or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Microsoft demonstrates Windows 8 with HTML5 apps
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft demonstrates Windows 8 with HTML5 apps - Page 5

post #161 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeuser1127 View Post

Actually, I just finished reading the 1998 book "Barbarians Led by Bill Gates" last night, and it described this interface along with saying Microsoft had been working on it since 1996. The only detail not mentioned was that it would use multitouch.

One of the authors of this 1998 book worked on tablet PC's for Microsoft in the early 1990's.

Indeed if we all actually think back to the 90s windows 95 and 98 could both have a webpage as the wallpaper. The future of windows was going to be integrating the internet into it. But then they were taken to court and the plan was put on hold, and they were ordered to make is possible to uninstall ie. Now the rest of the world has caught up and googles releasing an os with only a browser, they should be allowed to continue the dream.

Just to be fair though I think if googles os ever gains market share the eu should order then to give you a browser choice.
post #162 of 175
A full presentation can be seen here.

This answers quite a few questions that people have been posting.



Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

I can't see a reason why MS could not update their SkyDrive to match whatever iCloud will be doing. It already offers 25GB of free storage for anyone with MS Live account (which is also free to get).

I've got absolutely no doubt that they could, I'm hesitant to say they will though.

Microsoft have traditionally had a problem with product synergy mostly due to internal politics.

Microsoft seem to have most of the pieces. Lets say they pulled together Zune Marketplace, Zune Pass, Xbox Live Gold, Games for Windows, Skydrive, Live Mesh, Office Web Apps, Media Player sharing and Windows 7 libraries... then add the new Windows 8 Marketplace and they would have a pretty kick ass cloud services platform.

That said, there are some interesting things happening with the Airport base stations that I commented on here.

Microsoft could also create a private/public cloud mesh using an ARM based Windows Home Server appliance... however that would require hardware as well.
post #163 of 175
M$ is doing efforts to remain relevant

I just took an old project and pivoted it to make easy to develop applications for windows 8.

Check it out at http://metrodynamis.com

Is very very alpha
post #164 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Well, this will be first Windows for tablets, so that part will be the most interesting - how well will it work, and how well will it sell? Additionally, what approach will MS take - sell to anyone interested (likely), or sell exclusively to one brand (Nokia?)... or differentiate somehow premium brand (again, Nokia?) from all the other me-toos.

Regarding profit, revenue... I'm not that sure. So far we basically had traditional PC market on MS side versus traditional PC market on Apple side significantly helped by iOS growth. With Windows 8, MS will finally do significant push into tablets, and by that time WP7 will be more mature and, hopefully, well supported by Nokia. Of course there are so many unknowns there, but considering number of Nokia-faithful I know, I wouldn't be surprised to see WP7 getting respectful market share once Nokia starts selling.

All in all, MS has more new markets to "conquer" than Apple at this stage, and should they be successful, more profit and revenue to gain. But all this is purely academic - of all knowns and unknowns, one thing is very certain - both companies will do more than well for years to come.

Um, no. This is NOT the first tablet edition of Windows. Try googling "Windows XP Tablet Edition".

Microsoft has been doing 'tablet' OS development for more than 10 years. It took Apple only a few months to sell more iPads than Microsoft had sold it's tablet edition over all that time.

Microsoft is a follower company. If Apple and Google didn't show them which direction to go, the UI on your phone would look very much like WinCE 6.0, and the current 'tablet' version of Windows would just get a touchup and shipped again [hell, they would still market that turd as "optimized"].
post #165 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

Microsoft is a follower company. If Apple and Google didn't show them which direction to go, the UI on your phone would look very much like WinCE 6.0, and the current 'tablet' version of Windows would just get a touchup and shipped again

I see just about every large company as a follower and a leader. The result depends on your point of reference.

Microsoft had been developing smartphones and tablets for 7 or 8 years before Apple came along and said "I think we can do something better"... which spurred Microsoft into action to improve their software... and so on and so forth.
post #166 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

I see just about every large company as a follower and a leader. The result depends on your point of reference.

Microsoft had been developing smartphones and tablets for 7 or 8 years before Apple came along and said "I think we can do something better"... which spurred Microsoft into action to improve their software... and so on and so forth.

But Microsoft hasn't been a leader. They made Wince (if ever there was a product name that suited it, this was it), which was a me-too OS, that didn't advance the cell phone market in any significant way. It just enabled similar features and capabilities as the competition, just using Microsoft-only API's in an (failed) attempt to dominate the cell phone market. WinPhone7 is similar, they make an touch OS for a candybar phone, with a large touchscreen and several buttons along the bottom. Everybody and their dog is making a phone like this, just like when MS came out with Wince 1.0, they used the current popular form factor back then.

