Windows 10!

[b2hbm]

I almost hate to admit it but I'm getting quite keen on W10, and that's from someone who's doggedly stuck with XP on his "important" PC. I'm currently running the latest version on a laptop and (touch wood) it's been stable. The browser is ok, the email less so but as a desktop OS it's been far more impressive than W7 that preceded it.

Heck, I might even go as far as to buy it.....

Edited by b2hbm on Tuesday 5th May 17:49

[trashbat]

AmitG said:

I like the stuff around universal apps that are the same on phone and PC. So in theory you can write an app once and it runs on any platform. No distinction between phone apps, desktop apps, console apps...the same apps run on different form factors and adapt in sensible ways. This is IMHO what Microsoft should have done 2 years ago. They sort of tried, but as usual it's taken them a few versions to get moving in the right direction, and I'm sure it will take a few more to get it right

They need to get this right if they ever want to have a really credible mobile device platform.

So if you think back, iOS came along and gave us the App Store, and developers lapped it up as it was a whole new platform and already popular with or without apps, so that produced an ecosystem of apps.

Then Android came along, developers lapped that up because it was geeky/interesting/open/an alternative, and that availability of apps fed into consumers actually buying the phones, and that cycle inflated into another ecosystem that became the Play Store.

Then Windows Phone came along, and there was no real motivation for developers to bother until enough consumers bought the phones, and Catch-22, the lack of apps was a barrier to consumers doing that.

How do you as Microsoft fix that problem? You try and force your desktop OS developers to produce stuff that also works on a phone, using the universal app pattern, and if that works then you get your ecosystem built for free. Potentially genius.

I thought that's what the point of Windows 8 was, but it doesn't seem to have worked very well.

[WinstonWolf]

trashbat said:

AmitG said:

I like the stuff around universal apps that are the same on phone and PC. So in theory you can write an app once and it runs on any platform. No distinction between phone apps, desktop apps, console apps...the same apps run on different form factors and adapt in sensible ways. This is IMHO what Microsoft should have done 2 years ago. They sort of tried, but as usual it's taken them a few versions to get moving in the right direction, and I'm sure it will take a few more to get it right

They need to get this right if they ever want to have a really credible mobile device platform.

So if you think back, iOS came along and gave us the App Store, and developers lapped it up as it was a whole new platform and already popular with or without apps, so that produced an ecosystem of apps.

Then Android came along, developers lapped that up because it was geeky/interesting/open/an alternative, and that availability of apps fed into consumers actually buying the phones, and that cycle inflated into another ecosystem that became the Play Store.

Then Windows Phone came along, and there was no real motivation for developers to bother until enough consumers bought the phones, and Catch-22, the lack of apps was a barrier to consumers doing that.

How do you as Microsoft fix that problem? You try and force your desktop OS developers to produce stuff that also works on a phone, using the universal app pattern, and if that works then you get your ecosystem built for free. Potentially genius.

I thought that's what the point of Windows 8 was, but it doesn't seem to have worked very well.

I *think* they're opening the OS up to Android apps which will help.

[trashbat]

WinstonWolf said:

I *think* they're opening the OS up to Android apps which will help.

I hadn't heard about this.

Blackberry did this - and more - which was even more disastrous than you might expect for Blackberry. If you were demonically possessed and actually felt compelled to write an app for BB10, you had to pick one of about ten different languages, none of which would talk to each other and all of which lacked something, and so your best bet was probably throw your existing Android app at it and just kind of hope it worked OK. Not the best way to build a long term platform.

[Polariz]

The idea is that Microsoft is releasing tools that allow developers (relatively easily) recompile their existing IOS and Android code into a Universal app for Windows 10. It's a better strategy than BB, because the app itself will be a proper Windows application and not running in some kind of virtual machine. It's got half a chance of being successful because you're giving developers an easy route into the ecosystem without too much effort (Give them a "Why not?" rather than "Why bother?" scenario), and can give companies a bit of a warm feeling that their app is going to give users a good experience rather than some sort of hobbled and slow piece of junk.

