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

[EBUK]

It's like if I as a web developer refused to accept Responsive design and HTML5/CSS3 as the new industry norm/standard. Over time, I'd have zero value as a web developer.

No it's not like that at all. What body ratifies Windows 10 as an international standard?

Windows is a tool for getting things done. It is not a standard, never has been and never will be.

 

[Jason Hendry]

soz matey I got facebook on my windows phone and I love its closer to the version I loved.

 

[Jason Hendry]

you make a great point but also you are missing something, facebook is on my 930 8.1 phone so its not missing there.

 

[spaulagain]

No it's not like that at all. What body ratifies Windows 10 as an international standard?

Windows is a tool for getting things done. It is not a standard, never has been and never will be.

Lol, clearly you don't get it.

If you want to develop for Windows, then WinRT is the new standard. Just like if you want to develop for the Web, HTML5/CSS3 is the new "standard" (it's technically still in process/development).

And Responsive design is not an international standard either, it's the norm and accepted as the best way to develop new websites. But no body actually ratifies it as some universal standard. Which exactly why I said norm/standard.

At this point it's clear you are arguing just for the sake of argument.

 

[spaulagain]

They have shown what they WANT to happen. Not the same thing. To quote you again:


I don't have a point of view on this matter, so I don't know where you get the idea that I'm using my experience (I have none) to push a point of view. The title of the thread says it all - I want to believe, but need to be convinced.

I want MS to succeed with Windows 10. I just remain unconvinced that a market share of 14% is going to be enough. In fact market share will be LESS than 14% - that figure includes all versions of Windows. Strip out those still using XP (I have two devices that will never be upgraded to Win10) and the market share is considerably less. That's not opinion, that's fact. 14% was stated by Nadella himself.

If I didn't have any faith in MSFT's ability to make Windows relevant, I would have gone out today and bought a Windows Phone specifically for the technical previews that are headed our way.

Are you serious? You don't have an opinion? You do realize saying "I want to be, but I'm not convinced that developers are going to develop universal apps." is an opinion right?

As the OP, your entire proposition for this thread was doubt in the effectiveness of Universal apps acquiring developers and improving the app situation. You specifically ask "am I missing something?"

To answer that question, we have spelled out a bunch of different reasons why yes, you were missing something and that there is motivation. Universal apps can actually be effective in getting developers to develop for the platform.

Everything you have said since your OP has been complete denial of the info we brought up despite how valid it is. Then to back up your "non-opinion," you bring up this 14% market share stat. Which BTW, is more than enough to attract developers. OSX has applications right? And it's market share isn't even close to 14%. The iPhone only has 21% market share of smartphones, and yet developers make A LOT of apps for it. Win32 apps are still the biggest app development platform (in terms of scale and money) yet Windows desktop share of overall devices is not even 14%.

I'm getting really tired of your eristic arguments.

 

[EBUK]

Lol, clearly you don't get it.

If you want to develop for Windows, then WinRT is the new standard. Just like if you want to develop for the Web, HTML5/CSS3 is the new "standard" (it's technically still in process/development).

And Responsive design is not an international standard either, it's the norm and accepted as the best way to develop new websites. But no body actually ratifies it as some universal standard. Which exactly why I said norm/standard.

No, I don't get it. You're talking with a forked tongue. You talk of 'standards' which are not standards. You, as a web developer, must surely understand what a standards is. Let's take a look at word documents for a moment - almost everyone says that .doc is the standard format for documents, yet which .doc format are they talking about? .doc was NEVER a standard. It may have been the norm, but never a standard.

I feel that you are you using the word 'standard' incorrectly to support your viewpoint? This is the type of sophistry to which I previously referred.

-----------------

Look at the title of this thread again: I want to be, but I'm not convinced - Universal Apps. So far you have talked about your hopes and expectations for Universal app, and I'm delighted that you are so confident and excited by them. I want more developers like you to come forward to address my concerns and reassure me that you are committed to developing them.

