Microsoft Working On Its Own App Store

CWmike writes "Microsoft is working on a software distribution scheme along the lines of Apple's iPhone App Store, CEO Steve Ballmer said yesterday at a developer's conference in Sydney, Australia. 'There's not much money being made, but the general concept of giving developers a way not only to get their code distributed, but to really get visibility for the code, is a good idea,' Ballmer said. Ballmer hinted that something similar would be coming soon from Microsoft. While he said Micrsoft was not ready to detail the works in progress, he said '... fear not, we're hard at work, and you'll see some of the benefits [of that] with some of the concepts, particularly Facebook's.'"

Comments

monkey see monkey do

[larry bagina]

yo ballmer, maybe you should shut the company down and return the money to your investors.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

I wouldn't go quite that far, but he should shut down his unprofitable ego-trip ventures like the Zune and the Xbox.

MS's problem is that they're fixated on competition, not customers. They got into search because they thought they had to compete with Google. They got into online services in the first place because they thought they had to compete with AOL. Same with Zune and Apple.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[TheRaven64]

You do realize people have been buying music and software from Microsoft Online services for over 7 years right?

Really? MSN Music launched in 2004, a year after the iTunes Music Store (2003), and it is the first online music store from Microsoft that I can find any references to. I'm aware that Microsoft has had an online software store for a few years, although I've yet to encounter anyone who's bought anything from it (and any non-geeks who are even aware of its existence).

Re:monkey see monkey do

[ScaredOfTheMan]

Bro you are getting MS and Dell Mixed up.

That was Michael Dell who said this about Apple in 1997

What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[cgenman]

Actually, that division is currently making money.

As a game developer, I'd hate to see MS shut down their Xbox division. They basically took some great developers, gave them a real budget, and said "do what you want." So far MS corporate has avoided messing with the console games division, keeping them from becoming another MS Bob.

On consoles, Microsoft is basically responsible for: Digital game sales, digital movie rentals, add-on downloads, HDD's on consoles, cross-title friends lists, and the general concept of a cross-title global experience. While they're also responsible for the most godawfully painful log-in/log-out scenarios of any console manufacturer, they did a lot of things right and really pushed Sony and Nintendo kicking and screaming into an online world.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jav1231]

Or stick to things they're actually good at. This whole chasing every thing that comes down the pipe is abject stupidity. It has nothing to do with good business and everything to do with corporate ego.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[spydabyte]

I'm pretty sure the xbox is Microsoft's flagship, after windows and office. Anybody got statistics to back this up? Made up ones would be fine...

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Divebus]

MS's problem is that they're fixated on competition, not customers.

Boy, you said it, Chewie. Microsoft just wants to sell you the sizzle off the steak.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

Actually, that division is currently making money.

Only if you don't count the billions already pissed away. Xbox needs about twenty more HALO-scale hits before it breaks even.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Kentaree]

Same can be said for nearly every console ever apart from the Wii. The PS3 is still selling at a loss a few years on, and in a recent interview I think it was Kaz Hirai (probably wrong) that said they wouldn't recoup the losses made from the PS3 "in his lifetime"

Re:monkey see monkey do

[lysergic.acid]

i actually think some of the Zune's WiFi features are pretty innovative. being able to share music/photos/images directly with other wireless devices is definitely a neat feature (though it'd be neater if more devices supported it). likewise with by able to broadcast a wireless profile to indicate what you're listening to.

frankly, i think the major PMP manufacturers should get together and create a standardized protocol for sharing files across portable media players. Microsoft kinda ruined a great concept by crippling it with DRM. they also missed a great opportunity by not publishing their protocol as an open standard. with the iPod still lacking WiFi capabilities, if Microsoft had made wireless file sharing a popular open standard by working with companies like Sony, Creative, Archos and even SmartPhone manufacturers, they could have made it a huge selling point over the iPod. but the Zune by itself isn't popular enough to make their file sharing feature anything more than a passing novelty. the whole "welcome to the social" campaign is kinda silly when you're the only one in the social.

however, i still look forward to the day when these features become standard on all portable media devices. it'd be cool to sit down on a train and see that there's a person across the room that likes the same music/movies/tv shows/games as you do and be able to swap music/videos/frags/etc. with them.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[duguk]

I'd hate to see MS shut down their Xbox division. They basically took some great developers, gave them a real budget, and said "do what you want."

That explains a lot. Aside from the hardware problems, the XBox is one of the less flawed consoles. Now if only there'd put this much effort into all the other stuff they do...

Re:monkey see monkey do

[cheater512]

Yes if you ignore the multibillion dollar cost of the actual console which has extremely high failure rates.

Thats quite a big thing to ignore you know. :P

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

I did say 'aside from the hardware problems'! Compared to their operating systems, its bloody good.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Right, but those billions have already been pissed away. Shutting down what is now a profitable division because in the past it lost money is silly.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

The new 360s have much lower failure rates. They fixed what was causing the RROD and I believe it's down from a 30% rate of failure to something along the lines of 6%.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[yyttrrre]

Oddly enough they do have an online store. It took me a little googling to actually find it. I'm just surprised I never heard of it before.

http://www.microsoft.com/products/

Re:monkey see monkey do

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

The problem with all the social features of the Zune is that you're never going to find someone else who has one. Of all the people I know with MP3 players, only one of those is a Zune. The rest are iPods (most are actually iPhones).

I'll admit that the Zune has some pretty nice features that I wish I had in my iPhone, but I'm not willing to give up what I have in my iPhone for some cool features I'll probably never use.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[mabhatter654]

your point would be...

Originally Microsoft started out selling music store servers and DRM to Walmart, Yahoo, etc. rather than sell music themselves. Then they went thru a few changes in DRM schemes selling multiple types to multiple people. Then Plays for (not) Sure, then because they promised not to compete in the "one music file" market they created a new type ZUNE that works on Live. Only in the last iteration have they actually mattered compared to Apple. Ironically Live ties music to Zune and Xbox 360 even tighter than Apple ties to iPod and Apple TV.

They have had a "product store" tied to windows since at least ME.. and it was a pale attempt to sell you regular software stuff in a retail box and mail it, a few things might be downloadable now. All I remember is that it never had anything interesting and never updated... ever. Microsoft would have made a killing with online buying of small apps integrated into their website that automatically installed into windows in the "preferred" method, but they constantly try to hijack ISV sales so nobody would touch such a store for Windows because they'd block you out.. a la Defender, ForeFront..etc. A store might work for CE devices, but those are so varied and Microsoft allows carriers to lock out various features so the apps wouldn't be "WinMo" apps they'd have to be "AT&T WinMo" and "Verison WinMo" and "TMobile..." Apple's 5 year deal bought them the kind of control over their devices to make the system really shine. Microsoft would be violating anti-trust to even ask for such a thing.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

I heard that they are partnering with Samuel Beckett and Reginald Perrin, and are going to call it the Krapp Store, where only grot will be sold.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[A12m0v]

Maybe the Zune, but definitely not the XBox. When it comes to names both are horrible, but at least the XBox delivers plenty of fun games at a low price and a very good online experience, what does the Zune deliver that is better or different than the competition? I do agree with you on the fact the Microsoft is competition-driven, they rarely create new paradigms or market segments.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

Shutting down what is now a profitable division because in the past it lost money is silly.

