This is why there are no apps for Windows Phone

Forums › Legacy mobile platforms (Windows Mobile, Palm OS, Web OS, Symbian, Meego, Blackberry) › This is why there are no apps for Windows Phone

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

4054 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2652

Trusted

#1546829 4-May-2016 20:07

Breaking news, WP is doomed. This from it's biggest supporter on this thread ...

MikeB4: I retired my iPhone today and purchased a Galaxy S7 Edge.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1546858 4-May-2016 21:17

dafman:
Breaking news, WP is doomed. This from it's biggest supporter on this thread ...

MikeB4: I retired my iPhone today and purchased a Galaxy S7 Edge.

I purchased a Galaxy as the suppliers here have the 950 or 640 in stock. As I will not use parallel importers I needed to buy what was in stock. If the 950XL was in stock I would have purchased it.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

UHD

655 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 298
Inactive user

#1546865 4-May-2016 21:26

MikeB4:
dafman:

Breaking news, WP is doomed. This from it's biggest supporter on this thread ...

MikeB4: I retired my iPhone today and purchased a Galaxy S7 Edge.

I purchased a Galaxy as the suppliers here have the 950 or 640 in stock. As I will not use parallel importers I needed to buy what was in stock. If the 950XL was in stock I would have purchased it.

I think the Microsoft Store has the 950XL in stock.

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1547489 6-May-2016 10:08

jonb:

Interesting analysis/speculation on Intel canning production of ARM and Atom chips, and implications for Windows Phone..

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/05/03/intel_mobile_microsoft_analysis/

The surface phone was possibly going to be powered by atom, and makes Continuum and UWA more difficult. Good read anyway.

ARM is not Intel and is not being canned. Quite the reverse if you read that article, ARM will become even more dominant for mobile devices.

It's the low power Intel Atom chips that are on the block.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1547508 6-May-2016 10:33

This whole lack of Apps is over hyped in my opinion.

Some "tech writers" seem bound up about the smaller number of apps and make a big deal about it. I've seen similar short sighted reviewing about other devices as well. With many of these people unless it works exactly how they are used to then it's no good. Their sloppy and biased writing skews the market view of a product and consequently the sales suffer.

And the mobile sites for AirBNB and BBC have less functionality than their dedicated apps available on other OS. It's a compromise punters shouldn't have to make - and one they are not making, evidenced by WPs slow decline in sales.

There is no reason why the mobile websites (or the desktop version for that matter) couldn't have the functionality of the apps. Your personal preferences could be set on the site and you are served up the features you want. Whats more you would automatically have those preferences no matter what device you used for that service.

YMMV but the market has pretty clearly spoken that apps are the preferred way to utilize services and content. The arguments that you are making are similar to the ones apple was making before the apple app store existed. The dominance of apps vs web links speaks volumes for what the market actually wants.

Actually I think the app market is driven by the likes of Apple and Google who derive significant income from running their app stores. They have cultivated the desire for consumers to ask for apps. Going in hand with with this various companies want to be seen as being up with the play and being "customer focused" that they play along with the app idea and at great expense develop apps for their product. They don't want to be seen as being not in the game, a bit like the Kings new clothes.

I know there will always be a need for some applications, however I agree with Nathan most apps are just re-skinned website data. With a bit of thought these websites could be developed to provide the same as or better experience than the app at a much lower cost, there being no need to develop for various platforms.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

dafman

4054 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2652

Trusted

#1547563 6-May-2016 12:09

Technofreak:

This whole lack of Apps is over hyped in my opinion.

Some "tech writers" seem bound up about the smaller number of apps and make a big deal about it. I've seen similar short sighted reviewing about other devices as well. With many of these people unless it works exactly how they are used to then it's no good. Their sloppy and biased writing skews the market view of a product and consequently the sales suffer.