Alas, at the moment you are pretty much a lone voice which is saddening. You and I are both excited about Windows 10 and what it might deliver for us. Like you, I'm rooting for MSFT to produce a winning formula that will see Windows emerge as a relevant, stable, secure and desirable (to uses and developers) OS.

When you look at the apps that are being pulled from the store, including MSFT's own, you have to wonder whether MSFT is really doing enough to get developers on board.

 

[EBUK]

I'm getting really tired of your eristic arguments.

So don't respond. Simple. Go off and develop some useful Universal Apps instead.

 

[misterff1]

No, I don't get it. You're talking with a forked tongue. You talk of 'standards' which are not standards. You, as a web developer, must surely understand what a standards is. Let's take a look at word documents for a moment - almost everyone says that .doc is the standard format for documents, yet which .doc format are they talking about? .doc was NEVER a standard. It may have been the norm, but never a standard.

I feel that you are you using the word 'standard' incorrectly to support your viewpoint? This is the type of sophistry to which I previously referred.

YOU are the one using the word in a wrong way.. This is the definition of html5: HTML5 is a core technology markup language of the Internet used for structuring and presenting content for the World Wide Web. As of October 2014 this is the final and complete fifth revision of the HTML standard of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).
Oh...did it say standard? Yes it did. Also what you say about .doc is exactly what he says about responsive design. It is common to use it but not the standard. It's a norm. You simply agree to what he says.
You are the one using the word wrong. He is right.

 

[spaulagain]

No, I don't get it. You're talking with a forked tongue. You talk of 'standards' which are not standards. You, as a web developer, must surely understand what a standards is. Let's take a look at word documents for a moment - almost everyone says that .doc is the standard format for documents, yet which .doc format are they talking about? .doc was NEVER a standard. It may have been the norm, but never a standard.

I feel that you are you using the word 'standard' incorrectly to support your viewpoint? This is the type of sophistry to which I previously referred.

-----------------

Did you not read a single word I said above? WinRT is a STANDARD. It's a standard for the Windows platform. And like I said above, I specifically said norm/standard. Account for both standards and things considered the uniform norm within a development platform. I am not using standards in the wrong way, you are simply fighting it for the sake of argument.

Android and iOS development have standards as well. Do you really not understand that? Do you not understand that while web is cross OS platform, it's still a specific platform which has unique standards within it's own confines? Just like Android, iOS, and Windows have standards within their own unique platform?

Look at the title of this thread again: I want to be, but I'm not convinced - Universal Apps. So far you have talked about your hopes and expectations for Universal app, and I'm delighted that you are so confident and excited by them. I want more developers like you to come forward to address my concerns and reassure me that you are committed to developing them.

Alas, at the moment you are pretty much a lone voice which is saddening. You and I are both excited about Windows 10 and what it might deliver for us. Like you, I'm rooting for MSFT to produce a winning formula that will see Windows emerge as a relevant, stable, secure and desirable (to uses and developers) OS.

When you look at the apps that are being pulled from the store, including MSFT's own, you have to wonder whether MSFT is really doing enough to get developers on board.

No, you asked us to provide you reasons developers might be motivated to develop Universal apps (which they already are doing). So we have given you specific reason why they might be motivated. Your opinion and argument is that there is no motivation, and our opinion is that there is. But despite you specifically asking for us to provide with counter arguments to your own point of view, you continue to blow them off. It's quite ridiculous at this point.

And I am not a lone in this argument, others have stated similar points of view. People that have specifically been in the industry for 20+ years. So go a head, try to keep blowing me off. But if thats what you are going to do, then why the hell did you create this thread in the first place? None of us will know exactly what is going to happen, which is why all of is are presenting opinions based on our POV. The fact that as the OP you continue to blow off any counter argument to your view, makes this entire thread pointless.

@a5cent, should I stop cursing?

 

[colinkiama]

Certainly you don't miss anything. Even when apps like outlook are available in windows PC I don't use them but I use them on my browser

But outlook and all other sites wouldn't work as well in tablet and phones since its not completely optimised for touch but apps are.

