With Continuum, capable Windows 10 Mobile devices will be able to act like PCs, hooking up to keyboards, mice, and monitors for a full Windows desktop experience, and Microsoft is looking into ways of expanding these capabilities. Apparently, that involves investigating the possibility of running Win32 apps from phones, according to Microsoft’s Kevin Gallo during the Connect() 2015 conference.
I have two things to say about this. First, this is totally cool. The idea of having just one smartphone with me that can hook up to a display, keyboard, and mouse, and then also run proper Win32 applications (instead of crappy Metro applications) is incredibly appealing to me. I like the concept of the Surface and Continuum (the device being smart enough to adapt the UI to the current input method), but a desktop with just Metro (and yes I will keep using that name) applications is pretty much useless. It’s going to need big girl applications.
Second, while cool, this is also yet another admission from Microsoft that they just can’t get developers – either inside or outside – to care much about Metro and all that it entails. Microsoft would love to move everyone – users and developers alike – over to Metro, but it just isn’t happening, and there’s no signs that it’s going to get any better in the near future. I would love for Metro to be adopted enough (and capable enough) so that it can start replacing Win32 – but it’s been years now, and it’s pretty clear that we’re just not getting there.
The UWP only just has just been finalised this year but the move to provide win32 within a app-v container (Project Centennial) and sold through the Store rather than an admitting of failure is rather an acceptance that people aren’t willing to give up access to win32 applications and be told, “just hold tight, one day those applications will come”. The other problem is the lack of confidence Microsoft has in their own framework – why isn’t Explorer re-written in UWP (or at least the mention of a road map), the half finished mixture of Settings and Control Panel? It is all good talking about new frameworks but as the company who created it you need to go out of your way to demonstrate, by dog-fooding your own API, that it is ready for prime time and that others should jump onboard the gravy train.
Is it ready for prime-time, though? I do not know if UWP and Metro differ much, but at least Metro has a whole lot of limitations that mean it just can’t replace regular win32, like e.g. the Plex Metro-app is so limited because the Metro API doesn’t allow for querying and selecting different output-devices or fiddling with their settings, or for using other codecs than the ones the framework ships with. Something like Kodi would be a complete non-starter with Metro.
As I see it, the framework is only ever good for simple apps with simple needs and as long as it isn’t actually as capable as win32 it won’t be able to replace it.
The WinRT framework was a lot more limited than the UWP particularly when it comes to dealing with hardware – major differences between dealing with bluetooth depending on whether you were on Windows Phone or Windows 8.1 but these issues have been addressed with UWP so the platform is a lot more capable. UWP finally standardises and expands what was one a very limited multiplatform framework so I guess it is just a matter of time before we eventually see something.
Thom,
Many developers also feel the same way and would like to replace the aging platform. But besides the general blunders Microsoft made by making “Metro” so foreign to consumers, they also bet the company on a Metro strategy that was equally unappealing for most developers. Whereas MS used to have a vibrant software community around win32s, MS made a power play with windows 8 restrictions to take control over the free market for “modern” software, which placed MS in an adversarial role with many software developers.
So while most developers would be eager to replace win32s, frankly Metro has way too many strings attached alienating the very groups of people MS needs to build up the platform. The market is ready and willing to switch to a new platform, MS tools would get this position by default, this should have been an easy win for MS… Instead they doubled down with a strategy that backfired and decimated the chances of WinRT replacing win32s.
Microsoft’s greed soured the milk. A wiser MS would have decoupled modern apps from the windows store and promoted them independently from windows 8. Seriously it’s not very compelling that even years later it’s only supported on 1/3th of Windows desktops…
http://www.statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market-share-of-wi…
That’s not good at all. It was just stupid that they didn’t make WinRT available on Windows 7 at least. They could have even released it for Mac and Linux (and then followed that with the embrace, extend, extinguish maneuver MS used to be so good at).
Not only that, but if the windows store had been forced to compete on it’s own merit rather than to exist as a shoo^aEUR“in for windows 8, it could have developed into something far more competitive than it is now.
I think MS should keep things simple: Make the best platform you can, LISTEN TO USERS, sell superior products at fair prices and don’t force anything onto users who don’t want it… people will embrace that and appreciate you for it. Bah, what do I know.
Edited 2015-11-19 04:54 UTC
Fix’d
Kochise,
Isn’t it possible to criticize MS in it’s own right? Hey I’m ready to admit that projects like Unity, Gnome, systemd, etc have had some similar problems. But we’re talking about microsoft here and it’s inability to move beyond the win32s because it’s replacement is tethered to an ecosystem that few want to participate in voluntarily. Balmer era MS was way too focused on using force tactics to push adoption. You can’t imagine how glad I am that failed, but that still leaves Windows with the dilemma of how to replace the win32s, to which I still stand behind what I said in the OP.
But… there’s no problem focusing on MS, but hey, it’s a private company, that like any country, is sovereign on its own domain.
Win32 is ‘perfect’, covers all use cases and is backed with decades of user and coder experience. That MS would like to shove down our throat with a new analogy in order to have something new to sell, anything, even gold plated turds, is one thing.
But before and foremost, productivity is the key factor here. That’s why, despite tech-evangelist have falsely predicted, tablet haven’t sent PC to trash now. The office is still filled with Dell Optiplex 9020 computers.
Guess what, I even bet the Visual Studio team haven’t created a ‘Metro’ version of their top notch product and now using it exclusively, supposedly having increased their productivity by ten.
I’m currently facing a huge bug in the VS 2015 debugger : C++/CLI debugging don’t show STL contained values. Sometimes it doesn’t even break in the native code any more, you have to tweak the debug settings.
Even the latest VS 2015.1 RC doesn’t solve the problem, development is at stall, I have to… use pritf-like debugging techniques to watch containers’ content. Seriously…
So, maybe is they were not focusing on bullshit like new anal-orgies like “user experience”, they could actually care a little more about making real products that works.
And for that matter I won’t even consider Linux, because it’s mostly about loosing time into debugging, maintaining and updating the system…
My 0.02^a`not
Edited 2015-11-19 16:34 UTC
Absolutely, I was very, very keen on the approach until I realised that:
1. The only way to distribute modern apps to end users is through MS.
2. MS effectively restrict (censor) the kinds of apps that can be developed.
3. MS can restrict your right to distribute your app if they deem you to not match their model.
So, you could spend months developing something, and find yourself unable to market it.
Of course, Apple introduced this model, so blame should lie there, such a shame MS adopted it though.
Happily, this isn’t true anymore. UWP apps can be sideloaded the same as Android APKs – toggle a switch in developer settings, and install whatever you like, from wherever you like.
You can’t seriously ask users to enable a developer setting when trying to sell a commercial product. Half the potential clients will wonder what kind of hack they are buying.
No, but I didn’t suggest that, did I?
I only sad that the Windows Marketplace wasn’t a requirement.
Which is true.
Edited 2015-11-20 00:01 UTC
Listening to your customers is a good thing but there is another side to that coin. In addition to have different kinds of customers (personal use, point-of-sale, enterprise, etc), what’s preferable for `me` might not be for `you`. There’s a wide spectrum of users Microsoft needs to satisfy and the various needs/wants people have across that spectrum can differ greatly. I’m not saying there isn’t (obvious) areas that can’t be improved because there is. What I’m suggesting is that is isn’t as black & white as people tend to think. It seems simple when you only consider yourself as the target, but not so much when you have to accommodate the bigger picture.
ilovebeer,
Can anyone say in earnest that MS hit the mark for their desktop target? Personally I do deal more on the SMB side of things, but I have trouble believing that there was better uptake in the larger enterprises, which are microsoft’s bread and butter.
http://betanews.com/2013/06/04/windows-8-adoption-in-the-enterprise…
It’s evident to me that microsoft’s own strategy to control the modern platform has done a great deal of harm to the prospects of replacing win32s. Even those who are invested in microsoft’s agenda should recognize that there’s a problem here.
There’s definitely some problems and to be honest, I’m highly skeptical that they’re headed in the right direction. It does seem that they want to modernize their businesses & models however. They might need to get beat up a little more before they figure out a better path forward but that’s better than completely tanking (which I don’t believe they would let happen regardless).
Not to nitpick, but I’m pretty sure “win32s” has been replaced a long time ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Win32s
Damn I’m old.
lopisaur,
Yes you are. Damn I am too.
Why does everyone want Store Apps to replace Win32 Programs?
Windows should be the platform that runs EVERYTHING. Your favorite DOS-game from 1988? should run.
Your tax-program from 2000? should run.
Your browser? should run.
Your store-app (Metro)? should run.
and while we are at it: Android/iOS/Linux/OSX? Yes please.
I understand that mobile devices cannot run all of that and most people wouldn’t expect that (yet) so for now “only store apps” is a great beginning. Adding (virtualized) Win32 Apps that actually run on ARM…awesome!
(apps = store apps, programs = win32 programs)
With Windows 10 I started to run more and more apps in addition to my trusted arsenal of programs. Those programs are still my favorites but they are relatively hard to install/maintain/update, don’t sync settings and aren’t automatically there when I work on another machine. Apps are starting to get more powerful lately and since they work better with touch I use them more and more for consumption (browsing, video, games, mail, transportation)
For it to be practical to run win32 apps, those phones would need to be running x86 compatible cpus… Having an arm version of win32 would be of very little benefit as very few who aren’t willing to port to metro would port to win32/arm.
Ofcourse this is a huge wasted opportunity for linux, even the earliest phones based on the linux kernel have always been capable of running desktop/server linux software, and indeed some people actually installed distributions like ubuntu or debian inside of a chroot on android handsets, but this has always been a niche…
What we needed years ago were handsets which come with a full install of linux alongside the traditional android ui, where the android ui is used on the mobile screen and the linux ui is used when the handset is docked.
Such a system would be ideal for me, a phone that’s always with me that becomes a full desktop when necessary, produce a small dock in a laptop form factor and a small converter which gives you hdmi and usb.
This would also work well with software that has multiple interfaces, such as pidgin, you have the same settings/data coupled to multiple interfaces depending on wether your using mobile or desktop mode.
All this was doable on linux years ago as virtually everything has already been compiled for arm, but it’s only been available to those who want to build it themselves. I even have an old phone with a smashed screen running as a webserver.
How can developers take Metro seriously when Microsoft themselves don’t take Metro seriously?
Are they willing to discontinue the win32 version of Office and release only Metro versions? Of course not. Win32 Office is where the real business is, and Metro apps are that experiment for touch thingies.
So, why should Photoshop, AutoCAD, Sony Vegas, PowerDirector, Audacity, GIMP etc take Metro seriously?
Instead of going the same route of “win32 is where the real business is, Metro is an experiment”. And if they don’t like spending resources on experiments, drop the Metro part entirely.
That would have been a real opportunity for Intel to realize their much-publicized ambitions to get into smartphone game, if they were proactive (aka if they colluded with MS to actually make this a reality) instead of being reactive (aka chasing ARM in the Android field).
Edited 2015-11-19 13:25 UTC
Imagine that next year, there will be Lumia on x86 CPU. So this will be totally different story about Win32 Apps on mobile devices then.
Edited 2015-11-19 20:10 UTC
Is it really possible to run a smartphone with a fan-less x86 CPU without draining the battery within a couple of minute?
Win32apps which are designed for CPU requires more power than the average ARM CPUs. Please educate me.
You wouldn’t think so, but intel has cellphone-scale x86 CPUs that actually work fairly well; there are a handful of android/x86 devices in the wild. I agree that desktop applications are likely to use more power than the typical phone apps, but there are limits to how much those CPUs will draw no matter the load … I’d be equally worried about it being too slow.
Phones: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/smartphones/smartphones.html
Tablets: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/tablets/shop-tablets.html#!a…
Edited 2015-11-23 12:44 UTC
Win32 is just an API, one that’s been around since a 486 was considered high end gear. It’s possible to write lightweight but extremely useful Win32 applications: Notepad++ and PuTTY come to mind.