Only if it's more profitable than other things MS could be doing with the capital they have tied up in it.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[lysergic.acid]

which is why i think an open standard would be preferable for something like this. without widespread adoption, p2p (portable to portable) features aren't going to be very useful.

if PMP manufacturers all adopted an open standard for wireless file sharing & user profiles (the last 10 tracks you listened to, the games you have on your system, etc.) then i imagine lots of people would be using those features. open standards are beneficial to consumers because they promote interoperability. you wouldn't have to find another Zune owner, or iPhone owner, or PSP owner to swap files with them.

with Apple there's less incentive to promote interoperability because they have market dominance with their near-monopoly on PMPs, but it would still be in the interest of their customers to make their devices as interoperable as possible. but somehow i doubt they'd put consumer interests above their own commercial interests.

Microsoft OTOH doesn't have Apple's market dominance in the PMP market, so it's actually quite stupid for them not to pursue interoperability with other devices. with the Zune + PSP + Archos + Zen + smartphones, they could have created a coalition of WiFi-supporting portables all supporting the "Zune social" features. that would have made them very useful.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Kleen13]

Ummmm, if you read the summary, you'd see it was talking about some company called Micrsoft. I believe they make space sprockets.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[EveLibertine]

So you'd have them piss away more billions on a potentially unprofitable division, incurring years of loss for a chance to make a profit instead of having done exactly that, except they've finally gotten through to the profitable era of the division? You wouldn't happen to work for WaMu or something, would you?

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Divebus]

Micrsoft

Good Catch. Micrsoft wants you to burn up in the Earth's atmosphere if you don't use their sprockets.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[p0tat03]

but he should shut down his unprofitable ego-trip ventures like the Zune and the Xbox

The Xbox division is profitable, and it's been a long time coming. Unlike other parts of Microsoft, the Xbox division truly has an innovative product that is continually being improved in creative ways that benefit the user. The same can't really be said for Windows...

The Zune is also a very impressive piece of technology. Having played with one (and speaking as a loyal Mac user) I have to say it rips the hell out of the iPod classic's UI.

You've listed the two products that MS should not shut down under any circumstances - they're the only mass market items that have demonstrated any sort of creativity or innovation in the last while.

For a change though, I'd like to see MS be first in the game with their OS features - Windows (and to a lesser extent Windows Mobile) has been "me too-ing" their competitors forever now.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[peragrin]

Since when did MSFT support open standards? Also did you know that the wifi features of a zune are useless? cool in concept but MSFT used their own stupidity and limited all songs shared by such a method to three days. even music that you recorded yourself and wanted them to have a copy of.

Zune like most MSFT products takes a good idea and implements it poorly, with no concern for the end user who actually wants that feature.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

you'd have them piss away more billions on a potentially unprofitable division

How in the world do you infer that from anything I've said?

MS should be sticking to the knitting, and paying dividends. Xbox, online services and Zune are all distractions that will never be worth the time and money spent on them.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

i wouldnt waste your time. the only people still trying to propagate the idea that the xbox is a failure are the sony fanboys who just cant seem to deal with the truth that the PS3 just isnt as fantastic as sony told them it was going to be; and that the xbox is a worthy competitor, and even arguably better than the ps3.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Too bad the console isn't actually worth a damn. Between a DVD-only drive, locked down interface, limited support for USB devices, and optional harddrive, it's hard to imagine that the thing's worth developing for.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong joke for this crowd. Not a lot of liberal arts majors here.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[EveLibertine]

MS should be sticking to the knitting, and paying dividends. Xbox, online services and Zune are all distractions that will never be worth the time and money spent on them.

-jcr

Why would they shut down a profitable division, and one that they predict will continue to be profitable in the near future? How would shutting this division down be more profitable? Revenue doesn't work the way you seem to think it does. The only thing such a move would do would be to give them immediate liquidity, which would be very stupid in this current market. I've been thinking about this, and I can't think of any occasion where this would actually get them a profit, not to mention the fact that they'd be putting a thousand people out of their jobs.

And as to "paying dividends", where exactly do you think the money to pay dividends comes from? I'll tell you where it comes from, profitable divisions, that's where.

But fine, I'll bite. Let's say MS does shutdown it's games division. What "knitting" would you have them lather with this new-found liquidity, and how would doing that be shown to generate, without incurring an initial loss, more of a profit than an existing profitable division? What you'll find after thinking about this for more than 10 seconds is that they'd be spending this money on existing unprofitable divisions, exactly like how they did with their games division when it was unprofitable.

Thank you, and good night!

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

And as to "paying dividends", where exactly do you think the money to pay dividends comes from? I'll tell you where it comes from, profitable divisions, that's where.

MS Office and Windows are profitable divisions. The revenues they generate should be paid out as dividends, not spent on ego trips like the Xbox. Ballmer has wasted billions of his shareholders' money on lines of business that will never break even. Going cash-flow positive for a year or so doesn't make it profitable, it makes it potentially profitable if and only if that positive cash flow persists until the investment is recouped. As I mentioned above, MS needs twenty Halo-sized hits to get Xbox out of the red.

In the meantime, it distracts the company from addressing the fundamental flaws in their core business. Longhorn failed to ship. Vista was a two-year rush job that landed in the market with a muffled thud. They've got nothing in the pipeline to make Windows 7 any more interesting to customers than XP was. Apple and the Linux vendors are eroding their market share. These are all symptoms of Microsoft's management having a bad case of "Oooh! Shiny!", and wasting their time, money and attention on ego trips.

What you'll find after thinking about this for more than 10 seconds

Ah, there we go. If you don't know what you're talking about, then go for the ad hominem. Very classy.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

the only people still trying to propagate the idea that the xbox is a failure are the sony fanboys

I wasn't aware that Sony had any fanboys. I've never used a PS3, and even if Sony didn't exist, the Xbox would still be a multi-billion dollar hole in Microsoft's balance sheet.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[m00seb0y]

I didn't get where I am today making obscure Reginald Perrin references on Slashdot!

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

You haven't backed up your statement that they should close the XBox division; but it's OK, you have would have been the first person to defend an illogical, biased and poor-thought argument.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

oh look, it's a sony fan! i hope your enjoying lpb, because it's the only good exclusive game you'll be seeing in the next 12 months! it must suck to have bought into the wrong platform this generation... and you were so certain sony would win because of their past performance. perhaps you can take this as a learning experience. past performance doesnt guarantee future success (and being arrogant about their competitors only makes the company look like its staffed by fuckwits)

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

and even if Sony didn't exist, the Xbox would still be a multi-billion dollar hole in Microsoft's balance sheet.

if sony didnt exist, microsoft would be have total market domination of this generation of high-def consoles; but dont let that stand in the way of your irrational hate

Re:monkey see monkey do

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

it's not that I stuck with the PS3 because I "thought it would win." I bought a PS3 because I wanted to play Metal Gear Solid 4. I haven't had the urge to buy a 360 because there just aren't many games on it I really am dying to play save Guilty Gear Overture or maybe Ace Combat 6.

(Sorry, Gamer doesn't always mean frothing at the mouth Halo retard, WoW playing shut in, or Starcraft loony. Sometimes, some gamers want to play all of those annoying games on the shelf that aren't FPSes, MMOs, or Rock Band/GH. I even bought the US Beatmania bundle for god's sake).

