9 ms·

Microsoft Is Writing Checks to Fill Out Its App Store

96 points by sew 15y ago

barista 15y ago
As Microsoft tries hard, this looks like a good opportunity for hackers to set shop focusing on a niche market.
freehunter 15y ago
This is great news (if it's still news to anyone, they've been paying for apps for a while). Two big issues that are commonly heard when Windows Phone is brought up (among several) are the lack of apps and the lack of public awareness. I've recounted my tale here on HN several times of when I bought my Windows Phone. The salesman was so adamant that I was making a mistake that I actually had to go as far as calling the manager over before I could buy one. There was nothing I could do to convince him that I knew what I wanted. With Microsoft paying to fill out the app store (developers, developers, developers!) and Nokia paying for prime placement in AT&T stores, they'll be given a fair shake to let consumers know the options. Microsoft is the 1990's Apple when it comes to the mobile world. A strong and memorable start a decade ago that came to a halt very quickly as competitors took marketshare. I really, really hope Microsoft and Nokia know the limits, though. Combined, they have a lot of money they can throw around. Microsoft did that to beat Apple in the PC world 20 years ago, and it ended very badly for them. You can put money into gaining marketshare, but when it's time to stop, you better stop fast.
- melling 15y ago
  How did it end badly for Microsoft back then? They still have around 90% desktop market share. They're taking profits from that monopoly and they're desperately trying to avoid missing the Post PC era. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out. It's going to be a pain to have to write for 3 different platforms. This time I think Linux is gonna win, with Google behind it. :-).
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
igul222 15y ago
I experienced this firsthand when I attended a Microsoft-sponsored WP7 development course at which they were giving free phones to developers. My impression was that, for the price of maybe 30 phones, they got at least a couple high quality apps on their store. tl;dr: Microsoft is spending lots of money on WP7 apps, and it seems to be working.
gcb 15y ago
They did that for xbox, and it worked wonders.
- PakG1 15y ago
  Hehe, I said the same thing in another thread, but got majorly downvoted. But I think you're right.
- cageface 15y ago
  The same strategy could certainly pay off here if they're willing to play the long game. They've shown a lot more courage than Google in reconceptualizing the UI and they seem to understand how important this platform is for their long-term survival so I certainly wouldn't count them out yet.
  - SlipperySlope 15y ago
    But Microsoft could lose the long game too! Suppose that Metro does not play well on ordinary PCs, and sales of conventional laptop and desktop PCs, not only stop growing, but actually start declining as users instead upgrade to very capable smartphone and tablets. Once PC sales decline, then Microsoft profits will suffer in a disproportionate manner because of all the money losing business units that are supported by Windows, Office, and enterprise cash cows.
    - corporalagumbo 15y ago
      As a user of bother OS X 10.7 and WP7, I have to say at this point I have more faith in Microsoft to successfully push the desktop UI envelope than Apple. Lion is pretty much a mess of conflicting UI and usability concepts, and Mountain Lion seems to be more of the same. Unless Apple is planning on completely overturning their entire integrated UI model (causing massive disruption to their carefully constructed iOS-OS X ecosystem) in the next couple of years, I think we're just going to see more of the same - basically a continued push to polish and refine the basic 90s desktop UI paradigm. Microsoft in the mean time seem to be pretty intent on throwing out all the old conventions and building the interface of the future. The tech industry is interesting, success can be very short-lived, and can come at a high cost - inflexibility. Microsoft is in a flexible position, and can move much faster than Apple. Apple's success in the late 00's may hamstring it for the next stage of the digital arms race. It's just a question really of how sharp Microsoft's strategists are.
sriramk 15y ago
If they weren't doing this, I would advocate firing whoever was running dev marketing/partnerships. MSFT needs to jump start its dev ecosystem and using its bank balance is one of the easier tools to deploy. Now I would love to know how much Google paid Rovio + the other launch partners for their Google+ platform. :)
- nigelsampson 15y ago
  Agreed, the biggest issue highlighted in the new Lumia 900 views (which most are calling a fantastic phone) is missing some of the key apps in the ecosystem. I don't think the size of the marketplace is the problem, every user has about ten key apps they need on their phone (the trouble being it's a different ten for everyone), but every most of the cases covered will help them a lot. I expect them to do the same thing with Windows 8 and the store.
- Lewisham 15y ago
  Yeah, Microsoft did the same thing with the Xbox. They threw lots of money to developers in a climate when I think most people thought there was no way Microsoft could be cool enough to sell a console, particularly when it was going up against the PS2. Now, 360 is the market leader. NYT makes it sound like Microsoft is somehow cheating, but it's wise enough to realize that it needs to invest in order to bootstrap a new platform.
cageface 15y ago
Once you get to 100,000, the number stops being important I've been saying this for a while. You have to cover the major bases but beyond that it's just gravy. I've been tempted to dip my toes into the WP market anyway because frankly the iOS market is saturated already and Android is a pain in the ass for well documented reasons and I no longer have any particular goodwill towards Google. I think with C# Microsoft has the best development language, at least on paper.