We've seen a lot of apps pulled from the Windows Phone store recently because developers and companies would rather get rid of an app out of the store than leave a poorly updated in there which misrepresents their brand. This will hopefully make it easier to roll out updates to all platforms and keep it consistent.

[clonmult]

trashbat said:

WinstonWolf said:

I *think* they're opening the OS up to Android apps which will help.

I hadn't heard about this.

Blackberry did this - and more - which was even more disastrous than you might expect for Blackberry. If you were demonically possessed and actually felt compelled to write an app for BB10, you had to pick one of about ten different languages, none of which would talk to each other and all of which lacked something, and so your best bet was probably throw your existing Android app at it and just kind of hope it worked OK. Not the best way to build a long term platform.

BB didn't do this, at least not in the same way. On BB you could sideload apps, then latterly there were ways of installing alternate Android app stores.

What MS are intending to do is arguably more ambitious - an easy way of porting Android and iOS apps directly to the various Windows Platforms, and apparently its already been done with some success (Candy Crush, absolutely hate it, but apparently a good demonstration).

[trashbat]

clonmult said:

BB didn't do this, at least not in the same way. On BB you could sideload apps, then latterly there were ways of installing alternate Android app stores.

What MS are intending to do is arguably more ambitious - an easy way of porting Android and iOS apps directly to the various Windows Platforms, and apparently its already been done with some success (Candy Crush, absolutely hate it, but apparently a good demonstration).

It was more than sideloading - developers could convert their Android apps and put them in the BB store.

How it actually seemed to work was a mess though - more like running them in an emulator than converting them to the platform. If you're saying that MS are going to convert other platforms' apps to work natively, that'll be interesting, but it's one of the biggest challenges going.

[clonmult]

trashbat said:

clonmult said:

BB didn't do this, at least not in the same way. On BB you could sideload apps, then latterly there were ways of installing alternate Android app stores.

What MS are intending to do is arguably more ambitious - an easy way of porting Android and iOS apps directly to the various Windows Platforms, and apparently its already been done with some success (Candy Crush, absolutely hate it, but apparently a good demonstration).

It was more than sideloading - developers could convert their Android apps and put them in the BB store.

How it actually seemed to work was a mess though - more like running them in an emulator than converting them to the platform. If you're saying that MS are going to convert other platforms' apps to work natively, that'll be interesting, but it's one of the biggest challenges going.

I thought that the BB method wasn't really a conversion, just a wrapper around the application. With the OS providing some translation for the native Android API calls. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. On my playbook, it tended to not work.

Recompiling (?) an application written for one platform to another won't be easy, but MS definitely have the resources to do it. Heck, they may even be able to get it to work reliably. I could imagine Android developers would be open to it, but I can't imagine any faithful Apple developers beginning to consider it.

[Polariz]

clonmult said:

trashbat said:

clonmult said:

BB didn't do this, at least not in the same way. On BB you could sideload apps, then latterly there were ways of installing alternate Android app stores.

What MS are intending to do is arguably more ambitious - an easy way of porting Android and iOS apps directly to the various Windows Platforms, and apparently its already been done with some success (Candy Crush, absolutely hate it, but apparently a good demonstration).

It was more than sideloading - developers could convert their Android apps and put them in the BB store.

How it actually seemed to work was a mess though - more like running them in an emulator than converting them to the platform. If you're saying that MS are going to convert other platforms' apps to work natively, that'll be interesting, but it's one of the biggest challenges going.

I thought that the BB method wasn't really a conversion, just a wrapper around the application. With the OS providing some translation for the native Android API calls. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. On my playbook, it tended to not work.

Recompiling (?) an application written for one platform to another won't be easy, but MS definitely have the resources to do it. Heck, they may even be able to get it to work reliably. I could imagine Android developers would be open to it, but I can't imagine any faithful Apple developers beginning to consider it.