Hell, when somebody else comes out with something new, they ridicule it (see Balmer when iPhone 1.0 was announced). Only once they realized that Apple was kicking their nuts into their head did they try slapping a touch UI onto Wince 6 (see Wince 6.5). And after that turd, they started on WinPhone 7, a me-too touch OS. And they are still losing marketshare.
post #167 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

But Microsoft hasn't been a leader. They made Wince (if ever there was a product name that suited it, this was it), which was a me-too OS, that didn't advance the cell phone market in any significant way. It just enabled similar features and capabilities as the competition, just using Microsoft-only API's in an (failed) attempt to dominate the cell phone market. WinPhone7 is similar, they make an touch OS for a candybar phone, with a large touchscreen and several buttons along the bottom. Everybody and their dog is making a phone like this, just like when MS came out with Wince 1.0, they used the current popular form factor back then.

Hell, when somebody else comes out with something new, they ridicule it (see Balmer when iPhone 1.0 was announced). Only once they realized that Apple was kicking their nuts into their head did they try slapping a touch UI onto Wince 6 (see Wince 6.5). And after that turd, they started on WinPhone 7, a me-too touch OS. And they are still losing marketshare.

Like firefly I see that as being the same for all large companies as well. Look at Apple TV, that didn't really advance thing other than having a nice interface and hasn't been an amazing success. At the same time MS released stats this week showing 40% of the time spent of Xbox's is for things other than playing games.

The iPhone also isn't 100% origional. For a start the touch interface was less about Apple inovating and more about them buying fingerworks. The home screen with it's grid of icons is obviously influenced by the fact the most popular phone from the 5 years before all had a grid of icons for their menus.

Its very hard to find an example of a large company releasing a product that isn't influenced by other popular products or was the result of purchasing another company with a good idea.
post #168 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

Like firefly I see that as being the same for all large companies as well. Look at Apple TV, that didn't really advance thing other than having a nice interface and hasn't been an amazing success. At the same time MS released stats this week showing 40% of the time spent of Xbox's is for things other than playing games.

The iPhone also isn't 100% origional. For a start the touch interface was less about Apple inovating and more about them buying fingerworks. The home screen with it's grid of icons is obviously influenced by the fact the most popular phone from the 5 years before all had a grid of icons for their menus.

Its very hard to find an example of a large company releasing a product that isn't influenced by other popular products or was the result of purchasing another company with a good idea.

You are confusing 'influenced' with 'derivative'. Yes, the phone has a speaker and a microphone. And a plug for a microphone/headset. Apple's iPhone reset the mobile phone industry. Balmer was dismissing it as a toy. Other's said it was impossible (to make the device work that well, be that small, and last that long on a battery). Now, everybody is making phones DIRECTLY DERIVATIVE of the iPhone. And everybody is jumping on the iPad bandwagon as well. And for some reason, app stores all seem to work similar to Apple's [yes, there were 'stores' that sold 'apps' before Apple's, but the experience is so completely different, it's like comparing an original model-t with a new Ferrari].

Hell, EVERYBODY wishes they could do OS updates to their phones the way Apple does. But for some reason, Apple doesn't have to vacuum the balls of the carriers dry like the rest of the industry does [including Microsoft] to get updates out.

And to try to claim they 'bought' their way into the game by buying Fingerworks [which was developing touch screen technology] is ridiculous. If you want an example of this [only done in a completely boneheaded way, wasting more than a billion dollars], Microsoft buying Danger, then shipping the Kin as the result would be on point. Putting together a device like the iPhone when nobody else made anything like it before, and buying a company working on developing a better part to be used with it is something entirely different. Apple had boatloads more work to do to create the application environment to actually use that touch hardware. Microsoft on the other hand, dicked around with internal politics, and forced the Danger guys to port their work to use Wince "because we told you to".
post #169 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

You are confusing 'influenced' with 'derivative'. Yes, the phone has a speaker and a microphone. And a plug for a microphone/headset. Apple's iPhone reset the mobile phone industry. Balmer was dismissing it as a toy. Other's said it was impossible (to make the device work that well, be that small, and last that long on a battery). Now, everybody is making phones DIRECTLY DERIVATIVE of the iPhone. And everybody is jumping on the iPad bandwagon as well. And for some reason, app stores all seem to work similar to Apple's [yes, there were 'stores' that sold 'apps' before Apple's, but the experience is so completely different, it's like comparing an original model-t with a new Ferrari].

Hell, EVERYBODY wishes they could do OS updates to their phones the way Apple does. But for some reason, Apple doesn't have to vacuum the balls of the carriers dry like the rest of the industry does [including Microsoft] to get updates out.