- ghshephard 15y ago
  The issue isn't so much the number - I totally agree that you really don't need 500 solitaire applications in order to be a competitive platform for the user. What is important, though, is that the 15,000 to 20,000 Tier-1 Apps, and, most importantly (critically), the 1,000 or so AAA Apps are found on your platform. It's also important that the App developers show a little heart - six months in and my mother _still_ can't add her location on Path on her HTC-Desire-HD. 95% of the time, when a AAA App comes out, you can be certain that you'll have a full featured version of that application on an IOS device. That's true about 85% of the time on the Android - and it drops off a cliff immediately thereafter for the Blackberry and WP7 platform - with some Tier-1 developer who have already ported to the Blackberry starting to abandon that platform (Kayak) Owning an Android or IOS device means, today, being reasonably certain that the App you want will be on your device. Microsoft is showering people with money, training and hardware to make sure that will be the case for WP7. Now they just have to ship a killer phone and we'll have a horse race on our hands!
  - cageface 15y ago
    A counter-point: my fiance and her sister each recently bought a new iPhone 4S. They use them constantly all day but the only non-stock app they care about is Skype. I have a feeling there are a ton of mobile users like this that are easily satisfied by a solid foundation of Web, Email, SMS, and Facebook.
    - SlipperySlope 15y ago
      How right you are!!! Android smartphones will continue to dominate the lowest spec hardware, especially in developing markets like China. Because the Microsoft OS cost adds to the device bill-of-materials, and Android -being open source- does not have this cost. By analogy, its very hard to see how Microsoft will produce low-spec tablets that are cheaper than what Amazon does with the Kindle Fire - and its successor products.
hristov 15y ago
I wonder how much they paid for the lolcats. Can't you just imagine a sweaty MS exec shouting to his subordinates: "We must have lolcats! Cost is no object!"
- sopooneo 15y ago
  I'd like to imagine it was Balmer himself.
  - roc 15y ago
    s/developers/lolcats
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- smackfu 15y ago
  More like a list of the top 20 iPhone apps, working down it until they get as many as they can. Because have you looked at the top 20 iPhone apps? Half of it is crap joke stuff that is downloaded like crazy.
robomartin 15y ago
Here's something Microsoft and Google seem to not get in a big way: iPod. Put out a lower-cost non-phone device already! Call it whatever you want. The W7/8 "Gamester" or whatever. Offer that choice and your market just multiplied tremendously. Follow the iPhone<->iPod model. Case in point. Each of my kids has their own iPod. They'll don't have their own iPhones. What mother wants to hand a 3 year old their phone at a restaurant? We've done it for those unavoidable emergencies (you have to know three-year-olds). There's a huge market for non-phone devices like this and it just blows me away that these guys are battling hard over phones while ignoring the huge market that non-phone but 100% software-compatible devices represents. As a developer I see that the iPhone + iPod ecosystem multiplies the number of devices that my apps go into by a significant and non-trivial number. Furthermore, it expands the demographics as well. These are all important factors when considering which platform to focus on. Add to that the code-compatible iPad and you have an absolute 1-2-3 punch winner. Google and Microsoft (and everyone else trying to beat Apple at this game) seem to be blind to this for some strange reason. Am I missing something fundamental?
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  Heard of the Zune?
- killedbydeath 15y ago
  There is Galaxy Player: http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3-players/YP-G70CWY/XAA http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3-players/YP-G70CWY/XAA
- atpaino 15y ago
  Google actually does have an iPod competitor of sorts in the Samsung Galaxy Player (in both 4.0 and 5.0 inch screens). The adoption of these hasn't been great, however this might be due to the lack of advertising for them (especially when compared with Apple's rather large marketing campaigns for the iPod touch). I would like to see a non-phone device running WP7/8 though.
