It's built-in to the OS now. You odn't have to use it, and you actually can't use it at all until you register an account with Microsoft (which is 10% optional at the moment).
Apple does not require you to use their store in OSX. If you're trying to compare Windows to iOS then that's a bad comparison, instead compare Windows Phone to iOS, or compare Windows to OSX.
Nobody will know about your app on the Microsoft store either. If you do care, then put up a free demo/limited version and they have to go to you to get the full applicatoin.
The Mac app store seems to be rarely used in the workplace. Most everything you can get somewhere else. I don't know about home users.
Iif Microsoft wants an online store then they should get an online store. Having the store as a tightly integrated part of the operating itself is just a ridiculously bad idea.
They're all high. These guys add extremely small value, but want to extract huge amounts of profits. But this is the PC, we shouldn't even HAVE an apps market there! No one on OSX really uses Apple Store except to get xcode, because you can get everything you need elsewhere. What works on a phone for social media shouldn't automatically mean it's a good idea on an actual work device.
You forget, marketing is in charge of development. For every security bug patched, Microsoft marketing introduces new and exciting security holes to improve the user experience.
I suspect a lot of web developers suddeny had a desire to develop on a desktop instead but didn't want to learn something new. Also there seems to be an attitude in a lot of comments that writing UI is tedious, but that's why you don't get just a single person on a project and use a team instead. We've been trying to get so-easy-to-develop-that-a-child-can-do-it frameworks since the 80s, and they've always turned out badly.
The end goal of writing software is to have someone use it. When the goal becomes just writing the software itself, then it doesn't make much sense. And what's the point of advertising what tools were used to write some end user tool? The end user doesn't care.
"Time consuming"? if this means time to develop, is this now a factor in designing an actual product for actual customers to use? I'd say if a customer can actually see it and touch it and be affected by it in some way, then you never ever want to rush on it. If it's a dev only tool, then sure, rush it since it doesn't hurt anyone but themselves.
Microsoft really should just make it free. It already comes with advertisements and promotions of certain apps. Windows sole purpose at this point seems to be to support sales of its other software, such as Office, dev tools, back office server applications, etc. Note that I got Windows 8 Pro for $14.95, it's not a big stretch to drop that to $0.00.
It's just a pvp game with a slightly different twist. Any place you go to read about it will inevitably be so highly gushing in praise and amazement that you'll never know if it was a paid advertisement or a real review.
So popular that gaming sites are being told to popularize it even more. Even slashdot is advertising for it. Such a popular game would never go anywhere unless we spam the world about its existence!
But Enron said they were trying to save the world. Enron had geniuses too. Enron also had a practice of intimidating analysts who asked tough questions.
Then don't take the company public. There are plenty of companies that stay private, because they want to remain the owners (well, the original investors, the CEO is still just an easily replaceable pawn). Going public however means the public gets a voice in how things are done, if they decide to get involved that is. Going public means you've essentially borrowed lots of money from the public and they want to see a return on investment. And the public is much more finicky about results than the original venture capitalists.
After going public, a CEOs primary job is to coddle and reassure the stockholders.
Musk is not the owner of Tesla, it's a public company. That means the stockholders are in charge. If he keeps pissing off the stockholders then it's possible the board might want to find a different CEO that's more stable. Probably the board won't, but it would be less boring than usual when lots of stockholders decide to vote rather than send in the generic proxy check boxes.
The Wall Street putz is technically one of Elon's bosses. He wasn't being asked stupid questions, these were legitimate questions concerning the financial health of the company. If Musk didn't want to field questions from stockholders then he should never have taken the company public.
Well, that's another problem to solve. It doesn't mean solar is useless without storage, it just means that it can't do the full job 24/7. What's good though is that solar can offset the daytime spike in power, especially if that spike is due to extra air-conditioning usage during sunny days.
Slashdot Mirror
It's like they think they have a captive market that will never leave. Maybe they need to take a lesson from cable companies before it's too late.
It's built-in to the OS now. You odn't have to use it, and you actually can't use it at all until you register an account with Microsoft (which is 10% optional at the moment).
Which they do with their Surface RT. And no one really should be buying that product if they knew better what it was.
