Developers, developers, developers! But WILL they support Windows 10? Microsoft has revealed more of its plans for Windows 10, with full release expected towards the end of 2015. The press event focused on eye-catching features like HoloLens, a virtual reality and augmented reality headset, but what really counts is this: will Windows 10 attract developers back to the Windows platform? Windows …
Nope. Web apps - you use a web browser to access it. Why restrict yourself to <10% of the clients, when you can reach them all?
And, by the way, wrapping an app around a web page (with an internal "server") is a legitimate solution for developing a cross-platform app. The general theme these days is to make your apps cross-platform. We've been burnt so many times by restricting ourselves to a single platform.
Really? I'm developing cross-platform apps myself - that looks like best bet...
Mobile web? Keep up, AC!
@RyokuMas - "Really? I'm developing cross-platform apps myself - that looks like best bet..."
So to prove your point you refer to an article which says Flurry's numbers were derived from multiple incompatible sources and so are quite possibly complete rubbish? You might possibly be right, but that article doesn't support your point.
That's not even addressing the issue that Flurry was just counting number of hours spent using an app as a mark of its success. If it took hours to find a bus route using a native app and seconds to find it using a web browser, then Flurry would mark the native app as being superior. I suspect that most users would however draw a different conclusion. All Flurry is really measuring is that games tend to be written in native code, and people spend hours playing games while they expect non-entertainment apps (where a lot of web apps are used) to quickly and efficiently accomplish a set task.
What methods work best depends on the application and the target market. If you've got to turn out a basic utility app for a client and it needs to work on all platforms, and you have a finite budget and delivery schedule (like most of the real world outside of Silicon Valley does) then the open web looks very attractive.
Why on earth did you bother with the banality that all apps should be web apps. Do you think that every developer who develops a non-web apps has never heard of the web, has never considered it as an option, and then not worked out that for whatever constraint or reason that they have that they need a executable application. Desktop apps have a function and purpose at points, as do web apps, as do web services, as does a sql job. You Muppet.
There is a group of people who only grew up on MS-DOS and Windows. They believe that the problems they face on their systems are intrinsic to all computers. They believe that distributing software in binary form is a good thing, often claiming that if they would give out the source code, everybody could just copy it... as if that couldn't also happen with the binary code.
In a way it's similar to the "Facebook"-Crowd. Those are the people who believe that the Internet solely consists of Facebook and other large companies. For them it makes sense to host your website "in the cloud" as they think it's normal that a server cannot easily saturate a gigabit connection with web traffic. They think tracking their users is OK and even outsource that to companies like Google or Adobe. Those people believe that the main problem with the Internet is that there is no payment infrastructure.
Those crowds may seem weird and appalling to us, but they do exist.
Build isn't really attended to by real developers - mostly news reporters, people who think they're news reporters, fanboys, and those who are into group masturbation.
Remember all the bullshit announcements from 2014? Where are they now.. we're still developing just like we did 3 years ago. Windows/Office on a tablet/phones, cotana, etc. that they're still struggling to peddle. The biggest announcement was the return of the (drum-roll...) Start Menu! (fanfare + gasp) - but only available next year, and you'll need to upgrade/replace the whole OS for that one!
I'm worried that a universal OS like Windows 10, which is used across multiple platforms and devices, will lead to a "lowest-common-denominator" UI experience.
This is already with us with the desktop version of Skype 7.0, which is being written with (so they say) a universal design language based on Windows 10. The changes have led to literally thousands of messages on the community forum, pointing out that it removes features present in earlier Skype versions, hides commonly-used operations, and has a low information density on the screen to accommodate mobile devices. There are virtually no meaningful customization options - even for things as basic as color selection for accessibility.
The interface is the One True Way, immutable - regardless of platform, input device, screen resolution, use case, or visual impairment.
If the same thinking happens with other apps, then they will be in for a very bumpy ride.
Now, we're only a tiny precision engineering company but we're writing for Win10 and IoT for our next product which is all about fine granular control of production lines in the big pharmaceutical factories. As you can imagine, the instrumentation needs to be very, very precise and the data feedback constant in order to get past the FDA.
Admittedly, the front-end of our system is currently WPF but the plan is to go Universal with the launch version and the architecture is in place to support this (loose coupling, disconnected front end, disconnected data store, async model used throughout...)
It should run across workstations, tablets, embedded systems and headless IoT instruments.
So.... some of us are already on board.
And you are using windows to control production in the pharmaceutical industry - I just hope I, and others, don't have to use those products. I also assume the computers are connected to the internet in some way therefore you are asking for trouble in a big way.
No, they are on an internal network.
You should probably be aware that this is an upgrade to an existing system. It's actually the sixth upgrade since the original version 1.0 product which ran on Win2K workstations and Windows 98 Embedded.
You almost certainly depend on the products it has monitored and produced.
You might want to kill yourself right now, in fact, just so that you don't have to live with the fact that Windows has been saving your life and easing your pain since 2001. Or maybe you should just grow the fuck up.
An anonymous dickead, too scared to back up his sneering with a username.
It has nothing to do with fear. Please respect those of us who wish to post without tosspots who take themselves seriously and use our posting history against us - this site respects it, and so should you.
"we're writing for Win10 and IoT for our next product"
Surely you're bullshitting us. So you're already committing to a platform that isn't released, stabilised, proven or even gained a mentionable user base?
I'm curious of why someone would do that (unless Windows is all you know and are unable to explore alternatives).
"our system is currently WPF"
Says it all, really. And you haven't learned from that?
Been there, done that. Got the t-shirt, and then the nice redundancy package.
"So you're already committing to a platform that isn't released, stabilised, proven or even gained a mentionable user base?"
It makes sense. His company's customers are looking at kit with an EoL in, say 2030.* W2K has EoL in 2020. 8.* has EoL when? Of course they're going to want something that has a long life in front of it.
* Industrial kit has to run for a long time, that's why folk are finding it difficult to get away from XP and when I retired in 2006 my client had industrial printers still going strong which, as far as I could make out, had W95 embedded.
one word: Skylake.
Windows is on over one billion systems. They were forcing us to use the sucky Windows universal, no start menu junk, and they killed Silverlight when it was wonderful. How MSFT has failed with the phones -is- believable, given how brutal Google has been, with google voice not possible to work, youtube and mail almost, and stupid and dysfunctional large companies can be. but WPF is perfect for UI that works on different form factors. JS compared to C#, HTML, is for one size, it makes me want to die. you don't have to obfuscate it because its so hard to read. So, skylake , 3x less barely 2x smaller, and half the power, twice the speed. Finally a tablet can be as thin as something from Sammy or Apple. It takes time, but billions of dollars can win, even when Google is playing dirty, with the making stuff not work on Windows Phone. I think Google is so clever and competitive, windows has been just hammered., but.. do you want Android or Windows on a PC? hahahahahhahh.. shhh script kiddies. Old geysers suicide (over 40) rate will fall, if WinTell gets its Shizen back together.
@dogged
I was recently discussing software interfaces with a large manufacturer of a range of very expensive precision scientific instruments. Traditionally they are using Windows PCs for this (a long time ago they used VAXen or PDP11s).
They said that they were so annoyed with the uncertainty of Windows 7: 8; 8.1 and tablets that they were looking at a complete change of approach. One of the things that they are considering is to make each instrument with its own configurable internal web server. Its control parameters could be entered on its web pages by a PC, tablet, phone, terminal etc. There would be sufficient storage on each device that the data it had acquired could be transferred with a simple get after it had run.
What kind of irresponsible idiot uses Windows as a foundation for safety critical software? That's criminal negligence, right there. If you don't get it,
I press the thing next to Cortana and tell them. What you are saying is kind of true. need to disconnect it from the internet. they are pushing it. I woke up to an update, my StartisBack was broken, etc. I told them I was running an neural net overnight and lost a zillion dollar demo, with a guy leaving for the other side of the globe, no second chances. I complain to cortana, she has made me sound like a wife beating domestic violent case... stupdi b@#$@. And with her snide like jokes. this sh@# is not funny im going to starve because i develop for MSFT and too invested with an 8 year codebase.
However they have a billion + and you cant please everyone. I turned off the autoupdates for now. But i want them to change a ton of stuff. I expect a lot of churn. For a spaceship, it has to be a custom something and MSFT embedded solutions do exist I believe. https://www.microsoft.com/windowsembedded/en-us/windows-embedded.aspx
Web apps, Universal apps, Store apps - while they clearly have some benefits, the massive sticking point for complex applications is the fact that they are restricted to a single window (I guess you can do multiple browser windows for web apps, but it's far from a seamless experience). Being able to spawn multiple viewports or panels is a massive boon for any complex application which doesn't revolve around editing a single image or document, it also makes it much easier to make full use of multiple monitors in a sensible way.
"Who remembers Klik & Play?"
Me! LOL
For anyone who is only interested in the mechanics of a game, and doesn't care much for actual coding, I think applications such as Klik & Play (or whatever it's called now) work very well. For casual gaming where you want quick results, I really don't see the problem with it.
@RyokuMas You'll be pleased to know that Unity continues to support coding in C#. You can even link in your own DLLs written in C++, if you want to limit yourself to Windows. Of course it doesn't have the same portability as XNA. It is far better than that, allowing you to target Windows Desktop, Windows Store, Windows Phone, Windows tablets, Android, iPhones, iPads, OSX, XBox and Playstation. Oh, and Blackberry too.
I dipped my toes in WPF a few years back. It was good - but it was hard for me to commit to it when you looked at how fast the web (as an application platform) was gaining viability and popularity.
WPF is in maintenance mode now, for "legacy" applications that are reasonably recent.
I don't have anything against WPF itself, it just couldn't compete with the real world outside the Microsoft environment - stopping the investment was a difficult but shrewd move by Microsoft, but not telling their developers was a bit tasteless.
The web script kiddies seem to forget that there a lot of software isn't targeted at a phone or a tablet but meets some industrial functional need.
Whether it is Windows or Unix/Linux there are thousands of industrial applications that just work day in, day out. They just don't fit the social media meme that attracts attention today. Instead most of them do their job and make real money unlike most of the toy apps featured in the press.
Any organization that writes software for use by business will be looking at Windows 10 and deciding where it fits for their software. Some will look to exploit it, others will add it as a supported platform and for some it will not be relevant, but no sensible development organization can afford to ignore it.
The web script kiddies seem to forget that there a lot of software isn't targeted at a phone or a tablet but meets some industrial functional need.
No surprise there. Too often it seems that there is a sizable contingent of 14 year olds with 15 years of commercial experience here.
Whether it is Windows or Unix/Linux there are thousands of industrial applications that just work day in, day out. They just don't fit the social media meme that attracts attention today. Instead most of them do their job and make real money unlike most of the toy apps featured in the press.
Exactly. When a product may be on the market for a decade or more and need support for another 15 years after that as a minimum you take a very different perspective on these things: we have little interest in building entirely new software for devices that haven't been on sale for the last five years. Long term stability of the underlying platform is far more important than the latest shiny user-visible toys.
If you want to support developers to support your platform then support them. Look at the Unix world - if you understood the 1992 version of POSIX you'll need a bit of updating by now for e.g. threads or wide character support, but code written back then will still work with at worst minor fettling for the most part.
This is precisely where Microsoft continue to get it hopelessly wrong - entire new frameworks and paradigms are introduced every three or four years, far too frequently to keep up if you are doing actual work as opposed to playing with the latest shiny. The old stuff is left to bitrot or has the new cruft tacked on, such as how MFC was infested with the .NET stuff.
But at the end of the day, yes, of course we will have to consider Windows 10 at some point, whether that means the bare minimum to keep the old stuff working, a significant upgrade to the bare-bones Java software or simply saying, no, we're not going to cover that. A entirely new branch supporting all the fancy new features is probably the one option most likely to be quickly ruled out for pre-existing stuff, even if not for new stuff going forward.
entire new frameworks and paradigms are introduced every three or four years, far too frequently to keep up if you are doing actual work as opposed to playing with the latest shiny.
Oh yes. My CV is littered with "game changing" next new things that Microsoft now look down their noses at as legacy. I've also worked on projects where prima donners rewrite parts just to make use of the brand new and unproven MS tech.
I'm not saying their stuff is crap (or otherwise), it's just not stable enough to commit to long running projects or even your training allowance on. People are still stuck on XP because their stuff won't even run on a later version of the same OS!
I'm an experienced developer of the Microsoft stack and my current re-train is away from the damn churn-mill.
There is no reason not to separate the logic and data processing from the presentation through the standard protocols that make up the Web. The protocols and browsers are rich enough for your UI, and doing this makes your app more portable.
As for this "Holographic UI" nonsense, it's been done. Does no one remember Microsoft's VRML? I seem to remember a file manager with a Doom UI back in the day. Hit the file with a shotgun to delete, or something like that.
Oh, where to begin. No automatic conversion from one technology to another (VB6 to VB.net, Winforms to anything...). Abominations like Powershell syntax, instead of the rational, courteous approach of extending VBScript or JScript. Documentation and code samples? Oh, download the entire Windows xx devkit to find them, because we all want to do that. Need to download anything else like code samples? Let's see how many times we can make you click and guess which obfuscated named item might be the correct thing...
Frankly, Microsoft should just stop bothering. Developers are not an income stream. They never will be. Since Microsoft is *incapable* of paying attention to the human infrastructure that actually makes them money if it doesn't show up on a bean counter spreadsheet somewhere, they should just release some open source platform that works with all of it products and leave the rest to the developer community. Java-ize it.
"they should just release some open source platform that works with all of it products and leave the rest to the developer community. Java-ize it."
Without wishing to dispute the possible merits of open-sourcing some platform, I don't think you are wise to describe that as "Java-izing". There's been this little court case recently about just how open Java actually is.
I don't suppose this will have any effect, but can I just mention that "hologram" and "holographic" already have long-established meanings in the field of imagery and display and (here's the rub) ONE MORE FUCKING DIMENSION THAN YOUR HEAD-UP DISPLAY.
The innumerate tosspots in Microsoft's marketing department may not care about this small detail, but I do. So, Microsoft, when you produce a working 3D display technology, you can call it holographic. Until, then, I suggest you stick to the established meanings of words.
If you don't, we may decide to start calling your displays "wanky". Yes, I know the word "wank" already has an established meaning which doesn't accurately describe your new display technology, and our choice naturally leads on to an even more unfortunate nomenclature for the applications that use it, but it's OK to appropriate existing words because language evolves, right?
I mean Microsoft always talked about the "next big thing", a technology which should revolutionize everything. Usually those turned out to be just a couple of half baked libraries implementing a fraction of what's advertised and even that fraction often doesn't work. And shortly after the project gets usable... the project will be axed in favour of "the next big thing".
Now there are 2 groups of developers. Some are continuously keeping up with the latest fad, producing applications which, in their installation routine, install the last 20 years of external Windows packets.
The others are just limiting themselves to Win32, they create statically linked applications, often even without any installation routines. You copy your binary and it'll just work.
Now Microsoft made one mistake, they hinted stopping to support Win32. Windows RT doesn't support Win32 anymore, and so does Windows Phone. The operating systems they consider to be the future don't support Win32 any more. For both groups this means that their software won't run any more. And usually that even means they will have to completely re-implement their software. Now if you completely re-implement something you are likely to re-evaluate what platform you develop for.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
