5 ms·

Would it have been cheaper to pay the top 100 Android apps to make a Windows version? Perhaps they do it on a continual basis to keep their marketplace up to da

by jbob2000 11y ago

Would it have been cheaper to pay the top 100 Android apps to make a Windows version? Perhaps they do it on a continual basis to keep their marketplace up to date? On that note, I'd like to try making a windows phone app. Is there anything sorely missing from the platform?

josefresco 11y ago
I remember a strategy similar to this earlier in the Windows Phone lifecycle - maybe they weren't outright funding the dev teams, but they were offering large incentives. I'll paste a link here if I can dig it up.
- corin_ 11y ago
  Here's one example I remember, though only $100 offered per app: http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/19/4124548/microsoft-paying-developers-cash-for-windows-apps http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/19/4124548/microsoft-paying-d...
- rasz_pl 11y ago
  Yes, I remember whole shops banging out garbage filler apps just to milk MS subsidies :)
- umeshunni 11y ago
  Yeah - we were working on a startup idea back in '11 or '12 and MS offered us $2500 to build on WP first. It wasn't nothing, but it was also not even a week's salary for our team and building on WP would have taken more than a week.
pavlov 11y ago
Microsoft tried this a few years ago. Getting top 10 apps like Instagram took a lot of time -- and presumably money too, although that was of course never disclosed. When Instagram did make a native Windows Phone app, it was feature incomplete and stuck in permanent beta. I don't think they ever released a final version. Most other top 10 apps never did ports. At the same time, Microsoft was also spending quite extravagantly to get small indie devs making Windows apps through initiatives like "App Campus". Those didn't make a dent either. Paying their way to a mobile ecosystem was a complete failure for Microsoft. Even with its deficiencies, I'm sad that Windows Bridge for Android ("Project Astoria") is dead. The iOS bridge is nowhere close in practical use. Windows 10 universal apps don't have developer mindshare in the mobile space. Windows 10 Mobile is pretty much dead.
on_and_off 11y ago
AFAIK, they already do that. >Is there anything sorely missing from the platform? without trolling : the users. It is possible to have some success on the windows mobile platform, but there just isn't a critical mass of users. Other than that, even though it has its problems (like Android or iOS), it has most of the things you would expect.
- jbob2000 11y ago
  I'm OK with low users. It's impossible to capture users on iOS and Android because the marketplace is so huge; I can't build anything which doesn't already have 10 different versions. The prospect of a "new frontier" is exciting to me, even if the frontier is very small.
  - charlesdm 11y ago
    You're not necessarily wrong, though it can be hard to make money on a platform with low users. HOWEVER! I once met a guy when I was travelling in the UAE, and he built/sold a Twitter app for Palm OS smartphones (their next gen OS they launched some years ago). At the time, he was making close to $40k a month. So there's definitely money on those platforms if you can deliver a good product.
bkjelden 11y ago
The problem with apps when I left WP wasn't necessarily #1-50, it was #51-500. They had most of the top 50 (with a couple glaring holes, but those didn't impact me personally). The problem was that "apps" have become the default mobile delivery platform for a lot of things that should be websites, and the creators of those apps always target two platforms: Android and iOS. So you were just continually left out of the party. Pizza chain has a mobile app for online ordering? Not on WP. Smaller-scale sports network or league has a streaming app? Not on WP. Niche social network? Not on WP.

josefresco 11y ago

I remember a strategy similar to this earlier in the Windows Phone lifecycle - maybe they weren't outright funding the dev teams, but they were offering large incentives. I'll paste a link here if I can dig it up.

corin_ 11y ago
Here's one example I remember, though only $100 offered per app: http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/19/4124548/microsoft-paying-developers-cash-for-windows-apps http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/19/4124548/microsoft-paying-d...
rasz_pl 11y ago
Yes, I remember whole shops banging out garbage filler apps just to milk MS subsidies :)
umeshunni 11y ago
Yeah - we were working on a startup idea back in '11 or '12 and MS offered us $2500 to build on WP first. It wasn't nothing, but it was also not even a week's salary for our team and building on WP would have taken more than a week.

pavlov 11y ago

Microsoft tried this a few years ago. Getting top 10 apps like Instagram took a lot of time -- and presumably money too, although that was of course never disclosed. When Instagram did make a native Windows Phone app, it was feature incomplete and stuck in permanent beta. I don't think they ever released a final version. Most other top 10 apps never did ports. At the same time, Microsoft was also spending quite extravagantly to get small indie devs making Windows apps through initiatives like "App Campus". Those didn't make a dent either. Paying their way to a mobile ecosystem was a complete failure for Microsoft. Even with its deficiencies, I'm sad that Windows Bridge for Android ("Project Astoria") is dead. The iOS bridge is nowhere close in practical use. Windows 10 universal apps don't have developer mindshare in the mobile space. Windows 10 Mobile is pretty much dead.

on_and_off 11y ago

AFAIK, they already do that. >Is there anything sorely missing from the platform? without trolling : the users. It is possible to have some success on the windows mobile platform, but there just isn't a critical mass of users. Other than that, even though it has its problems (like Android or iOS), it has most of the things you would expect.

jbob2000 11y ago
I'm OK with low users. It's impossible to capture users on iOS and Android because the marketplace is so huge; I can't build anything which doesn't already have 10 different versions. The prospect of a "new frontier" is exciting to me, even if the frontier is very small.
- charlesdm 11y ago
  You're not necessarily wrong, though it can be hard to make money on a platform with low users. HOWEVER! I once met a guy when I was travelling in the UAE, and he built/sold a Twitter app for Palm OS smartphones (their next gen OS they launched some years ago). At the time, he was making close to $40k a month. So there's definitely money on those platforms if you can deliver a good product.

bkjelden 11y ago

The problem with apps when I left WP wasn't necessarily #1-50, it was #51-500. They had most of the top 50 (with a couple glaring holes, but those didn't impact me personally). The problem was that "apps" have become the default mobile delivery platform for a lot of things that should be websites, and the creators of those apps always target two platforms: Android and iOS. So you were just continually left out of the party. Pizza chain has a mobile app for online ordering? Not on WP. Smaller-scale sports network or league has a streaming app? Not on WP. Niche social network? Not on WP.