 

[spaulagain]

YOU are the one using the word in a wrong way.. This is the definition of html5: HTML5 is a core technology markup language of the Internet used for structuring and presenting content for the World Wide Web. As of October 2014 this is the final and complete fifth revision of the HTML standard of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).
Oh...did it say standard? Yes it did. Also what you say about .doc is exactly what he says about responsive design. It is common to use it but not the standard. It's a norm. You simply agree to what he says.
You are the one using the word wrong. He is right.

EDIT: Sorry, thought you quoted me.

It's like if I as a web developer refused to accept Responsive design and HTML5/CSS3 as the new industry norm/standard. Over time, I'd have zero value as a web developer.

@EBUK Here is a definition...

stand?ardˈstandərd/
noun

• 1.
  a level of quality or attainment.
• 2.
  an idea or thing used as a measure, norm, or model in comparative evaluations.

Notice the second definition?

Again,like I said above, HTML5 is the Standard for a specific development platform, the WEB. Just like WinRT is a standard for a specific development platform, WINDOWS. W3C is the governing body for Web Standards just like Microsoft is the governing body for Windows Standards.

If you as a developer want to develop an app for Windows 8+ from any country around the world. You would use the standard WinRT.

If you as a developer want to develop an app for the Web from any country around the world. You would use the standard HTML5/CSS3.

The point of the statement is that to remain relative as developer, you must maintain knowledge in the most current standard for the environment you work in. COMMON SENSE.

 

[colinkiama]

I want to be, but I'm not convinced that developers are going to develop universal apps.

Facebook, SnapChat, banking apps, etc - the apps that form part of the 'app gap' - surely on the desktop we just use a web browser rather than installing apps for these sorts of things, so where is the motivation to develop them as universal apps?

Am I missing something?

Basically it's market share. If a develop developed an app for phones with winRT, they could also port their app with the majority of the code they originally used to the billions on Windows Pcs and tablets. Developers on PC can extend their user base to the millions of WP users, with little effort if they use winRT. So basically devs can't dismiss windows phone because they would be dismissing windows as a whole. Missing out on a massive user base. Also it allows apps to be easily updatable across platforms since they share the same code.

I can't see anything wrong with this approach if windows 10 is free for windows 7 and 8.1 users. That's like 80% of Computer OS market share already.

 

[luke_f]

Developers on PC can extend their user base to the millions of WP users, with little effort if they use winRT. So basically devs can't dismiss windows phone because they would be dismissing windows as a whole. Missing out on a massive user base.

Sorry, I really wouldn't call the WP user base "massive" at all. Windows (PC) user base is massive. Android user base is massive. iOS user base is ok (not so many users but at least these guys have a lot of money to spend, obviously). WP user base is tiny (and even worse: most WP users buy cheap phones so they probably don't even have a lot of money). That's a fact, unfortunately. As a Windows developer and a fan of the plaform, I really hope that this will change, but it is what it is right now. For someone who does a WP app, it is a big opportunity to bring it to Windows Desktop. But the other way round is probably more like a small addon right now. But it is an addon that is really easy to do, which could help bring a more software to WP. And that, combined with a great Win10 experience could finally drive WP adoption, hopefully. And then the small addon could evolve into a solid thing...

 

[a5cent]

@a5cent, should I stop cursing?

Yeah, sorry 'bout that. See PM

 

[rhapdog]

I'm a geezer, too, but there's an almost perfect counterexample in OS/2. It was "the future" of PC development and IBM+MSFT poured hundreds of millions of $$$ into its development and marketing. It failed miserably because it couldn't supplant the existing Win16 API. OS/2 had a zero userbase and zero developer base, wasn't accepted in the PC community, and required rewriting significant chunks of code to convert to it. And that was at a time when MSFT was coming on strong. It's even worse today because MSFT has far more powerful, entrenched competitors (if things continue the way they are, AAPL will be able to do a cash buyout of MSFT in five years).

