Official Microsoft Device Event 10/6 10AM Eastern

Liquid

Superstar
WOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
37,122
Reputation
2,655
Daps
59,916
You act like the app ecosystem is not a major deal though. While it may be true that we will use cross platform web apps one day in the *future*, what happens while we wait? It's not like it's going to happen over the next few weeks or months or year. There's no reason for the average consumer to jump if this isn't happening for another 2-3 years. People aren't trying to jump to a platform that doesn't support the most popular feature of smartphones today.

Microsoft is positioning themselves very nicely for the future but let's not pretend that completely missing or at best being sorely behind the competition in a key smartphone feature works for the average (or even above average) consumer. Until they can bridge that gap, they'll have a niche product in an market dominated by two manufacturers on opposite ends of the spectrum. And once they get there, it's still an uphill battle to stay afloat.

We definitely need another major player to shake things up though. I'm cheering for them and will support if the new phone reviews look good.
I'm still not getting examples of the major misses on WP, the major miss IMO is Snapchat. If you don't use Snapchat then you are not really missing most of the major apps anymore. The numbers game doesn't matter as much as these companies claim it does for the majority.

Uber? Check
Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Tinder Client? Check
Netflix, Hulu? Check, although apparently the Hulu app needs an update.
Updates on a consistent basis that is not found on Android? Check
Customizable UI, but still maintaining and closed and consistent experience across all devices? Check

Now there are some specific applications that can only be found on Android and iOS, but I would argue that most of those are productivity apps on a device that most don't use as productivity devices. Windows Phone has a healthy amount of games as well.

WP is positioned as the best platform to scale across devices, receive updates better than Android and customization that Apple does not allow on their home screens. It works consistently across all phone hardware from the old ass Lumia 520 to the newest flagship 950XL.

What you guys are bringing up are way overblown in 2015 with the trend of developers wanting apps that will work across all platforms. We aren't there yet, but there is literally nothing I am using on my iPhone 6S that I cannot find on Windows Phone. I'll tell you what I CAN'T do though, that is reach the top left of my iPhone 6S screen with my thumb because I cannot resize shortcut...My Windows Phone all have a large tile on the top left of the screen so that I can reach it with ease.
 

Liquid

Superstar
WOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
37,122
Reputation
2,655
Daps
59,916
U couldn't deny any of it lol
You went off-topic because you don't have a counter.

No shyt that posting on an iPhone 6 is going to be better than on an old ass Palm Pre, the fact is that it still works regardless of platform. The Coli works on any smartphone released in the past 7 years with minimal tweaks having to be made by the developers at Xenforo or cook/brooklynzson and rain.

You guys are obsessed with this apps nonsense like the shyt is a good way of approaching things. Only games and things that need the local horsepower are the ones that make sense. Facebook and all these networks would love to only have to worry about 1 standard and that is the trend going forward.
 

Golayitdown

Veteran
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
24,598
Reputation
5,043
Daps
83,396
You went off-topic because you don't have a counter.

You guys are obsessed with this apps nonsense like the shyt is a good way of approaching things. Only games and things that need the local horsepower are the ones that make sense. Facebook and all these networks would love to only have to worry about 1 standard and that is the trend going forward.

It's a good way of approaching things UNTIL universal apps are standard. You're literally saying "apps are stupid....... until we get one app for everybody". It's crazy to pretend that platform specific apps have no utility at all for an end user because it's easier to develop one ubiquitous app.

As developers, you and I both know that the end user doesn't give a fukk about these networks preferring a single standard as long as they can reliably access the content from the platform of their choice in the most convenient way possible.
 

satam55

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
45,557
Reputation
5,142
Daps
89,786
Reppin
DFW Metroplex
I'm downplaying the app situation because I'm moving past it already. LOL @ the idea of updating every single app in 2015. You don't realize how ridiculous you would feel in a tech meet up today. Everyone hates the process as it is now, it is just being dealt with because cellular remote connections still need to improve.

What is it that Windows phone does not offer outside of the app ecosystem which is completely overblown? Do you realize that Windows is the best scalable platform out there today? They accomplished what apple has been trying to accomplish for years and in a more open environment :laff:

It's all going universal. The very idea of fragmented app stores and creating a headache for developers is ridiculous as most of these apps don't even push the hardware on these devices.

Why do you think The Coli never bothered with an app? We are already ahead of the curve...the website works across all phones from an OG Palm Pre (I tried it) to an iPhone 6S+ flawlessly.

:francis: You keep talking about how HTML5/Web Apps are gonna take over. I'm still waiting for it to happen. Not just on mobile, but on Game Consoles, Smart TVs/Blu-ray players, media boxes, & etc.

HTML5 is what we all want, why bother having to create Windows Desktop, Phone, Mac OS X, iOS, and Android versions of apps that we are all using the same way?

It is a headache to manage all of that stuff for companies when you can have a single focus that can spread across devices. Once Apple gets on the touch screen bandwagon for their computers it will make even more sense.

It is definitely taking a long time, but understand that it is a very daunting task.

You basically have to create a solution that will work on resolutions between 1024x768 all the way up to 5K now. It is slowly getting there, but it is what everyone is trying to get to eventually. Google is ahead of all the other browsers in making it work with chrome. Once everything starts dropping dedicated keyboards for the majority of the applications is when the real push is going to happen. That is why Microsoft is pushing the Surface line so hard, ironically Apple is lagging behind in that space. It is mind boggling to me that a touch macbook has not been released yet.

Video Games and thing that push hardware will continue to run on dedicated hardware.















:francis: Ummm @Liquid .....


New Apple TV shuns thousands of Web-powered apps

Apple has excised some browser technology from its tvOS, meaning a great many developers will have to retool games and other apps if they want a place in the new Apple TV App Store.

by Stephen Shankland September 11, 20159:57 AM PDT


Apple wants customers of its new Apple TV to be able to run a wealth of apps on the device, but it has apparently closed the door to one large class of software.

Apple TV, which Chief Executive Tim Cook announced Wednesday, is a $149 or $199 device that streams Internet video to TVs and lets people play games. Its underlying software and hardware are closely related to what Apple uses in its iPhones and iPads, and as with those mobile devices, Apple will distribute Apple TV games and other apps through its own App Store.

buytvlarge.jpg

The new Apple TV and its remote control were unveiled Wednesday.

But even though iPhones and Apple TV are technological cousins, lots of iPhone apps won't be easily adapted for the streaming-media device, and not just because its remote control is different from the iPhone's touch screen. It's because Apple removed a crucial software component called WebKit that lets developers build their apps using the same technology used to construct websites.

You probably don't care about how your apps are written as long as they work, but you may care if it means apps you want aren't available. Apple TV customers who want to search for video with the JustWatch app, exercise with the Sworkit app or read news from the Financial Times will have to wait for app developers to move away from Web technology and adjust to Apple's new approach.

Developers, the unofficial business partners whose software is crucial to making a modern computing device successful, certainly do care. Moving an app from one programming foundation to another takes time, especially if a developer must learn new programming languages and tools. Some developers like to use Web technologies to build apps because the Web is nearly universal on computing devices, which means they can reuse code when building an app for lots of different devices. Core parts of a Web-based app will run on an iPhone or iPad powered by Apple's iOS operating system or on other devices powered by the likes of Google's Android, Microsoft's Windows Phone and Samsung's Tizen.

But the operating system powering Apple TV, called tvOS, is missing WebKit, according to Apple's documentation. The rationale for the decision isn't yet clear, and it's possible Apple could restore Web technologies later. Apple didn't respond to requests for comment on the tvOS move.

Better performance?

One possible reason Apple removed WebKit support was because of concerns about app performance. Facebook famously ditched its Web-based approach for its apps in 2012, saying the speed of apps built natively for iOS and Android were better. Apple cares deeply about app performance.

High-performance apps can be built with Web technologies, but it's not always easy, said Borui Wang, co-founder and CEO of a company called Polarr whose photo-editing app uses those Web technologies. "WebKit leaves too much responsibility to the developers," he said, raising the possibility of inexpert programmers writing apps that suffer from jerky animation or stability problems. Web apps also can consume a lot of memory, a precious resource. "My gut feeling is Apple wants a consistent experience among TV apps and wants to have more control over how stuff looks and works."

webkit-icon.jpg

Apple's WebKit software powers its Safari browser and lets other programs employ Web technology for displaying graphics, text, video and more.

Another tricky matter: An app interface geared toward Apple's remote control, with a touch-sensitive surface, orientation sensitivity and a handful of buttons, is very different from an app interface geared for touchscreens or for keyboards and mice.

Most computing devices -- smartphones, PCs, tablets, gaming consoles -- have a built-in browser. Apple didn't demonstrate its own browser, Safari, on Apple TV, and it's possible the company doesn't think the Web is really a core part of the TV experience.

It wouldn't be the first. Streaming-video devices including Amazon's Fire TV and those from Roku don't include browsers. The Nvidia Shield doesn't come with a browser, but that software can be installed if you jump through a couple of hoops. But Apple is in a different position from those rivals in an important way: It's already got thousands of Web-tech apps and developers who've invested time building them. They'll have to start over if they want to make the jump to Apple TV.

Ripple effects

The removal of WebKit doesn't just affect apps for things like games, news, shopping, social networking and photo sharing. It also means, in all likelihood, that third-party browsers also will be impossible.

Browsers can fill gaps in app stores. If there's no app for Gmail, Vimeo video, Bing Maps or Amazon shopping for a particular device, a Web browser can provide that access. It looks like Apple is keeping that door shut, too.

On iOS, by contrast, Google, Mozilla, Opera and others have released browsers that rely on Apple's WebKit engine to turn website code into a page shown on a screen.

If Apple TV proves as popular for streaming video as the iPhone is for smartphones, then developers could well feel compelled to support it. But if Apple TV apps need major retooling before they'll run on other devices like those running Google's Android TV, it'll be more expensive and time-consuming for developers to support those other devices.

webkit-elements-removed.jpg

Many programming interfaces using WebKit technology are available for use by iPhone apps but aren't for Apple TV apps.

The older Apple TV device hasn't achieved that kind of market clout. As a result, it's not yet clear if bringing games and other apps to the new Apple TV will be the business necessity for software makers that iPhone support is.

Apple has shown a knack for developing popular, profitable products, and Apple TV could become more compelling with the expected arrival of a video-streaming subscription service. Shunning Web-based apps might not be a big deal today, but in the long run it could be a blow to the broad power of Web technology.


Link: New Apple TV shuns thousands of Web-powered apps - CNET

With Apple having the dominate App ecosystem on Mobile, I always felt they would try to stifle the development of HTML5/Web apps. This reminds me of Sony putting exotic chips in the PS2 & especially PS3, so it wouldn't be easy for game developers to port their games over to other platforms.
 

Liquid

Superstar
WOAT
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
37,122
Reputation
2,655
Daps
59,916
:francis: Ummm @Liquid .....




With Apple having the dominate App ecosystem on Mobile, I always felt they would try to stifle the development of HTML5/Web apps. This reminds me of Sony putting exotic chips in the PS2 & especially PS3, so it would be easy for game developers to port their games over to other platforms.
Stupid, but expected from Apple.

It's all good, Microsoft has a much better plan moving forward anyway.
 
Top