Re:monkey see monkey do

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

This is from a gamer point of view, so, take it for what it's worth(eg: xbox fanboys complaining about the development difficulty when they've never even seen an IDE).

No built in harddrive? No HDDVD/BluRay drive? Godawful game pads? No built in WiFi? ADVERTISING EVERYFUCKING WHERE!? (When the new Xbox360 dashboard drops and it's not trying to sell me Axe body spray when I'm pulling out the DVD for something else, I'll drop this fucking point. Nothing pisses me off like selling products to stinky people that only makes them stinkier.)

PS3 isn't perfect, it's horribly expensive, huge, and the BDROM is pretty slow for the amount of data on the disc, but it comes with WiFi, an HDD, an optical drive with capacities not from the 90's, and no advertising on the XMB. Some people don't like the DS3/SIXAXIS either, but that's a matter of personal taste.

While it does come down to games, when it comes to multiplatform titles like Street Fighter IV and Mirror's Edge, there's absolutely nothing that makes me think that the 360 version is superior.

Although when it comes down to SF4, atleast on the PS3, I can use any of the 3 USB arcade style joystick situations and not feel like i'm left in the cold.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[duguk]

Wait, what!? What the hell are you talking about? BluRay? WiFi?

Are you guys talking about the XBox *360*!? I'd wish you'd said! I don't have one of those and couldn't possibly comment.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm just thinking of the top of my head now, but SURFACE! Now that is fairly innovative, is it not?

Re:monkey see monkey do

[bezza]

Firstly, revenues don't get paid out from revenues, they get paid from after tax profit.

Secondly shutting down a division after absorbing the sunk cost of setting it up would upset a number of shareholders as you have effectively thrown away those 'billions of dollars'. They've set up a division that is now profitable and that you could pretty easily justify the good growth in that profit given the product which they have in the market.

If you were a shareholder given your attitude you would have dumped your stock on announcement of the xbox project. If, on the other hand, you were an investor that wanted Microsoft to pursue growth options and effectively use their capital at hand you would support the xbox project.

But your argument of shutting it down now makes no sense what so ever. If you were a shareholder that just wanted no growth and big dividends you would have sold out already, but if you are still in there and only complaining NOW when the division is turning a profit, anyone would look at you thinking "what the hell is this guy on about?"

Going cash-flow positive for a year or so doesn't make it profitable, it makes it potentially profitable if and only if that positive cash flow persists until the investment is recouped.

-jcr

This is exactly what investment is all about. But what you fail to understand is that not only will the profit persist, but it will probably grow. I couldn't think of a project set up by any company that didn't require up front sunk cost to implement. The fun in financial modeling is getting the future cash flows positive so that there is a positive return on initial investment. Microsoft seem to be making that happen. As a shareholder, I would be happy with that outcome.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[pallmall1]

Anybody got statistics to back this up? Made up ones would be fine..

Umm, people like the XBox more than Vista?

Re:monkey see monkey do

[bert.cl]

While I agree with most of your statement, the OP's original point was that the profit should yield a better return than can be gotten with other projects. For example, if the XBOX project (could) realise(s) an ROI of 3% and just putting the money in some sort of savings account gives you a net return of 4%, then you should pick the savings account, especially if there is less risk involved in other possibilities to use that money.

Of course nobody is certain about how risky the console market is, nor does anyone know how big the return on investement will be in a few years, but the man has a point if he says that just throwing money at something isn't really the best way to invest. It seems to me that if you need 10 more "halo-size" hits, somebody didn't really do his or her homework properly.

On the other hand, one shouldn't account for sunk costs when calculating current future profits, which supports your point of "not closing down a now profitable division".

Just keep in mind that the profit of that division (and its possible growth scenarios) might be lower and more riskier than some other investments.

To end, I'd like to point out that Microsoft "sticking to their knitting" might be seen as a way to lower the risk involved, thus benefting the shareholder once more.

I think you both have a point, and that, like always, the truth is probably somewhere in between.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[LWATCDR]

Actually this is going past what Apple has done.
Microsoft is going to extend this to PCs and not just their mobile product.
I have been saying that one of the Linux distros should have done this a long time ago.
Click n run wasn't a bad idea it was just tied to a not so good distro.
This is actually a good idea and a bad thing that say Red Hat, Ubuntu, or Suse didn't do first.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

I'm saying the 360 sucks. I have like, a gajillion USB pen drives that are easily bigger than half a gig that I can buy from any store around me and yet I can't use it for save games or downloadable content? I have to buy a proprietary device? The same thing is true for the HDD, WiFi, headset, and the list goes on with peripherals.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Bert64]

The ipod touch has wifi...

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

"Irrational hate"?

Project much?

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

But what you fail to understand is that not only will the profit persist, but it will probably grow.

For how long? Another year?

Wishful thinking, nothing more. Nintendo's eating their lunch.

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[TheNetAvenger]

your point would be...

Just what you took time to demonstrate in your post, Microsoft was doing all of this crap before Apple.

Therefore, the comment "Monkey see, Monkey do", would better be suited at an attack at Apple, as they are the 'me too' once again. Of course their fanbois wouldn't know this, and probably still think they invented everything, as long as Apple marketing tries to make people believe it.

And yes Apple INTENTIONALLY tries to create this perception. When they run ads about the first 64bit computer - which the UK made they stop saying (and OS X still isn't even 64bit), and then use their marketing strength of cool to run ads about the iPhone or iPod 'revolutions' and then describe features that have been available for years.

But since the basic consumers and Apple fans didn't realize it existed before, they run to buy it and give Apple all the technology credit for crap they ripped off. Yes even the iPhone is a sad knock off. It looks like a rotary dial phone compared to phones in Japan and is very featureless compared to basic Windows Mobile devices people had been using for years. Can anyone say freaking voice dialing even, who in their right mind would release a bluetooth enabled device without any voice features? (And don't say iPhone=multi-touch, it is even a rip off, google TED multi-touch, let alone the Tablet PCs that were multi-touch enabled years before.)

I am tired of the myth of Microsoft is copying Apple crap, especially when Apple vampires the entire industry, puts a cute logo on it and people think it is the gold standard. Some of us had multi-GB MP3 players in the mid 90s, and phones with touch interfaces, real 3G, and even an OS running our own applications for almost 4 years before the iPhone.

The only thing Apple has done well is offer few choices and lock users into their products further, so people that are dumb as rocks feel 'comfortable' about using the product and don't have to worry about even which store to buy the song from.

So ya, Monkey See, Monkey Do - Apple keep up the rip offs for as long as people are stupid enough to believe your marketing, a time will come when people find out they were duped.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[jcr]

SURFACE! Now that is fairly innovative, is it not?

Nope.

Google "Jeff Han".

-jcr

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't Microsoft have a rather large cash surplus this year that the investors told them to invest into new ventures? I'm sure investors would rather see their shares increase in value. Paying huge dividends won't generate any new revenue. Neither will shutting down their games division so they can focus on Windows which is selling anyway.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Bungie]

I have like, a gajillion USB pen drives that are easily bigger than half a gig that I can buy from any store around me and yet I can't use it for save games or downloadable content? I have to buy a proprietary device? The same thing is true for the HDD, WiFi, headset, and the list goes on with peripherals.

I can tell from your complaints that you've never owned a Playstation 2.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[mgblst]

No it isn't the same. Xbox 1 never made money. They have not made up the initial investment in the Xbox project yet.

The first PS made Sony loads of money. So did the second. The 3rd is probably yet to break even, but overall the PS project has made Sony Billions, even counting the loss from PS3.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Anonymous Coward]

ah, the old "I know you are, I said you are, but what am I" argument, disguised with fancy new words. I havent seen anyone use that one since grade-school. bravo to you!

Re:monkey see monkey do

[bezza]

I disagree, but my argument is that it really isn't easy for Microsoft to search out growth opportunities on a large scale. The console market seems to be one where Microsoft's size is a competitive advantage.

The amount of money we are talking about is peanuts anyway, $3bn is only 15% of one years cash flow for Microsoft.

All the other poster should be saying is that he doesn't believe the Xbox division will achieve a RoE that justifies it. That's fine if he believes that. But he shouldn't be saying that Microsoft is doing something wrong by keeping the division going...if they believe the RoE is there then they are totally doing the right thing by keeping the division going! This is what I am arguing against. Microsoft aren't doing anything wrong -- it is just that their views differ.

I suspect that he wouldn't have a clue what sort of growth Xbox can achieve, and what boost it can provide to other products Microsoft provides. That's why I would probably side with Microsoft here.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

PS2 was designed and built in and around 1999/really early 2000. I didn't have any USB devices ready to go then.

Now that it's 2008, this is a much different story.

Re:monkey see monkey do

[Christophotron]

A store might work for CE devices, but those are so varied and Microsoft allows carriers to lock out various features so the apps wouldn't be "WinMo" apps they'd have to be "AT&T WinMo" and "Verison WinMo" and "TMobile..."

I have a Windows Mobile phone and I have not seen or experienced this (although I have never used a Verizon WinMo phone). ATT did put a customized, branded ROM on their phone, but it did not seem crippled in any way. It was a little bloated with trial software and they removed the *icon* for the internet sharing (tethering) app, but the capability was still there. Tethering worked perfectly after creating a shortcut to InstShrUI.exe. As far as I can tell, all of the features of the phone worked the same as they would have on the OEM ROM and any Windows Mobile apps I tried to install worked as intended. I did not find it to be crippled in any way. I even loaded the OEM ROM on the phone after a while just to try it out. I hear T-Mobile works the same way.

I get the feeling that a WinMo phone is a WinMo phone, and you can install whatever you want. If you buy an app online, you just copy the .cab over and install it on the phone. This makes me think an app store really would be a great idea because it is a unified platform that doesn't suffer from carrier restrictions that other phones have. But maybe some phones are restricted and I haven't seen them...I've always known that Verizon is the worst offender when it comes to crippled phones, so I'd like to know what they do to their Windows Mobile smartphones and pocketpcs. My gut feeling is that you could still install any .cab files you want, but the only thing that could get in the way is some stupid licensing agreement against certain apps the carrier doesn't like (i.e. WMWifiRouter). If that were the case, couldn't it be circumvented by making the app store PC-based and carrier-agnostic instead of phone-based? You could simply load the CABs on the phone yourself, just as you would if you bought the app directly from the publisher. Even if it couldn't be done directly on the phone, it would be really nice to have a unified "storefront" for all Windows Mobile apps, rather than having to scour Google for obscure apps.

Break out the copy machines...

[Rainbird98]

This company is pathetic. Don't they every ever come up with an original idea?

Re:Break out the copy machines...

[emailandthings]

Not necessarily, there is new stuff coming up from M$... - Rumor has it Outlook will have a heavy makeover. More social plugins and what not so that you stop going to social sites and stick to Outlook. :) - SharePoint + Silverlight... Web 2.0 ala Microsoft. :> But yeah nothing original..

Re:Break out the copy machines...

[retech]

I should switch back from FF. Oh wait, it already does all this and so much more.

Re:Break out the copy machines...

[thetartanavenger]

What makes them pathetic isn't that they don't come up with an original idea, that's how progress is made. It's the fact that often they don't improve on the original idea, or somehow implement it worse. Not always, just often.....

Re:Break out the copy machines...

[Breakfast Pants]

Yeah sharepoint was so original, Microsoft even made a concept video of sharepoint way before anyone was dreaming of even thinking about this stuff: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8734787622017763097

Re:Break out the copy machines...

[zuperduperman]

Oh, come on, don't you think MS would have killed to have a monopolistic app store for their platforms at any time in the last 20 years? Of course they would have.

The only reason they *can* do it now is because first Apple and then Google have paved the way and ensured they won't get shot down on competition grounds. So welcome to the new era where the one thing that Windows really had going for it - a truly open platform where anybody could write and deploy an app without fear or favor - is going to get slowly eaten away. An you can thank Steve Jobs for it.

Re:Break out the copy machines...

[nanomanc]

That's way too responsive to have anything to do with sharepoint.

No supprise here

[bobwrit]

Microsoft has copied Apple's ideas ever sence the apple II in 1978. Or GUI's. Or the mouse. Or the Ipod.... Not news, just move along people.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that Apple didn't invent any of the things you listed either, I don't see what your point is.

Re:No supprise here

[larry bagina]

I'm pretty sure Apple invented the iPod.

Re:No supprise here

[Gonoff]

I am pretty sure that neither of them invented the mouse or the GUI.

Re:No supprise here

[teknopurge]

I'm pretty sure the mouse came from Xerox PARC.

Re:No supprise here

[Concerned Onlooker]

No, but Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC. Microsoft simply copied them after they saw how successful it was.

Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action. I'm sure their app store will do fine. At least as fine as the Zune....

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action.

I hope Apple or Google successfully goes bankrupt then MS copies them.

Re:No supprise here

[jcr]

I'm pretty sure the mouse came from Xerox PARC.

No, Doug Englebart invented it at SRI.

-jcr

Re:No supprise here

[AttillaTheNun]

Aha, but that's not where the story begins...

What few realize is that is that the mouse was preceded by the development of cheese as a user input device. If I recall correctly, this was an Al Gore invention which, unfortunately for him, didn't succeed to the same level as his better known invention - the internet.

Sadly, Al could not figure out an appropriate application of a block of cheese to a User Interface. Xerox PARC quickly picked up the ball and drew the obvious conclusion.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC. Microsoft simply copied them after they saw how successful it was.

Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action.

On the other hand it took Apple few decades to put second button and wheel (ok.. "orb") on their mouse and they managed to get it wrong still.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

They invented the name and gave it a nice interface. Nothing else.

Re:No supprise here

[PenisLands]

The ipod is not an original invention. It's a fashionable implementation of an appliance which has been common since at least the 1970s - the personal stereo.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

The original poster was obviously talking about MP3 players in general because I'm pretty sure that there is no such thing as a Microsoft iPod.

Re:No supprise here

[Facegarden]

I'm pretty sure the mouse came from Xerox PARC.

No, Doug Englebart invented it at SRI.

-jcr

I met him once a couple years ago. Really old (he's passed now) but he had a pretty interesting story. The part that really gets me is he never made a penny from inventing the mouse, aside from his salary at the company. He should have been made rich though!
-Taylor

Re:No supprise here

[Gonoff]

The way I see it is that someone somewhere innovates. PARC, Linus or whoever, it doesn't matter. It seems to be less and less likely with any big company.

Apple gets hold of the idea and makes something very neat and appealing with it. The only problem I ever have is that it is too expensive. I own an iPod but have never felt able to justify the cost of a 'Mac.

Microsoft takes the idea and makes something much cheaper. It looks cheap as well. It runs on my PC but is no more open than the Apple stuff.

Re:No supprise here

[supernova_hq]

Apple invented the iPod as much as Microsoft invented the Zune. However, NEITHER of them invented the mp3 player, portable media player, etc. Even the mp3 player with a touchscreen was nothing new when Apple announced the "innovation"!

If you don't believe me check out Archos. They had touch screens + WIFI WAY before apple did.

Re:No supprise here

[Branka96]

No. Microsoft licensed it from Apple Apple vs Microsoft.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually they only invented the name. Apple stole the iPod UI from Creative and got sued for it.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

He's dead? According to Wikipedia he's still alive.

Re:No supprise here

[rohan972]

I'm pretty sure Apple invented the iPod.

That was Kane Kramer. http://gizmodo.com/5046463/apple-admits-british-man-invented-ipod-in-1979-uses-him-to-win-patent-lawsuit

Re:No supprise here

[gnupun]

it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action.

And that's why patents are important in protecting against large companies like microsoft simply leeching innovative ideas because they have more money and marketing power, while the innovator goes penniless. Pretty soon, the innovators get tired of getting robbed and stop putting effort into inventive things and society suffers by missing out.

Re:No supprise here

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

"no more open?"

Darwin's source is out in the wild thanks to Apple.

Re:No supprise here

[Whiteox]

Uh! I was wondering when someone would point that out.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

They basically HAD to keep Darwin open since they would look like a lot of incompetent dicks if they took open source software to "make" Darwin and then didn't release it. On the other hand, Microsoft wrote their own OS, so they aren't tied to the same expectations.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe MS is waiting to see what Apple does with its cash before making a decision. Buying aQuantive was the last major copy-cat move that comes to mind..

Re:No supprise here

[Weedlekin]

"Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC"

On a purely historical note, Apple licensed the mouse patent from SRI (where Doug Englebart, its inventor, worked), not PARC, although the fact that they bothered to do so reinforces your point about Apple actually having licensed many of the technologies they used in the Lisa and early Macs rather than simply plagiarising them.

Re:No supprise here

[Quietus]

The GUI came from the PARC, too! And the iPod was nowhere near the first portable media player - apple copied that too!

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

If he wanted to get rich for inventing something he should have been working for himself.

That is why your employer is paying you, for your work and ideas, not for most of the work and ideas, except the really successful ones.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

I've updated Wikipedia, so now he is dead.

Plus he no longer invented the mouse and was the fifth Beatle.

Please update your memories, thank you.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't "steal" it. They used one created by a company called Pixo, and tried to patent it. Creative beat them to the punch with their "Zen" patent, then sued Apple. The suit was settled with Apple licensing the UI from Creative.

All in a day's business. Of course, because Apple makes you feel small and inferior (which are YOUR problems), you have to resort to hyperbolic words like "stole".

It's time for you to see a counselor for that inferiority complex.

Re:No supprise here

[Anonymous Coward]

They did steal it. The instant that they decided to license it from Creative is the instant that they admitted guilt.

You point and drool Mac zealots are always going on about how Apple creates everything and everyone else steals from them. What's the matter, reality distortion preventing you from accepting that Apple is just as crooked as any other big business?

Personally, when I see someone with an Apple product, "unsophisticated" is the first thing that pops into mind. People who aren't tech savvy use Apple.

Little understanding of a new model

[UnknowingFool]

There's not much money being made, but the general concept of giving developers a way not only to get their code distributed, but to really get visibility for the code, is a good idea

The money being made is in smaller chunks but the volume could be quite high. This combined could quite profitable for small, independent developers. Also from Apple's standpoint they are not in it to make large amounts of profit for themselves from the app store. Like the music and video divisions, it will probably generate a small profit. The app store is a tool to sell more devices. MS unfortunately only sees that they can't make much money off it because their model relies on OEMs buying their OS software and their mobile software which means they will have to compete in some cases with 3rd party developers.

Re:Little understanding of a new model

[jellomizer]

The apple App store model has huge problems (aka. you cannot run app X because we don't want you too) I don't think customers really want a repeat of that. iPhone and iPod users use it because they don't have an option. However once a way that allows them to run apps outside of the app store that will not cause the iPhone to brick on the next update then the new method will probably get far more popular. As you can get apps that really make the iPhone useful. Flash, Java, ways to share network connections...

Re:Little understanding of a new model

[TheRaven64]

The apple App store model has huge problems (aka. you cannot run app X because we don't want you too) I don't think customers really want a repeat of that

I suspect you're wrong. Users want somewhere safe where they can get apps that do what they want and know that they won't get some malware. If that means that they may miss out on a few apps that Apple doesn't like then a lot of people will be willing to accept that.

Re:Little understanding of a new model

[IamTheRealMike]

Yeah but I'm not convinced that'll last. I mean the "visibility" you get from the App Store is only really possible because it's still quite small. Imagine if there was a million apps in the app store, the UI would rapidly become a hinderance rather than a help. Most apps would instantly vanish into obscurity with no way to advertise themselves, except via the web, word of mouth etc, in which case there's not much advantage over just selling your app on your website as is done today for WM software. App Store works great today but I am skeptical about its scalability.

Something like...

[Anonymous Coward]

XBLA?

Viruses available for your mobile devices.

[KozmoKramer]

Viruses available for your mobile devices upon request.

Correction

[TheUni]

'There's not much money being made, but the general concept of giving developers a way not only to get their binaries distributed, but to really get visibility for the binaries, is a good idea'

Re:Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

google for define:code

Re:Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft is doing its bit to help developers, developers, developers!

Really?

[NuclearError]

... fear not, we're hard at work...

Start fearing.

Who wants to bet...

[Anonymous Coward]

the requirements to view that site are going to be:
at least windows vista, internet explorer and genuine validation? If you don't meet any of those needs, it will not show any of the website but instead give you a list of the requirements :P

Re:Who wants to bet...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget, it is also going to be one big Silverlight monstrosity. (Posting AC to protect mods...)

Let me guess...

[Red Samurai]

With blackjack? And hookers? Ah screw it, forget the blackjack... And the app store.

Hehe

[Anonymous Coward]

"to really get visibility for the code, is a good idea"

Funny, coming from a man whose mission is to keep it hidden.

Live Maps?

[Christophotron]

I think that's an example of something they did better.. They ripped Google off and put better, more detailed satellite photos in the "birds-eye view" on their mapping site. It's a little chunky to use but the photos are amazing. Now when I shop for a house I go to live maps and instantly get a view of it from all sides from about ~50ft away. It puts Google Earth to shame, and although street view is even closer and more detailed, it covers a lot more area than street view.

Sure, MS copies ideas, but it only really HELPS the consumer in the long run. Even if it's not always "better" than the competition, it gives us more choices. I, for one, am looking forward to the new app store on my HTC Kaiser.

Re:Live Maps?

[thetartanavenger]

I agree to an extent. The speed of live maps annoys me (certainly when I first used it, it has been a while) but their birds eye view feature is a nice one. More competition and another companies attempt at the same idea is always a good thing in the long run, however it has been my experience that some are certainly better than others at bringing new life to the same problem.

If this works,

[meatmanek]

It could end up being like a package manager. If you could get all or most of your software through the software store, it could handle updates and dependencies. It might even make re-installing Windows easier. Just save the list of installed programs, wipe and install, then use some scripting magic to re-install all of your programs. That is, if it's not crippled by DRM.

Re:If this works,

[Darkness404]

The problem is, this is MS. Most software installed is not MS software, unlike OS X where just about every app is made by Apple or Adobe. Just look at the disaster Windows update is, think about what they would do with this. Not to mention that this will attract about 3 other developers other than MS, and no doubt MS would charge to be part of this "elite network" which throws out any OSS project. Its a good idea, but the thing about Ballmer's MS is, they have some corporate crap stopping them from executing the good idea.

Re:If this works,

[Anonymous Coward]

[...] unlike OS X where just about every app is made by Apple or Adobe.

This is so ridiculous it made me chuckle. Someone better tell MacUpdate about this fact.

Re:If this works,

[Darkness404]

Well, on just about every Mac I've seen, from corporate computers, to those of artists to those used at home, just about all the used software is from Apple or Adobe, with the exception of Office.

iTunes is overwhelmingly the most used media player, Safari for browsing, Photoshop for editing, etc. On the other hand on Windows computers, VLC or iTunes are the most popular media players, Firefox the browser (for anyone who knows much about computers), Photoshop or The GIMP for editing, etc.

Re:If this works,

[TheRaven64]

Looking down my dock, I have 11 Apple apps running and no Adobe ones. I have five others, three open source and two from Omni Group (you'll find those on a lot of Macs, since they were bundled by Apple for a long while). Two of the Apple apps are X11 and the terminal, and both of those are running non-Apple software, but probably not the kind that the average user would run. If you discount developer tools and X11/Terminal, I am only running seven Apple apps - only two more Apple apps than non-Apple apps. One of those is Activity Monitor (basically a GUI version of top).

Oh, and I very rarely see a Mac without VLC installed. iTunes is a nice music jukebox, but it fulfils a very different role to VLC.

Re:If this works,

[EvilIdler]

Perian, Growl, Skype, Smultron, Scrivener, Firefox, Opera, Thunderbird, Cyberduck, Flip4Mac, GimmeSomeTune, Coda, FreeDMG, Himmelbar and PixelMator are all vital tools and plugins on my systems. The first six of those are on a lot of Macs used by people I know.

Then there are the little neat ones I use occasionally, but they're still not made by Apple. I use XCode (with most of its extra programs), Terminal, the address book and Safari most of Apple's own software. I also use a ton of widgets, some of them made for personal use, some from the net. Just the iCal and Calculator widgets remain from the original collection.

Re:If this works,

[tsa]

I use as little Apple software as possible, and as much software that runs on all important platforms as possible, so I can easily switch from Apple to somewhere else if I want to. I realize that I am quite unique in that regard though.

Re:If this works,

[Weedlekin]

"Well, on just about every Mac I've seen, from corporate computers, to those of artists to those used at home, just about all the used software is from Apple or Adobe, with the exception of Office. "

And just about every Windows computer I've seen in exactly the same settings is invariably dominated by software from MS and Abobe, i.e. MS Office and / or Adobe Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Visual Studio on dev. machines, SQL Server and Exchange Server on Windows servers, etc., etc. The only wide-scale exceptions to this are various anti-virus solutions and the bundled horrid-ware that OEMs are paid to plaster all over cheap Windows boxes that end-users don't want and would remove if they knew how.

Geek-owned Windows machines are non-typical in their software mixes, but then so are geek Macs.

Re:If this works,

[Jeppe Salvesen]

Let's say Microsoft indeed wises up and emulates the Linux package management idea. The users will then always have the latest security patches applied. Maybe for all installed programs. That would be a good thing, wouldn't it?

about the name

[syngularyx]

TheÃy will call it ... App Store Live?

linux package management

[CarpetShark]

Probably something like Linux package managers, only you have to pay for the privilege of a less functional version.

Re:linux package management

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel for you bro'
The concept is great, the reliance on it for kernel and core apps is good, but dependencies suck somewhat and each distro's package managers are different enough to cause lateral problems.
Try to get OO.o3 via Ubuntu repositories (I think) is not possible, but available elsewhere I hear.
Go outside of the Ubuntu framework (for example), will cause dependency problems.

App store not making money? pfft

[santiagodraco]

They are making PLENTY of money off the app store, far more than they expected. Ballmer's comments about "there's not much money being made" is simply his way of discounting Apples success and predicting his own failure.

The return of the middlemen

[Anonymous Coward]

How come everybody thinks the music industry is on the way out, because, thanks to the internet, artists can now market their work without middlemen? The very same companies which keep promising us more freedom and more access are building the next toll booths. Want to sell iPhone software? Got to pay your dues to Apple. Want your Firefox extension to reach its audience? Submit to the rules of addons.mozilla.org. It's the music industry all over again. The rate at which people are giving in to this is depressing.

Thats not the problem. Its the benefit

[CdBee]

this could render horrible, spyware-laden free app download sites like the current ones a thing of the past. if Microsoft hosts and vets downloads, it means higher quality apps for users, as well as an extra distribution channel for vendors

Re:Thats not the problem. Its the benefit

[CdBee]

Microsoft is subject to monopoly regulation, unlike Apple. It wouldn't be allowed to do that.

If they have a built-in download-and-install system in Windows, that could greatly improve Windows security as well as greatly benefiting free/OSS software on Windows. . It disadvantages Linux but helps both Microsoft (re: security), and the user...

are MS Windows programs hard to find?

[fermion]

I am not sure what the motivation here. When I go to a store, I see MS Windows programs everywhere. When I go to sourceforge, I see plenty of free MS Windows programs. If people want to pay a small fee for a program, I see that too. I just paid a small free for an utility the other day. I do not see a dearth of opportunities to purchase a MS Windows program.

So what is the motivation here. Apple has it's store to control content. I don't think MS wants to do that. Google has it's store to insure that content is available, provide more pages to host ads, and eventually make a little money on the side, when they begin charging, something I thought they were already doing, but I forgot about their always freaky business model. MS business models are always very straight forward.

So as best I can figure this is a case where someone else it making a bit of money in the computer business, MS is not getting it's cut, which is driving MS crazy. So they open a store, even though they have no experience in it and will not pay anyone who has experience, and then use their partnership arrangements to make others use it, maybe even building it into the next version os IE. Probably have to have to have and MSN account to use it as well.

The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Khuffie]

Linux community: "Windows sucks. They don't even have a decent app repository. In Linux I can find any program from one place!" Microsoft: "We're building an App Store" Linux community: "Zoinks! Theives! Scoundrels! Copycats!" Since when is it wrong for a company to see something it's competitor has done successfully, that was beneficial for both customers and developers, and then decide to do so for their own customers and developers? Seriously, how is this a bad thing that they're doing it? They've even acknowledged that their competitors had a good idea and that they've taken the concept from them. Jeez.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Khuffie]

Damnit, I really wish Slashdot's 'html formatted' posting method will put in the br tags automatically.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Foofoobar]

Um... how is an app store the same thing as an app repository?? You are comparing apples to microwave ovens.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Khuffie]

An app store would theoretically allow free apps, as does the iPhone app store. How are they different?

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Foofoobar]

The poster compared it to apt-get. Apt get allows for updates and upgrading as well as checking for dependencies. I repeat... how is an app store like a repository???

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Khuffie]

Ever used the iPhone app store? Which allows for updates as well? Also, Windows apps tend to not need dependencies installed.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[symbolset]

You've confused the iPhone App Store with Google's Android Market.

And some of us don't care if Microsoft ports the entire Gnome environment, complete with Gnome-yum to MinWin and call it Windows 8, as long as they comply with the licenses and post the source.

Hey... that's actually not a bad idea. I won't buy it, but I'd definitely test the crud out of it.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Waccoon]

You mis-spelled p tags.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Culture20]

The poster compared it to apt-get. Apt get allows for updates and upgrading as well as checking for dependencies. I repeat... how is an app store like a repository???

Never once has [iphone app store] supplied the source code for me.

How did the source code requirement suddenly crop up? It wasn't in GGP. Source is not necessary for an MS Windows app store/repo anyway. If this keeps my family members from downloading crap from stupidweatherbugspywareriddledsite.example.com , I think it's a good thing.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[JohnBailey]

An app store would theoretically allow free apps, as does the iPhone app store. How are they different?

A repository (In Linux practice at least) is one of many software libraries accessed by a package manager They don't all have to be run by the distro maker. So third parties are free to set up their own repository and link it into the package manager without needing the distro maker's approval.

An apps store may allow free apps, but a repository only asks permission from the user.

For example. If I make an iPhone app to search and buy from the Amazon music store, Apple are entitled to refuse to distribute the app. They say what is and is not available. And there is only one store. So Apple get to decide what everybody can and can not run.(jailbreaking doesn't count)

If I make the same app for Linux, I don't need to get anybody's permission. I can set up my own set of repositories to make a package available for easy installation, or I can offer it to the distro run repositories, or a third party repository maintainer. The user gets to decide who they get their software from, and what is available not the distro maker..

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[thetoadwarrior]

An app store isn't a repository. I think you're confused. It's best if you chill for a moment before you get even more confused and think chairs are for throwing instead of sitting.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[SoulRider]

Given MS's history, I will remain skeptical until I actually see OpenOffice, MySQL, FireFox and Apache available in the repository.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Foofoobar]

LOLZ> You are talking about a Microsoft app store and expecting bug free, spywarefree software??? Can I live in your fantasy world?

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Culture20]

Only if you bring pie. I can't imagine pie very well.

Re:The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious

[Foofoobar]

That would explain alot. PI is required by many Al Gore Rhythyms that Microsoft has yet to master

The primary motive:

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Don't look stupid at the next shareholders' meeting.
What have MS really got to show for the last two years or so? A string of failures: Zune, Vista, Yahoo...
MS need to show shareholders that they are still competing with the other players and are not just burning their cash. Apple and Google have app stores (running or in development). Therefore MS better have one too.

Well now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone likes to bash Apple for having a desktop GUI and at the same time claim that Windows is merely a copy, but, a more careful reading has to give Microsoft a few firsts.

Microsoft had a component object model first in OLE/COM. Active X controls are an extension to this for sure, and COM doesn't look as good when your PC is always on a LAN...but that nifty little trick of having an Excel document embedded inside of a word document required a fairly divergent set of technologies that Apple and IBM worked on but never really got together and Microsoft simply did. OLE structured storage comes to mind. Come to think of it, both GNOME and KDE have rich object models on the desktop largely inspired by the COMish nature of Windows shell, but, you don't see pervasive Shell Extensions on Linux in the way you do with Windows partially because there are, well both KDE and Gnome.

Microsoft was the first to have a pre-emptive GUI. OS/2 was mired in SIQ even through Warp and Mac could lock up for any reason, but Windows NT Daytona was rock solid, and, in historic perspectives, was the most logical OS Microsoft would ever release.

Microsoft's START bar got it right. Apple finder and the desktop thing was ok for its time, but really, Microsoft's START bar is actually the thing that we find ourselves using. My Gnome start bar is essentially the MS START bar with some doodads, as is the Mac OS/X bar.

First fully programmable DOM in a browser. Oh, now that's a biggy.. it was this feature of IE 4.0 that killed Netscape more so than anything else.

And, as of right now, no one has code completion and refactoring as well as is done inside of Visual Studio for C#. To this date, no one has made a desktop database that put together reporting, forms and database the way MS Access has.

Re:Well now...

[ion.simon.c]

How are you defining "Desktop Database"? This feels squicky to me. Your answer should be enlightening.

I'll get to the rest of your message later, after I've done some research.

Re:Well now...

[binarylarry]

uhhh, you apparently have never used Eclipse with Java.

It puts Visual Studio to shame. In fact, a lot of the new stuff Visual Studio has, was implemented as a direct result of Eclipse. :)

Re:Well now...

[XDirtypunkX]

Or, as a direct result of Visual C++ 6.0 (and various extensions for it) which implemented most of the features way back when.

Re:Well now...

[GaryPatterson]

Microsoft's START bar got it right. Apple finder and the desktop thing was ok for its time, but really, Microsoft's START bar is actually the thing that we find ourselves using. My Gnome start bar is essentially the MS START bar with some doodads, as is the Mac OS/X bar.

I agree with the general post, but this one is way off in my opinion.

Too many items in the Start menu are buried several layers deep, requiring careful coordination to avoid leaving the menu altogether. It's not simple enough.

The Dock in OS X works pretty well, but lacks the general usability of the Start menu. Well, it does until you drag your /Applications folder into the Dock and use that as a shortcut to your apps.

The MS Windows shareware model is a mess.

[tjstork]

There's nothing in Microsoft land that equates to what Apple has with its application store. Windows shareware developers have to do shareware, first of all, which is pretty bad. In the Apple store, Apple has it set up that consumers have to pay first and then get the application, and that Apple approves the products and lathers its brand on things makes it great. In Windows, you have 2000 web sites all cheesily affiliated with a handful of players, no consistent payment collection mechanism, loads of cracks everywhere, viruses and malware diluting the idea of downloading programs from the internet, all just conspiring to make developing for Windows a very difficult proposition. A Microsoft Store, not just some subcontracted junk from Digital River, but a Microsoft Store fully and genuinely bundled right into damn OS (and incidentally Vista is a step in the right direction), would be a godsend.

Troll post rating

[Anonymous Coward]

Masterfully executed, particularly the brilliant redirection and liberal application of FUD, all done with a shit-eating grin. 9/10.

Get current

[symbolset]

And, on Windows it will probably actually WORK.

I know you're a whiny astroturfing AC troll, but I can't let this pass.

If Microsoft OS software had a feature that worked like GNU/linux's software repositories, that would be a huge benefit for the end user and a major selling point. Install any of many thousands of apps in every category for free just by clicking on it? Free apps so plentiful they require their own search engine? Automatic dependency resolution? Integrated updates for all apps in one system? Slam dunk. There's even a spot for it in their control panel: the forgotten "add programs" part of add/remove programs.

But they won't because they can't. Every commercial software vendor would port to GNU/Linux the very next week, and the game would be over for them before the Justice department even launched the antitrust investigation.

So sad for MS. So good for everybody else. That is the "that was easy" button.

Re:Get current

[Whiteox]

Every commercial software vendor would port to GNU/Linux the very next week,

Why would they (commercial vendors) do that?
They can still sell their products.
Also, freeware/shareware vetted by an MS community could also go in the MS repository as well as 'pay for' software.

Imaging this: Get you CC debited for Norton's Premium HyperSmart All-In-One Global Professional Internet Security with Anti-Virus + AntiMalware + AntiRogue + AntiSpam download all from a central place!
Users and developers will flock to it.

Re:Get current

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Am I the only one who reads this and thinks that even with microsoft strictly controlling this, this is a possible spawning ground for malware?

Re:Get current

[symbolset]

Why would they (commercial vendors) do that?

Because they would finally realize that they were just grist for the mill that is Microsoft.

Re:Get current

[symbolset]

No. Unless by "a possible" you didn't mean "an essential".

Re:Get current

[Your.Master]

Why doesn't somebody make this? Either as an open-source effort or as an aftermarket add-on to Windows?

Re:Get current

[symbolset]

Imaging this: Get you CC debited for Norton's Premium HyperSmart All-In-One Global Professional Internet Security with Anti-Virus + AntiMalware + AntiRogue + AntiSpam download all from a central place! Users and developers will flock to it.

It's interesting that you mention all of that. Did you know that OS-X and Linux users don't have to deal with all that (forgive me) crap? On rational platforms all that junk just does not run and if it could by some fluke run it wouldn't spread because the systems are designed differently. Non Windows systems assume that the network is hostile because it is .

Re:Get current

[bongomanaic]

Package managers work on Linux because all (or nearly all) of the software that distros support is open source; They have control over the compilation and packaging of the binaries they provide, and so can ensure that an update to one piece of software doesn't break something else. The few pieces of proprietary software that a distro might support, such as Adobe reader or Skype, are treated with caution and are typically well tested before updates are made available. Microsoft can't replicate this on Windows. So much of the software that makes Windows useful is proprietary or is in competition with Microsoft's own products and there are enough examples of apparently respectable software vendors producing user-hostile software that there just isn't enough mutual trust to make it work.

Re:Get current

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux and OS X are not invincible shields against remote exploits and root kits. The junk runs just fine when it's made to target your platform.

Re:Get current

[colinrichardday]

Am I the only one who reads this and thinks that because of microsoft strictly controlling this, this is a possible spawning ground for malware?

Fixed it for you

More better!!!

[symbolset]

I prefer "Runs for sure!" It has that link to their DRM efforts that foretells the conclusion, without ruining the ending for the neophyte.

Re:More better!!!

[symbolset]

On second thought, maybe they should save the "Runs for sure!" meme for Windows 7.

Hey I get this in Linux already...

[Bytal]

apt-cache search ________

apt-get install _________

That s simplifying it of course, but apt and it's relatives were always one of the majors reasons I loved Linux. Unlike windows, I didn't have to hunt apps down on shady sites, download random EXEs, etc. Everything is in one relatively simple to use place. Add some way to process payments and you have a ready made AppStore.

Re:App store not making money? pfft

[neuromanc3r]

I like to bash MS/Ballmer as much as the next slashdotter, but I don't think that's true. He admits that it is a good idea. And his comments about "not much money being made" simply show the difference between his definition and your definition of "much money".

One Word:

[bradgoodman]

"CrapStore"

Re:One Word:

[AmberBlackCat]

Leave Circuit City out of this.

Duh

[Anonymous Coward]

You do understand what object code is, right?

Re:Duh

[Anonymous Coward]

What's that got to do with anything?
I'd rather my code be listed than wasting away on one of the thousands of websites presently.

Re:App store not making money? pfft

[Daimaou]

I don't think it is as much about discounting Apple's success as it is minimizing the "me too" nature of Microsoft's business.

Finally they take security seriously, it seems

[Casandro]

Finally they are making repositories of software so people have at least some chance to find out if it's malware or not.

Finally Microsoft might get a package manager and people could install software without having to type "programmname free download" into the next search engine, and probably getting malware with the first 10 links.

That is, unless Microsoft messes it up which they will probabaly do. My guess is that they will not open it to "free" software or the whole system will be horribly insecure. Probably nobody will trust Microsoft and therefore they all will stay at the old, horribly insecure system.

Re:App store not making money? pfft

[Paradise Pete]

I don't think it is as much about discounting Apple's success as it is minimizing the "me too" nature of Microsoft's business.

I think that's exactly right. By making it look like a favor to developers instead of a real business, while at the same time drooling over a 30% slice.

Kill pirated software

[tsa]

I think this is just a way to kill pirated software. What if in Windows 7, like the iPhone, you can only install software you got from the MS App store? It's also a nice way to keep those irritating OSS programs like FF and OO off of their lawn.

More MS Mindset here ---

[Whiteox]

Here's an example of how Ballmer views the world.

Despite acknowledging that WebKit's open-source nature is "interesting," Microsoft's chief executive elaborated on why he says the software giant is sticking--at least for now--with its Trident rendering engine for Internet Explorer.

"I think there will continue to be a lot of proprietary innovation by us, and other people, inside the browser itself," he said. "A company like ours needs to have (its own) rendering service. It is important that we have a browser that embraces (Internet) standards but also allows us to have innovative extensions, even before the standards bodies go there."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10090118-75.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5

So MS make innovative extensions to IE and then wait for the standards bodies adopt it??

He's completely ignoring FOSS here. He seems to have lost objectivity, especially if you read the rest of the article.
Doesn't look like MS is going compliant any time soon.

Open-source app store?!?

[noidentity]

Ballmer said yesterday [...] 'There's not much money being made, but the general concept of giving developers a way not only to get their code distributed, but to really get visibility for the code, is a good idea,'

Wow, an open-source app store.

Re: Obscure references FTW!

[TaoPhoenix]

However, I did by being thorough enough to look them up as I see them!

Lit for Nerds, Stuff that Matters.

TFA

[allgoodnamesaretaken]

"Research hasn't indicated harmful long-term effects of TFA on people. At this stage there's no evidence that non-stick cooking poses a safety risk.'" from Is Teflon safe?

Re:App store not making money? pfft

[Anonymous Coward]

They are making PLENTY of money off the app store, far more than they expected. Ballmer's comments about "there's not much money being made" is simply his way of discounting Apples success and predicting his own failure.

And the top 100 products will be antivirus and uninstall programs, just like with Windows

Microsoft was inspired...

[dangitman]

When the Microsoft executives saw Apple's ability to apply heavy-handed censorship and control over applications offered on the iPhone platform, they thought "That's Brilliant! Why the hell didn't we think of that first?"

Oh Boy!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh Boy! The makers of Zune and Clippy are going to make an app. store.

Can't wait.

Re:App store not making money? pfft

[destiney]

I'm feeling quite the banksta with my two iPhone apps.

Stevie B. can suckit.