4 ms·

Yes. They lost in 2004-2007 when they decided to stop investing in the growing CE platform. I still don't understand why. It's got to be one of the biggest busi

by guelo 9y ago

Yes. They lost in 2004-2007 when they decided to stop investing in the growing CE platform. I still don't understand why. It's got to be one of the biggest business blunders of all time.

jmspring 9y ago
Developing on WinCE in the early 2000s and developing on Windows based server apps at the same time was actually somewhat efficient. APIs had some consistencies between the platforms -- not mentioning shared toolsets. The WP7 -> WP8 thing was unforgivable.
Const-me 9y ago
> I still don't understand why. AFAIK, they wanted developers to use native code and Windows API. This is especially needed for games and other resource-demanding apps. Windows CE is just too old. The security there is comparable to Windows 9.x, i.e. almost no security. It was very hard to design a CE-based OS that would allow arbitrary native code to run, while denying the ability to access user’s private data and break the device. WP7 only allowed C++ code for close MS partners. Regular developers had to use .NET, which has its own very advanced security model built-in. Probably, MS thought that once they allow C++ development, third-party developers start to port their older Windows games to WP 8 + Direct3D 11 feature level 9.3. Eventually the plan didn’t work. MS bought Minecraft, convinced Rockstar to port GTA San Andreas, but the platform still hadn’t gain enough traction, and most third party developers passed.
heisenbit 9y ago
> I still don't understand why. Look at Apple and compare the iPhone and Mac versions. They share the same architecture and a lot of code and that is not just on the surface but for real. This allows Apple to have one very, very good codebase for their OS. Microsoft did not have that solid foundation and additional challenges particularly in the area of security. There was no way for them to catch up if they maintained multiple platforms. To see where trying to have multiple platforms lead just study Nokia.

by guelo 9y ago

Yes. They lost in 2004-2007 when they decided to stop investing in the growing CE platform. I still don't understand why. It's got to be one of the biggest business blunders of all time.

jmspring 9y ago

Developing on WinCE in the early 2000s and developing on Windows based server apps at the same time was actually somewhat efficient. APIs had some consistencies between the platforms -- not mentioning shared toolsets. The WP7 -> WP8 thing was unforgivable.

Const-me 9y ago

> I still don't understand why. AFAIK, they wanted developers to use native code and Windows API. This is especially needed for games and other resource-demanding apps. Windows CE is just too old. The security there is comparable to Windows 9.x, i.e. almost no security. It was very hard to design a CE-based OS that would allow arbitrary native code to run, while denying the ability to access user’s private data and break the device. WP7 only allowed C++ code for close MS partners. Regular developers had to use .NET, which has its own very advanced security model built-in. Probably, MS thought that once they allow C++ development, third-party developers start to port their older Windows games to WP 8 + Direct3D 11 feature level 9.3. Eventually the plan didn’t work. MS bought Minecraft, convinced Rockstar to port GTA San Andreas, but the platform still hadn’t gain enough traction, and most third party developers passed.

heisenbit 9y ago

> I still don't understand why. Look at Apple and compare the iPhone and Mac versions. They share the same architecture and a lot of code and that is not just on the surface but for real. This allows Apple to have one very, very good codebase for their OS. Microsoft did not have that solid foundation and additional challenges particularly in the area of security. There was no way for them to catch up if they maintained multiple platforms. To see where trying to have multiple platforms lead just study Nokia.