Do you remember the issues behind what really happened to make it fail? It started out as a collaborative effort between IBM and Microsoft. However, there were some disagreements on the licensing of some of the code, and Microsoft pulled out of the deal and started direct marketing against OS/2 with their own product. If Microsoft would have put their full weight behind it and kept it there, things would have changed. I was a bit privy to some of the happenings between Microsoft and IBM at the time, as my father actually helped with the OS/2 development and worked for IBM.

Sorry, I really wouldn't call the WP user base "massive" at all. Windows (PC) user base is massive.

The quote to which you were referring was calling the entire Windows line massive, not Windows Phone. We're talking 80% of PCs in use.

 

[James8561]

I have an Office 365 subscription. I've tried the Metro OneNote app, and it lacks so much functionality compared to the desktop OneNote program. I gave up on Metro OneNote due to the lack of features. The OneNote program is awesome.

What you think is lack of feature I think as clean and simple. I use OneNote to take note in class every day and I love how easy, simple, straight forward it is. Especially that round pen selection icon. That thing is amazing

 

[manicottiK]

I'd argue that there's not even a probability that developers will create universal apps.

Fallacy. There are some developers that already ARE creating universal apps, so to state there isn't even a probability is total hogwash.

My sentence was typed a bit too quickly and didn't convey the right idea. I meant that while many developers will port their Win32 apps to WinPRT, it's not yet clear that most current Win32 apps will get ported.

...maybe the new Universal Apps technology can build for Windows 10, Android, and iOS from one code base.

MS has already shown what is going to happen with VS 2015, where you can build both iOS and Android apps, as well as Universal Apps.

I don't think that it's already been shown. While VS2015 can create Android and iOS apps by using Xamarin tools, those apps aren't built like normal universal apps (for example, I don't think that they use XAML). We and others here seem to agree that it would be very beneficial to have broad platform base from one "standard" build.

 

[paulxxwall]

Will the apps them selves become universal or will that be up to the dev as to making the app universal? If there's an option ........apps wont be universal! Kinda like the Kinect debacle were ms vision for the Kinect was that by forcing Kinect with every Xbox one sold .....devs will now code games with Kinect implementation! Not so much. Ms finally figured out that was just a dream and now they sell Xbox with out the Kinect. Devs will still make make games but more than likely without Kinect implementation

 

[Mike Gibson]

Do you remember the issues behind what really happened to make it fail? It started out as a collaborative effort between IBM and Microsoft. However, there were some disagreements on the licensing of some of the code, and Microsoft pulled out of the deal and started direct marketing against OS/2 with their own product. If Microsoft would have put their full weight behind it and kept it there, things would have changed. I was a bit privy to some of the happenings between Microsoft and IBM at the time, as my father actually helped with the OS/2 development and worked for IBM.

I started in the OS/2 group at MSFT in 1989 (I think it was OS/2 1.2, 1.21?) but was just a peon programmer so I wasn't privy to the high level crap. However, it's obvious that OS/2 failed to capture marketshare and developers ... while Windows 3.0 exploded on the scene. OS/2 didn't support the Win16 API which meant that developers had to use two separate code trees if they wanted to support both. Guess which one they picked? Anyway, drudging up historical anecdotes about internal bickering and finger-pointing is meaningless because OS/2 wasn't a success with users and that's all that matters.

WinRT/Universal Apps face a worse situation than OS/2. Now there are three strong APIs out there: Win32, Android, and iOS. Rather than throw more billions of $$$ down the WinRT rat hole, MSFT needs to strengthen their successful API, Win32, by cutting obsolete stuff and adding a scalable UI API (and make the whole system work on Win7). This Win32X plan is the only thing that will succeed. Continuing with WinRT is corporate suicide on an unprecedented scale.

 

[dkediger]

We need a geezer forum. I got to sell some OS/2 to a local pharma company - complete with IBM MicroChannel hardware they connected to their LanManager backend - Token Ring as well. I think those units cost as much as my car then. They were running some QC automated testing and statistical analysis.

But yeah, fun times on the hardware side back then as well. Generating Novell workstation shells, extended/expanded memory management, bus Ethernet and even arcnet, and making that first call for NT Server/ActiveDirectory over NDS.

Now, Get off my lawn you darn kids!