And the mobile sites for AirBNB and BBC have less functionality than their dedicated apps available on other OS. It's a compromise punters shouldn't have to make - and one they are not making, evidenced by WPs slow decline in sales.

There is no reason why the mobile websites (or the desktop version for that matter) couldn't have the functionality of the apps. Your personal preferences could be set on the site and you are served up the features you want. Whats more you would automatically have those preferences no matter what device you used for that service.

YMMV but the market has pretty clearly spoken that apps are the preferred way to utilize services and content. The arguments that you are making are similar to the ones apple was making before the apple app store existed. The dominance of apps vs web links speaks volumes for what the market actually wants.

Actually I think the app market is driven by the likes of Apple and Google who derive significant income from running their app stores. They have cultivated the desire for consumers to ask for apps. Going in hand with with this various companies want to be seen as being up with the play and being "customer focused" that they play along with the app idea and at great expense develop apps for their product. They don't want to be seen as being not in the game, a bit like the Kings new clothes.

I know there will always be a need for some applications, however I agree with Nathan most apps are just re-skinned website data. With a bit of thought these websites could be developed to provide the same as or better experience than the app at a much lower cost, there being no need to develop for various platforms.

The thing is, it's not the tech writers, it's the punters who have made their choice - they want apps, not links to mobile websites. It doesn't matter if the mobile websites are just as good or not, the punters have voted with their feet. Remember betamax, or HD DVD? Nothing wrong with either of those apart from the fact that punters didn't buy into them. And they died.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Technofreak

6657 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3477

Trusted

#1547620 6-May-2016 13:43

dafman:

The thing is, it's not the tech writers, it's the punters who have made their choice - they want apps, not links to mobile websites. It doesn't matter if the mobile websites are just as good or not, the punters have voted with their feet. Remember betamax, or HD DVD? Nothing wrong with either of those apart from the fact that punters didn't buy into them. And they died.

Part of my point about tech writers is they fixate on app numbers without bothering to check what apps are available and even if some apps are needed. So many apps are variations on a theme and many more are of questionable value. They often write a negative review when there is no need for it. This colours the view of prospective purchasers

I would suggest the birth of many apps has been because websites weren't optimised for mobile and lacked functionality. As a result a user has used their talents to create an app to over come the short comings of the website.

Obviously your experience is different from mine regarding the value of apps.

For example I've downloaded the NZ Herald app and promptly uninstalled it as I was not impressed, looked at a banking app and decided it didn't give me anything I couldn't get from the mobile site, downloaded one of the Met Service apps and decided it was a complete waste of time. In all three cases I'd prefer to use the mobile website.

Personally I'd rather develop a really good mobile website with good functionality and features for personalisation for users, rather than spend time on developing apps for all the various OS's. It must be a nightmare for some developers, you only have to look at some of the reviews to see the issues some people have.

With the improvement of mobile websites I see less and less demand for apps in the future.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1555912 20-May-2016 07:47

I have to admit I was wrong regarding the future of WM, I believe that the moves by MSFT this week clearly shows the platform is doomed. They say they will still support it and a small selection of existing MSFT handsets and OEM handsets.
I believe MSFT has given a clear indication that it sees no future so how do they expect OEM's to see a future and invest in the platform.
I believe it's goodbye and please turn out the lights.

This is from Microsoft. ...

In an effort to further focus on products where we offer unique differentiation and that run Windows, Microsoft is selling its entry-level feature phone assets, including Microsoft Mobile Vietnam—its Hanoi, Vietnam manufacturing facility—to FIH Mobile Ltd., a subsidiary of Hon Hai/Foxconn Technology Group, and HMD Global, Oy. Microsoft will continue to develop Windows 10 Mobile and support Lumia phones such as the Lumia 650, Lumia 950, and Lumia 950 XL, and phones from OEM partners like Acer, Alcatel, HP, Trinity and VAIO.”

Source; http://mspoweruser.com/future-of-lumia-hardware-remains-bleak/

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1555915 20-May-2016 08:00

we jettisoned the feature phone business because they don't run Windows.

This change enables our team to focus on devices which run Windows.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1555916 20-May-2016 08:14

nathan:
we jettisoned the feature phone business because they don't run Windows.

This change enables our team to focus on devices which run Windows.

I understand that and it's logical they are legacy devices. However the MSFT statement strongly indicates that they will no longer develop handsets but leave that to OEM's. I do not believe that it will last as the lines of HP are notorious flip floppers and they will exit the platform ferry quickly.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1555951 20-May-2016 09:23

MikeB4:
nathan:

we jettisoned the feature phone business because they don't run Windows.

This change enables our team to focus on devices which run Windows.

I understand that and it's logical they are legacy devices. However the MSFT statement strongly indicates that they will no longer develop handsets but leave that to OEM's. I do not believe that it will last as the lines of HP are notorious flip floppers and they will exit the platform ferry quickly.

Our first party mobile hardware team now report into Surface in our Windows & Devices Group

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1555970 20-May-2016 09:47

nathan:

MikeB4:
nathan:

we jettisoned the feature phone business because they don't run Windows.

This change enables our team to focus on devices which run Windows.

I understand that and it's logical they are legacy devices. However the MSFT statement strongly indicates that they will no longer develop handsets but leave that to OEM's. I do not believe that it will last as the lines of HP are notorious flip floppers and they will exit the platform ferry quickly.

Our first party mobile hardware team now report into Surface in our Windows & Devices Group

I appreciate greatly your participation and responses and that you have corporate restraints but, on global perspective the time in which Microsoft can continue to be furtive and vague regarding the platform has past.

Microsoft need to stop the mixed signals and come out with an honest, open and definitive statement on what they have planned for the platform and what their commitment is in the short, medium and long term. They simply cannot expect people to commit to their platform in terms of customers, OEMS's, software and Application developers. Why would these groups commit when it is very unclear what Microsoft's commitment is today, tomorrow next year.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

dafman

4054 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2652

Trusted

#1556035 20-May-2016 10:33

More, indirect bad news for WP. Nokia has announced it will re-enter the phone handset market with android phones.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1556047 20-May-2016 10:39

dafman:

More, indirect bad news for WP. Nokia has announced it will re-enter the phone handset market with android phones.

They will just be another Android OEM, they have a huge wall to climb to become relevant again. The Asian competition has an edge in both price and now quality e.g Huawei.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Hammerer

2480 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 802

Lifetime subscriber

#1556063 20-May-2016 10:51

MikeB4:

nathan:

MikeB4:
nathan:

we jettisoned the feature phone business because they don't run Windows.

This change enables our team to focus on devices which run Windows.

I understand that and it's logical they are legacy devices. However the MSFT statement strongly indicates that they will no longer develop handsets but leave that to OEM's. I do not believe that it will last as the lines of HP are notorious flip floppers and they will exit the platform ferry quickly.

Our first party mobile hardware team now report into Surface in our Windows & Devices Group

I appreciate greatly your participation and responses and that you have corporate restraints but, on global perspective the time in which Microsoft can continue to be furtive and vague regarding the platform has past.

Microsoft need to stop the mixed signals and come out with an honest, open and definitive statement on what they have planned for the platform and what their commitment is in the short, medium and long term. They simply cannot expect people to commit to their platform in terms of customers, OEMS's, software and Application developers. Why would these groups commit when it is very unclear what Microsoft's commitment is today, tomorrow next year.

I don't think Microsoft's position is unclear but I do think their commitment to that position is unclear. I've seen Microsoft flip-flop on positions that had a much more positive outlook than this one.

I suspect most of us who want more information and certainty are wanting to know that this position is not going to be upended later this year. Unfortunately, Microsoft won't be telling us that and Microsoft staff cannot tell us their estimate of this likelihood even if they have a very clear figure in their heads.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6