestly believe that an entire team dedicated to WM and backed by the millions MS has, could not have emulated this success?

    Porting android/ios apps wasn't the best, but for a brief moment it allowed developers to bring over their apps without a lot of fuss and apps were coming. They weren't native obviously and this caused some issues, but we were getting attention. That could've been the opening developers needed to feel out the environment and its users before fully plunging in.

    MS was adamant to build its base in the US, while WP had a much stronger presence outside of the US. Those people were alienated.

    I'm not saying that if they simply pushed through with any of these it would have eventually netted them success, but there were different approaches available. Each with their own inherent downsides nonetheless...

    Coming back to your point. MS needs 'Edgium' to succeed. MS never said that they weren't coming back to the mobile game. If they want complete dominance, they will need some kind of mobile device. Dan and Zack have been shouting this from every available rooftop lol. MS said that they will return with some kind of 'mobile device', but it won't be anything in the tradional sense. They want it to have its own space. Think Surface when it first launched.

    The problem with this? Exactly what I started with. MS has lost the trust of many die-hard fans. These are the same people that would've happily forked out a couple of hundreds to get the latest and greatest.
    You are right. But I don't think it changes the situation. Even if Microsoft had continued to support W10M, the app situation would not have considerably changed for the three most important categories: in productivity apps, Microsoft already dominates; for gaming, Xbox and easily transferrable arcade games give them the future option to port to mobile; and for utility, short of MS losing billions writing apps or paying companies to do so, most companies would have continued not to support W10M.

    So their two choices were: continue to bleed, keep trust, and wait who knows how long for PWAs to emerge triumphant - or cut losses, develop everything else and wait for the right time.

    My post is predicated on the assumption that MS leadership know what they are doing. I think many of us consider that to be a risky assumption - and I suspect it is the biggest doubt for most of us regarding the future. But notwithstanding that, I think this was the only way they could take things.
    04-26-2019 08:11 AM
  4. Ryujingt3's Avatar
    Microsoft forking their own Android version and then releasing their own 'Microsoft Mobile' branded devices running it could work. BlackBerry managed to survive this way.
    04-26-2019 10:14 AM
  5. tgp's Avatar
    Microsoft forking their own Android version and then releasing their own 'Microsoft Mobile' branded devices running it could work. BlackBerry managed to survive this way.
    BlackBerry's market cap is $5 billion. Microsoft's market cap is $1,000 billion. They aren't even close to playing in the same league. Mobile was a larger part of BlackBerry's revenue. Mobile barely registered on Microsoft's revenue charts.

    Microsoft has bigger fish to fry.
    ven07 likes this.
    04-27-2019 03:21 AM
  6. BajanSaint69's Avatar
    The future of computing is mobile, so MS has to have a mobile platform. I don't think this is any particularly brilliant insight and Nadella and crew must already understand this. MS is subverting Android with it's apps and launcher but let's face it WM was a failure. Citing Blackberry as an equivalent just absolutely makes the point that it was a failure.

    Andromeda (or any other mobile effort by MS) isn't going to happen until they launch Core OS. After they have that then maybe we can look for a mobile platform. Probably aimed at business/productivity segment. They may even run Android in an emulator mode.

    If they don't make portable windows work the future is that Windows will have it's lunch eaten by Android and IOS as they move towards making their OS systems more powerful for desktops.
    ven07 likes this.
    04-27-2019 09:55 AM
  7. ven07's Avatar
    Probably aimed at business/productivity segment.
    Probably
    04-27-2019 10:11 AM
  8. Ryujingt3's Avatar
    The future of computing is mobile, so MS has to have a mobile platform. I don't think this is any particularly brilliant insight and Nadella and crew must already understand this. MS is subverting Android with it's apps and launcher but let's face it WM was a failure. Citing Blackberry as an equivalent just absolutely makes the point that it was a failure.

    Andromeda (or any other mobile effort by MS) isn't going to happen until they launch Core OS. After they have that then maybe we can look for a mobile platform. Probably aimed at business/productivity segment. They may even run Android in an emulator mode.

    If they don't make portable windows work the future is that Windows will have it's lunch eaten by Android and IOS as they move towards making their OS systems more powerful for desktops.
    But the word 'mobile' here doesn't have to mean phone. It just means mobile as in being able to used anywhere at any time. At least that seems to be where things are heading.
    04-30-2019 09:06 AM
  9. BajanSaint69's Avatar
    But the word 'mobile' here doesn't have to mean phone. It just means mobile as in being able to used anywhere at any time.
    EXACTLY!

    Phone functionality is a small add in to a larger system.
    04-30-2019 09:30 AM
  10. eshropshire's Avatar
    But the word 'mobile' here doesn't have to mean phone. It just means mobile as in being able to used anywhere at any time. At least that seems to be where things are heading.
    10 years ago mobile required owning the platform. In 2019 success in mobile is all about having mobile platforms that support your enterprise software. Microsoft was losing this battle big time under Balmer. Today Microsoft is flying and and being successful supporting Android and iOS.

    Microsoft has zero interest in getting back into the low margin mobile HW and OS business.
    05-02-2019 06:03 PM
  11. Ryujingt3's Avatar
    10 years ago mobile required owning the platform. In 2019 success in mobile is all about having mobile platforms that support your enterprise software. Microsoft was losing this battle big time under Balmer. Today Microsoft is flying and and being successful supporting Android and iOS.

    Microsoft has zero interest in getting back into the low margin mobile HW and OS business.
    The Surface and Xbox hardware is still doing well.
    05-03-2019 09:50 AM
  12. eshropshire's Avatar
    The Surface and Xbox hardware is still doing well.
    I said the low margin "mobile" hardware and OS business.
    05-03-2019 12:40 PM
  13. Ryujingt3's Avatar
    I said the low margin "mobile" hardware and OS business.
    Very true, my mistake. MS figured out that services is the key to success and getting them on as many platforms as possible. Apple are only just realising this.
    05-05-2019 09:06 AM
  14. naddy6969's Avatar
    “Like many of you, I am not sure if Satya Nadella is a genius with a long-term plan, or is pursuing foolish short-term profits”

    If you have continuing “foolish short term profits”, the long term takes care of itself.

    IOW, the short term is what you SHOULD be focusing on. 20 years of “foolish short term profits” becomes not-so-foolish long term profits. Besides, long term goals don’t pay short term salaries. You have to succeed in quarter after quarter and year after year.

    This is exactly what a CEO is supposed to do. Be consistently profitable. NOT lose billions for years but say “The future will be great!”
    Last edited by naddy6969; 05-12-2019 at 07:40 PM.
    05-12-2019 07:30 PM
  15. BajanSaint69's Avatar
    Yeah but under Balmer MS was super profitable. In fact revenue and net income doubled in his tenure. But Microsoft's stock price remained flat as they missed several new trends (including mobile)

    Granted Nadella is reaping the Azure harvest sowed under Ballmer, but his bets for the future have been rewarded by investors.

    Short term profit Vs. Long term gains.
    05-12-2019 08:24 PM

Similar Threads

  1. Respawn Entertainment delays Titanfall 3 to focus on Apex Legends
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2019, 02:42 PM
  2. Schedule these discounted Teckin Smart Plugs to work whenever you want
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2019, 01:11 PM
  3. Windows 10 May 2019 Update raises minimum storage requirement
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2019, 01:11 PM
  4. The top gaming mice for left-handers
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2019, 01:11 PM
  5. Need a portable display? We compare the ZenScreen GO and TAIHE Gemini
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-25-2019, 01:11 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD