Slashdot Mirror
Future Microsoft Devices Will Take Cues From the Surface Tablet
An anonymous reader writes: Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella says the company is committed to bringing Windows to as many computer form factors as possible — even if they have to do it themselves. He says their plan is to build out new devices with the same mindset that created the Surface line. The Surface Pro tablets (and the regular Surface tablets, now that Windows RT has been retired) have been a rare bright spot among Microsoft's mobile stumbles. Nadella seems to want Windows to become almost hardware agnostic, and he thinks the universal apps plan for Windows 10 is the way to do it.
He says, "Universal Windows apps are going to be written because you want to have those apps used on the desktop. The reason why anybody would want to write universal apps is not because of our three percent share in phones. It's because a billion consumers are going to have a Start Menu, which is going to have your app. You start the journey there and take them to multiple places. Their app can go to the phone. They can go to HoloLens. They can go to Xbox. ... And by the way, when we hook them on that, we have a phone app. This strategy is path dependent, which is a term I use that means where you start is not where you end up. And therein lies a lot of the nuance. The fundamental truth for developers is they will build if there are users. And in our case the truth is we have users on desktop."
He says, "Universal Windows apps are going to be written because you want to have those apps used on the desktop. The reason why anybody would want to write universal apps is not because of our three percent share in phones. It's because a billion consumers are going to have a Start Menu, which is going to have your app. You start the journey there and take them to multiple places. Their app can go to the phone. They can go to HoloLens. They can go to Xbox. ... And by the way, when we hook them on that, we have a phone app. This strategy is path dependent, which is a term I use that means where you start is not where you end up. And therein lies a lot of the nuance. The fundamental truth for developers is they will build if there are users. And in our case the truth is we have users on desktop."
I have a Windows Phone. I love it, and really wish that it had taken off. But my feelings don't change the economic reality, which is that I can get to those desktop users just fine with either a Win32 application or a web app. The only reason to write a WinRT/Modern/Store/whatever-they're-calling-it-today app it to reach that additional 1% of the uses with a Windows Phone.
I used a Windows Phone for a while and it is actually a good product. It was fast and stable and did what I wanted it to do. The UI was actually pretty nice. The one thing that made me go back to Android was the lack of apps and the quality of some of them. I really missed the Google apps that I was used to using. Google is no more of a villain for doing that than Microsoft is for not producing Office or Exchange for Linux, or Apple not producing iTunes for WindowsPhone or Android but Windows Phone with gmail, youtube, and google maps would have been really nice.
BTW yes I know about bing maps and using imap for gmail and the third party youtube apps but I liked google better.
In the end I really wish that WP did better than it looks like it will do. Now what Microsoft is doing to Nokia is shameful.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
please please
When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a tablet. ;)
They can go to Linux.
Universal Windows apps are going to be written because you want to have those apps used on the desktop.
Universal Windows is a contradiction. Especially coming from a company with an on-again off-again relationship with allowing backward compatibility on X-Box. Your customers quit caring about your apps for their devices when google came out with docs. Web is the universal app.
The reason why anybody would want to write universal apps is not because of our three percent share in phones. It's because a billion consumers are going to have a Start Menu, which is going to have your app.
that was the whole point of the 3% phone marketshare and this is the circular logic thats been plaguing "thought leaders" at redmond for a decade. To have that button, you need a platform, and you didnt win phones or tablets so what pray tell is the start button going to show up on? transit cards?
You start the journey there and take them to multiple places. Their app can go to the phone. They can go to HoloLens. They can go to Xbox. ... And by the way, when we hook them on that, we have a phone app.
Stop. stop with the fever-dream of a phone. you lost seven billion dollars on the phone thing. real people lost jobs because of your half-assed insistance on dominating all markets forever. as of 2009, Steam had a 70% share of the digital distribution market for video games so clearly at this point both developers and customers think the X-Box crack is wack. Maybe if you treated your users like real people and not some sort of parasite theyd keep following.
This strategy is path dependent, which is a term I use that means where you start is not where you end up.
Yes. Bankruptcy court is still certainly not the lowest option you have. Take a look at how long SCO managed to fuck up the brand.
And therein lies a lot of the nuance. The fundamental truth for developers is they will build if there are users. And in our case the truth is we have users on desktop.
So...none of your circlejerking about the phone meant anything to the cusp of your argument. surprise. And the idea that developers will build if there are users is a Ballmerism; and not one i might say most people are keen on. Developers want creativity and independence. you bought Mojang last year because, arguably, you couldnt bring any of that to the table. And once you run that franchise into the dirt (and you will) there will be an open source clone, or hell, even a successor on Steam, but it most certainly wont be tethered to the haggared burro you call an OS.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Stop.
Stop talking.
Please for the love of God, stop talking.
The last few years it seems like decades of "because we say so" is catching up with Microsoft.
Their "innovation" seems to be at an all time low, and most of the new and shiny stuff they're putting out seems to fall flat, and the stuff they're putting out which copies what other people have done aren't very popular.
I wonder if Microsoft hasn't lost the plot entirely, and now they're a big lumbering entity flailing around to try to stay relevant, while mostly failing to write stuff people care about.
Office has mostly plateaued, yes, people will keep using it, but there's not a lot of new functionality anybody needs.
Quite honestly, their strategy to make everything look like mobile is complete garbage for a desktop computer. You have to turn off most of their "innovations" to end up with a usable desktop.
If they are pinning their hopes on all of us becoming completely involved in all of their ecosystem, they will probably discover not enough of us care, or are willing to go that route.
It just feels like Microsoft no longer has any real clue about how to remain relevant in a lot of segments. I can pretty much say I don't foresee their vision of the future being something I give a damn about.
And when I see shit like "we're going to share your wifi password" I think "wow, you have no clue about security and think you own the systems" -- basically nobody with a Microsoft product will ever get any access to any wifi I control.
Sorry Microsoft, but you've become a dinosaur selling us spreadsheets and Power Point. Meanwhile the rest of the world is actually trying to make new and interesting stuff.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Says the anonymous coward
Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
in 3,2,1...
... does anyone care about your newest "strategy"?
I really wonder what this guy smokes cause it seems very powerfull !
He's still missing a big opportunity: the enterprise. Why everyone is clamoring for the crumbs of the consumer pie, I don't understand. Enterprise functionality is being ignored forcing us to adopt strange concepts like BYOD which is a logistical nightmare and security concern.
Dominate the enterprise and the consumer market will follow. Gates knew this. Balmer seemed more interested in chasing the heels of the current trend as most sales guys do. And now I'm not sure what to think about this new guy... But he seems to be still missing the point.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
"Universal Windows apps are going to be written because you want to have those apps used on the desktop."
Wait, who wants universal Windows apps?
Certainly it is not the desktop users. Because they must cater to the "lowest-common-denominator" of hardware, universal apps tend to be underpowered and have interfaces poorly optimized for mouse/keyboard.
The developers have little care for Universal apps. There is no demand for the things, and requires an investment in learning new development methods. It is an added expense and complication that brings little reward for the extra effort.
I suppose there might be some demand from Windows Winphone users - all six of them - but even they might prefer a more functional app tailored to their desktops capabilities rather than a cut-rate smartphone app. I don't hear an overwhelming clamor crying out, "oh if only the mail app on my desktop worked just like it did on my winphone!"
No, there is only one party that is really interested in Universal apps, and that's Microsoft themselves because universal apps are sold through the Microsoft app store and they get a cut of the proceeds. It also gives them great control over what sort of programs users have access to (what are the odds they would allow a stand-alone Linux installer to be added to their store?).
So, other than some great desire to increase Microsoft's profits, what reason is there to develop or use Universal apps?
The reason why anybody would want to write universal apps is not because of our three percent share in phones. It's because a billion consumers are going to have a Start Menu, which is going to have your app.
A billion consumers already have an Explorer desktop. You can already distribute a program to those customers right now; why would I, as a customer or as a developer (other than MS), want to introduce a new walled garden to the desktop PC market? Sure you get to distribute to multiple devices, but the most useable programs take advantage of the platform they're on. You can't make Photoshop meaningfully functional on a phone, and I don't see FlappyBird being a hit on the PC. The only reason my programs can't go to the HoloLens is it doesn't exist yet, and they can't go to the XBox because MS won't let me.
I'm a smalltime developer. I see the value in a central repository, apt-get style. I'm also frequently irritated over the store on my phone. I'm really having trouble seeing the benefit of this, besides dollar signs for Microsoft.
Kill me now...
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
The one thing I wouldn't like is needing to create a Microsoft account so still I would look for Firefox OS 2.x, which is said to allow adding app stuff without the need for an online account.
Without any sort of "online account", with which primary key would the store associate your purchases so that they can be restored onto a different device, such as a replacement or upgraded device?
my programs [...] can't go to the XBox because MS won't let me.
What was the reply when you applied to become an Xbox app developer?
Which of those here, that have actually tested Windows 10 for more than a day are willing to trade Windows 7 for Windows 10?
Microsoft are dead and dumb... I hate there approach to software.
I tried Linux Mint 17.2 Cinnamon, and love it to pieces... never before, has Linux won me over so convincingly.
Linux is the right approach because from all the distros you get to choose what fits you like a glove, and not have some ape from Microsoft shove a Window 8 or Universal App garbage down your throat.
Thank you Linux world - you rock, and I'm just sorry it took me this long to realize your way is the right way.
And M$ pushes even more unwanted hardware onto the market.
These assholes have been pushing tables and tablet like devices since the late 90s.
I wish they would take a hint and just fuck off.
With PC shipments falling at about 10% every year, being dependent on this path leads to a cliff. Nadela cannot change the fact that Windows users were pining for an alternative after being nickeled and dimed to maintain an utterly crappy product release after release. Now that there are alternatives, even if not fully replacing each and every feature or convenience, users have turning their backs to whatever Microsoft has to offer. And wisely so, because it has nothing but offered more of the same, ignoring that users have moved away from the 20th century model that Microsoft corralled them in and are using computing devices in different ways that no desktop can dream of.
Universal apps will for the most part be crap. It's hard enough to make a really great application for the iPhone and iPad (it's what I'm familiar developing for). Heck, even with all of the different screen sizes and retina and non-retina screens just the iPhone is trouble enough.
And now Microsoft wants developers to deploy a single app to phones, tablets, huge wall mounted tablets, desktops, laptops, game machines, and their HoloLens?!?! I hope that you are able to exclude the platforms you don't want to support because you know that people are going to trying running your app on them even if you had no intention of it.
And by the way, when we hook them on that, we have a phone app. This strategy is path dependent, which is a term I use that means where you start is not where you end up. And therein lies a lot of the nuance. The fundamental truth for developers is they will build if there are users. And in our case the truth is we have users on desktop.
Translation: We have a monopoly in desktop computers that we need to leverage to get into other markets where we have been getting our ass handed to us.
Tigers cannot change their stripes. Hail to the new boss - same as the old boss.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the Surface products been some of the worst selling products ever? I remember the sales of the first Surface were so bad that Microsoft was sued by investors for misleading them with the sales numbers. If I am correct about surface sales, why would you 'take cues' from a flop?
Nadella says the company is committed to bringing Windows to as many computer form factors as possible
No matter how much we have to destroy the classic, functional "WIMP" experience for desktop users by forcing the "Fingerpaint Interface", no matter how much we have to dumb it down, no matter how much stuff we have to hide, but WE WILL put windows on every Form Factor (the cheapest, simplest crap being the Common Denominator, of course).
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
even if they have to do it themselves
Translation: We don't want to work with our hardware partners any more.
Why should Dell, Acer, HP, etc. continue to do business with Microsoft when Microsoft openly says that they are going to compete with them?
How can these companies compete with Microsoft in the Windows market? They can't. They will realize this...
What's the point of developing for a niche platform?
If you are an enterprise and you want to provide a service to your customers, you can do just about everything from the web. You don't need to write an app, you don't need to distribute it and keep it updated. You can write a web app and have everything in one place. You don't have to force your users to upgrade. You don't have to worry about fake versions of your app. You can use web standards and just ignore Microsoft and Apple and everyone else.
The same way it works on AOSP: by restoring from a backup. If you want the cloud backup/sync features of having a store account, then, great, create a store account. If you're capable of handling your own backups, the OS should let you do that.
Surface is a prime example of a product that does not satisfy any actual need. Most consumers seem to believe that it is better to have a proper tablet, with a proper table oriented software stack, and a proper laptop with proper desktop/laptop oriented software stack. Surface is a horribly confused mash-up of technologies that don't belong together, and it shows. If Microsoft wants to pursue a strategy based on this, it really shows a total lack of understanding of their users' needs.
The other problem is the Windows app store. As a developer, I will never touch it. It simply has worse economics than developing for the traditional desktop model, and the idea of 'universal apps' is patently stupid. We would never inflict stupidity like that on our customers. These days, we only develop cross platform software, so a lot of the tools are useless legacy products. If Microsoft still intends to think with a Windows centric mindset, they will just fade away, and become potentially irrelevant, probably much quicker than anyone might believe. Within my own company, we have recently dumped a bunch of Microsoft technologies, due to poor cross platform support, and crazy UI decisions. These include Windows Server across the board - over 150 servers, Lync (no Linux client that works. There was a program called Sky/Wync, but it didn't work well enough to use for multi-party conferences - although it has some promise for a future for which we can not wait), and a huge number of desktops that have been migrated to Linux. Over 750 so far. The cost savings in terms of maintenance effort, are significant, not to mention the reduction in license fees. It remains to be seen how migration of the more business oriented and less technical users will go, but the Windows 8/tile/ribbon mess and high license fees was the deciding factor. We just could not justify using software that is clearly being designed without any user input.
Since Android 4.1, paid apps have been encrypted with a key per device. The intent, as I understand it, is that if you restore an encrypted paid app from one device to another device, you can't use it. Or what am I missing?
I got my hand on a MS Surface today and.. I did not like it! Can't glide two fingers on an object to zoom or shrink an object or glide to scroll in an object like the file browser but have to fiddle with a tiny vertical scrollbar to move the inner content.Seems they have some magnifying mode which I experienced as horrible, anxious to get out of it as quickly as possible. Seems not to be on todays state of art level with their interface.