And to try to claim they 'bought' their way into the game by buying Fingerworks [which was developing touch screen technology] is ridiculous. If you want an example of this [only done in a completely boneheaded way, wasting more than a billion dollars], Microsoft buying Danger, then shipping the Kin as the result would be on point. Putting together a device like the iPhone when nobody else made anything like it before, and buying a company working on developing a better part to be used with it is something entirely different. Apple had boatloads more work to do to create the application environment to actually use that touch hardware. Microsoft on the other hand, dicked around with internal politics, and forced the Danger guys to port their work to use Wince "because we told you to".

Ballmer dismissing it as a toy is no different to Steve Jobs dismissing the concept of smartphones ever being better than individual devices. CEO's irruspective of their real beliefs will always say negative comments about other companies products.

I didn't say Apple bought their way into the game, I said the touch screen technology and the way you interact with the phone wasn't an origional idea by Apple but one they purchased. Products large companys bring out tend to contain a lot of ideas from smaller companies that they've bought, there's nothing wrong with it.

What Apple did with the iPhone was take the idea of smartphone that predates them although unpopular. Combine it with the popular phone interface layout of a grid of icons. Add in the touchscreen technology that they had purchased. Use the low powered processors developed by ARM so it could be thin and light. Then polish the whole thing off with OS X/Web 2 style of design. Yes they we're the first to do it and it switched us away form flip phones but they we're still influenced.

WP7 in the same way is influenced by continuing the same concept of having a big touch screen, but the software side of things is different. Rather than a grid of icons it has large panels that can either be just an icon or show information, then there's the whole text off screen and sideways swiping. I would challenge you to actually find a screen in both WP7 and iOS that actually look the same/similar (obviously the calculator doesn't count).

Android devices are a different story, some are origional and others are just complete copys of an iPhone.
post #170 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84 View Post

WP7 in the same way is influenced by continuing the same concept of having a big touch screen, but the software side of things is different. Rather than a grid of icons it has large panels that can either be just an icon or show information, then there's the whole text off screen and sideways swiping.

I think WP7 is more than a different look, it's a different mobile phone paradigm. It is task based (as opposed to app based) and has common functionality, cloud integration and data aggregation built in to achieve that goal.
post #171 of 175
It actually looks pretty good. I'm more accustomed to iOS now, but i can see this working for them.
post #172 of 175
Pros:

1. Solves the Windows touch user experience (UX) problem.
2. Will give a more consistent feel and UX between Windows PC's, tablets, and phones.
3. Uses HTML5, which might prevent Chrome OS from gaining too much traction and might also prevent WebOS from converting Windows users.

Cons:

1. Too little; too late.
2. Very little interest shown in Windows Phone 7 so far and let's not forget that whole Zune sales problem.
3. Although it looks a lot like WP7, apps aren't compatible and don't use the same coding languages. Would make sense if they allowed these apps to eventually work on Windows Phone.
4. Users hate change. Sometime they even react negatively when small changes are introduced. This is a big change from Windows 7 and what's worse is it could go completely unused by most users who choose to use the legacy UI. Didn't they learn anything from the consumer reactions to Vista?
5. Use of HTML5 could actually help Chrome OS and WebOS because HTML5 apps can easily be modified to work on those platforms or on the web.
post #173 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhciR View Post

Although it looks a lot like WP7, apps aren't compatible and don't use the same coding languages. Would make sense if they allowed these apps to eventually work on Windows Phone.

Sure they are! (but I'm making a few assumptions here based on what we know! )
  • Windows 8 rendering is supported by IE10.
  • IE10 supports the Silverlight plugin... and since the DoJ anti-trust oversight has ended I don't think Microsoft will have any issues bundling the Silverlight plug-in with IE10.
  • Microsoft brought XNA into Silverlight on WP7. I think games written in XNA will be able to completely run within the IE10 Silverlight plug-in.
  • This means Microsoft just need to support the WPx XNA/Silverlight runtime in Windows 8 and they will have cross platform compatibility.
post #174 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

Just Windows with a tablet skin running on top. I "get it", because it still allows you to run the entire Windows catalog, but I'm still unimpressed.

I wonder if it isn't sort of an "emulation of Windows API in HTML5" layer?

It seems like the writer is unaware that Microsoft is FOLLOWING the industry with this, and that the "touch" interface is going to be in Lion and Apple has been working to bring the IOS features to not only the desktop, but also Airport.

Well, when it SHIPS, then we can see if it is something awesome. I don't know how this is really going to improve things for users or developers though. Sounds like just a "skin" or another "virtualization" layer -- which Microsoft has invested heavily in.
post #175 of 175
at the BUILD conference in September.

Still a lot of questions about this new OS

http://www.windows8update.com
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Microsoft demonstrates Windows 8 with HTML5 apps