Apple does not require you to use their store in OSX. If you're trying to compare Windows to iOS then that's a bad comparison, instead compare Windows Phone to iOS, or compare Windows to OSX.
Nobody will know about your app on the Microsoft store either. If you do care, then put up a free demo/limited version and they have to go to you to get the full applicatoin.
95% is pretty good, since 99% of iOS and Android apps could be thrown away without anyone noticing.
But you can also sell the same program for Windows somewhere other than the Microsoft store.
The Mac app store seems to be rarely used in the workplace. Most everything you can get somewhere else. I don't know about home users.
Iif Microsoft wants an online store then they should get an online store. Having the store as a tightly integrated part of the operating itself is just a ridiculously bad idea.
They're all high. These guys add extremely small value, but want to extract huge amounts of profits. But this is the PC, we shouldn't even HAVE an apps market there! No one on OSX really uses Apple Store except to get xcode, because you can get everything you need elsewhere. What works on a phone for social media shouldn't automatically mean it's a good idea on an actual work device.
"Your document is taking too long to load. Do you wish to cancel running the scripts or continue to wait?"
You forget, marketing is in charge of development. For every security bug patched, Microsoft marketing introduces new and exciting security holes to improve the user experience.
I suspect a lot of web developers suddeny had a desire to develop on a desktop instead but didn't want to learn something new. Also there seems to be an attitude in a lot of comments that writing UI is tedious, but that's why you don't get just a single person on a project and use a team instead. We've been trying to get so-easy-to-develop-that-a-child-can-do-it frameworks since the 80s, and they've always turned out badly.
The end goal of writing software is to have someone use it. When the goal becomes just writing the software itself, then it doesn't make much sense. And what's the point of advertising what tools were used to write some end user tool? The end user doesn't care.
"Time consuming"? if this means time to develop, is this now a factor in designing an actual product for actual customers to use? I'd say if a customer can actually see it and touch it and be affected by it in some way, then you never ever want to rush on it. If it's a dev only tool, then sure, rush it since it doesn't hurt anyone but themselves.
Microsoft really should just make it free. It already comes with advertisements and promotions of certain apps. Windows sole purpose at this point seems to be to support sales of its other software, such as Office, dev tools, back office server applications, etc. Note that I got Windows 8 Pro for $14.95, it's not a big stretch to drop that to $0.00.
It's just a pvp game with a slightly different twist. Any place you go to read about it will inevitably be so highly gushing in praise and amazement that you'll never know if it was a paid advertisement or a real review.
As an anonymous coward, how do we know you're not just blatantly advertising?
So popular that gaming sites are being told to popularize it even more. Even slashdot is advertising for it. Such a popular game would never go anywhere unless we spam the world about its existence!
I have no idea how you even enter Unicode characters on slashdot, but apparently a lot of people manage to do it.
But Enron said they were trying to save the world. Enron had geniuses too. Enron also had a practice of intimidating analysts who asked tough questions.
Wow, Elon, I didn't know you were on Slashdot!
Then don't take the company public. There are plenty of companies that stay private, because they want to remain the owners (well, the original investors, the CEO is still just an easily replaceable pawn). Going public however means the public gets a voice in how things are done, if they decide to get involved that is. Going public means you've essentially borrowed lots of money from the public and they want to see a return on investment. And the public is much more finicky about results than the original venture capitalists.
After going public, a CEOs primary job is to coddle and reassure the stockholders.
Musk is not the owner of Tesla, it's a public company. That means the stockholders are in charge. If he keeps pissing off the stockholders then it's possible the board might want to find a different CEO that's more stable. Probably the board won't, but it would be less boring than usual when lots of stockholders decide to vote rather than send in the generic proxy check boxes.
What we learned is that Musk has not realized that those stockholders are the owners of the company, not him.
The Wall Street putz is technically one of Elon's bosses. He wasn't being asked stupid questions, these were legitimate questions concerning the financial health of the company. If Musk didn't want to field questions from stockholders then he should never have taken the company public.
Well, that's another problem to solve. It doesn't mean solar is useless without storage, it just means that it can't do the full job 24/7. What's good though is that solar can offset the daytime spike in power, especially if that spike is due to extra air-conditioning usage during sunny days.