But as clonmult mentioned, the Candy Crush app on Windows Phone is an IOS app that has been recompiled for Windows Phone. It's been a great success I'd say, so will be an eye opener to most other developers.

[RobinBanks]

I've always found android apps on BlackBerry 10 pretty good. The odd app is buggy but they're mostly fine.

[trashbat]

Polariz said:

But as clonmult mentioned, the Candy Crush app on Windows Phone is an IOS app that has been recompiled for Windows Phone. It's been a great success I'd say, so will be an eye opener to most other developers.

If (and I'm not saying this is the case for Candy Crush) you build your app using a higher level platform in the first place, like you make it in HTML5 or via PhoneGap or whatever, then the burden of making it work on a new operating system is largely on Microsoft or PhoneGap or whoever, and it's not massively difficult.

If however you haven't done that, because it has a lot of drawbacks as well as advantages, and you've built your app natively to take proper advantage of the platform in a non-abstracted way, then someone has the job of porting or reimplementing your platform-specific code in a new format. That's the hard bit.

For example consider the permissions model. On Android you can do stuff like turn the Wi-Fi on and off. Not on iOS, and probably not on Windows Phone. You might think, well, what percentage of apps do that, and it's a fair point, but just one of the many things you would have to deal with.

[clonmult]

trashbat said:

Polariz said:

But as clonmult mentioned, the Candy Crush app on Windows Phone is an IOS app that has been recompiled for Windows Phone. It's been a great success I'd say, so will be an eye opener to most other developers.

If (and I'm not saying this is the case for Candy Crush) you build your app using a higher level platform in the first place, like you make it in HTML5 or via PhoneGap or whatever, then the burden of making it work on a new operating system is largely on Microsoft or PhoneGap or whoever, and it's not massively difficult.

If however you haven't done that, because it has a lot of drawbacks as well as advantages, and you've built your app natively to take proper advantage of the platform in a non-abstracted way, then someone has the job of porting or reimplementing your platform-specific code in a new format. That's the hard bit.

For example consider the permissions model. On Android you can do stuff like turn the Wi-Fi on and off. Not on iOS, and probably not on Windows Phone. You might think, well, what percentage of apps do that, and it's a fair point, but just one of the many things you would have to deal with.

The Android permissions model is a nightmare; install an application and it requests access to lots of functionality that doesn't seem necessary ...

But this approach from MS does remove, or at least reduce potential barriers to W10 development.

[Polariz]

trashbat said:

For example consider the permissions model. On Android you can do stuff like turn the Wi-Fi on and off. Not on iOS, and probably not on Windows Phone. You might think, well, what percentage of apps do that, and it's a fair point, but just one of the many things you would have to deal with.

I'd agree with this definitely. If your code is 90% logic and if statements then its going to be a straightforward port but the issues are always going to be with how to control the hardware; turn on location services etc, and of course use hardware acceleration to make games play nicely. You only have to look at how badly a smartwatch works with WP's app system under the hood. The sad fact of the matter is that Microsoft's API mechanics have always been more tricky for devs and it doesn't help when MS keeps changing things.

As I'm not a developer I couldn't comment on how much "easier" MS is going to make this for devs to do the porting. What I like about this is that MS are trying to tackle the attitudes and mindsets of companies rather than trying to bodge it. Unfortunately the fate of Windows mobile for phones and small tablets is very much intertwined with how this strategy works out. Its going to take some time but hopefully they can pull it off.

Edited by Polariz on Thursday 7th May 00:46

[AmitG]

I agree on the mindset thing. This is really about building bridges for iOS/Android developers and encouraging them to walk over, rather than promising a one-click conversion into a Windows app. The mere fact that Microsoft is putting out these tools will encourage many developers to give it a go, particularly if it means that their app can become a Windows desktop app at the same time.

I like what Satya Nadella is doing. He got a bit of criticism early on for his communication style, but IMHO he really knows his stuff and has exactly the right strategy. It's substance rather than style. Very different from his predecessor...

[clonmult]

Polariz said:

You only have to look at how badly a smartwatch works with WP's app system under the hood.

Bad example; MS have only recently added the relevant API calls for smartwatch functionlity, and the only device to use them is the MS Band.

There is an unofficial app for the pebble - which sucks as they didn't have the relevant APIs at the time. The FitBit app works really well but doesn't support notifications.

[grumbledoak]

Polariz said:

The sad fact of the matter is that Microsoft's API mechanics have always been more tricky for devs and it doesn't help when MS keeps changing things.

As I'm not a developer ...

I have no idea where you got this little 'fact'. There has been a bit of a hiccup recently, but historically Microsoft's use of APIs and backward compatibility to build functionality under existing applications has been exceptionally good. Far better than the competition. This has played a large part in Windows' success, though in the process the Win32 APIs have become a millstone MS would like to be rid of.

(I am a developer).

[Polariz]

I'm not sure why it's a bad example though? Pebble came out in Jan '13 and developers and customers alike have been calling for the API's to be opened up. The API's are there, but they're hidden away so that normal developers can't get at them (I believe).

Quite rightly, developers from Android and IOS are going to look at this and wonder how they can offer the same app experience as they do on their current platforms and they're not going to be able to do that. I have a fitbit and I'm annoyed that I can't have the same notification experience as someone on IOS or Android. A good example of why the most difficult part for developers to convert is going to be things like this.

[Polariz]

grumbledoak said:

Polariz said:

The sad fact of the matter is that Microsoft's API mechanics have always been more tricky for devs and it doesn't help when MS keeps changing things.

As I'm not a developer ...

I have no idea where you got this little 'fact'. There has been a bit of a hiccup recently, but historically Microsoft's use of APIs and backward compatibility to build functionality under existing applications has been exceptionally good. Far better than the competition. This has played a large part in Windows' success, though in the process the Win32 APIs have become a millstone MS would like to be rid of.

(I am a developer).

I don't have to be a developer, I just need to be a consumer, and have eyes. A couple of fact based examples for you:

http://www.thewindowsbulletin.com/fitbit-update-wi...

https://windowsphone.uservoice.com/forums/101801-f...

And no Jabber: https://communities.cisco.com/thread/41525 (Post 8).

I would concede though that my comment was a little generic, but we're talking within the context of mobile here, not desktop/Win32.

Be serious. I'm not going to throw mud here, but the apps that I want as a consumer are being held up by these situations which is bound to be one of the contributing factors in why these big players don't move over.

Edited by Polariz on Thursday 7th May 10:24

[clonmult]

Polariz said:

I'm not sure why it's a bad example though? Pebble came out in Jan '13 and developers and customers alike have been calling for the API's to be opened up. The API's are there, but they're hidden away so that normal developers can't get at them (I believe).

Quite rightly, developers from Android and IOS are going to look at this and wonder how they can offer the same app experience as they do on their current platforms and they're not going to be able to do that. I have a fitbit and I'm annoyed that I can't have the same notification experience as someone on IOS or Android. A good example of why the most difficult part for developers to convert is going to be things like this.

Its a bad example as the APIs weren't available in jan 2013. They've only recently been made available (this year iirc) in preparation for the MS Band. Now that MS have made the APIs available, I would hope that support is coming, as they're public available (which is something that MS tend to do these days).

[MarkRSi]

My machines just updated to 10074 (after being stuck on a update-reboot-update fail-revert loop after switching on a 'fast' update while on a 9xxx build).

Liking the new interface design/theme, pushing it away from a 'slightly tweaked Windows 8.1' feel.

Only niggle seems to be a VirtualBox VM can't set up a bridge adaptor to one of the host network interfaces.

Also has Cortana worked for anyone in the UK or do I need to set my computer to think it's in the US?