- roc 15y ago
  > "Am I missing something fundamental?" Price. Apple's supply chain, the one that's turning out tablets that no-one can match on price, has been doing the same thing to the PMP market with the iPod Touch. Android PMPs either have a price premium over a stock iPod Touch or they simply don't run well enough to meet consumer expectations. Microsoft is in largely the same place price-wise. Though their more-controlled product should be easier to optimize for cheaper/slower hardware and their services/brands have found a better reception in the market. (XBox, Live, Marketplace, Zune) I think Microsoft is just too focused on the phone market to give it a serious try. Though a Phone 7 PMP could also be a victim of Microsoft's strategy crisis: the bit where they seem to be so hell-bent on pushing Windows onto everything, that despite the critical reception, putting Phone 7 on anything that isn't a phone is still anathema.
farnsworth 15y ago
I really really want Microsoft to succeed with WP7. I know Microsoft/Windows hate is popular, and I'm not saying it hasn't been justified at times, but we need a solid third competitor to Android and iOS. More competition -> everybody wins. But - reading this, I realized I had almost no idea what Microsoft's app store is like, or even how typical apps look. I looked up the Facebook app ( http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/apps/82a23635-5bd9-df11-a844-00237de2db9e http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/apps/82a23635-5bd9-df11-a8... ) and have to say... do they all look like that? Where almost 1/3 of the view is dead space? Even on the screen where it's partly used, it looks like they just couldn't get the layout quite right. Then there is the massive title on each "tab", and I've always kind of liked the metro look but does it have to take up so much space?
- bmelton 15y ago
  It's interesting you bring that up, as my Xbox and ICS Galaxy S started somewhat converging on a boxy layout style at around the same time not long ago. While I am obviously biased, I feel like the changes were a big UI improvement in Android, as, while the layouts are definitely boxy, they fit together well, and do a great job of highlighting action items and guiding my interactions. On my Xbox, I've found that it often leads to extra clicks being necessary where they weren't before. I quit questioning the design decisions when I (not too irrationally) concluded that they must have done it to assist with Kinect users, dragging a large virtual hand around the screen... that is, until you posted those screenshots, and the layout really, really looks about as busted as it does on the Xbox. It's somewhat visually appealing, and while I think that, generally, it still looks like a better alternative to the usual Microsoftian clutter, it's definitely a long way from being good (IMHO).
- zmmmmm 15y ago
  > I've always kind of liked the metro look but does it have to take up so much space? This has actually been a well known criticism of WP7 that goes under the name "low information density". People counter that by saying it's a feature, not a bug. For me, it creates a problem because every time I pick up a WP7 handset it feels like a feature phone. The nicest feature-phone I ever held, but it still has this limited, focused, prebaked feel that I find hard to explain but which exactly reminds me of the same feeling I get with feature phones. I think the smart phone market is very much an aspirational one where people expect to feel like they're stepping into the future, and WP7 just doesn't feel like that. As much as everyone praises iOS for it's polished and slick nature, that's not actually why people are buying phones (and also why Android succeeds in spite of having missed the polish). They are trying to empower themselves with something more advanced than their previous phone which probably already had things like a facebook widget and weather app, etc.
kgrin 15y ago
Having just had a series of incredibly frustrating experiences trying to ship a WP7 app, and given the awful support (or lack thereof) from MS throughout their buggy-as-all-hell app submission process, my sympathies are quite limited. What I found particularly absurd is that while there were some technical issues with the platform, they were pretty minor in the grand scheme of things - bugginess-wise, nothing worse than what you encounter on Android... but the App Marketplace submission and approval process was an unmitigated disaster, and is of course the thing that you have the least control of.
- jmspring 15y ago
  Can you elaborate on your challenges with the submission/approval process? The stories of the iOS app store being a black box are well documented. I'm curious what WP7 is like, as I am playing with something I might submit...
  - kgrin 15y ago
    Sure. Problem 1: the actual upload(s) of the XAP to App Hub just failed sporadically - we got an opaque error code which, when we looked it up, translated to essentially "either there's a problem with your language settings... or there was a random network error." Eventually it just worked, with no rhyme or reason - one out of every few times, it would get through. Problem 2: the first time we were able to complete the submission, the app was rejected because we had marked it for worldwide distribution. Turns out the [free] app was barred from three countries (China and I forget the other two) because it had a few "inappropriate" images (of museum exhibits). OK, fine, some countries are censorship-happy - not MS' fault. So what does MS do? Reject the app wholesale (rather than just in the problematic countries). We resubmit (going through all the difficulties of #1 above), exclude the problematic countries from the "where do you want your app available" checkboxes... and wait as it goes through the full 5-business-day approval cycle. Problem 3: OK, the app is certified and made it into the store! Woot! But wait - it has a pretty serious bug - can't play any audio! (It's a museum tour, so that's rather unfortunate!) The bug didn't exist in the version we tested (in the emulator and two real devices), and after several days of back-and-forth with MS, they acknowledged it was a bug in the "XAP ingestion" process (what App Hub does to your XAP once it's submitted). They suggested a workaround, which we implemented right away (it was trivial, albeit not-really-obvious). At that point - this is after talking to several-layers-up support engineers - we asked that they push our update to the store ASAP (given that it was their bug we were working around). The best they could do is "expedite" the certification/approval process, which still took 3 or 4 business days - which doesn't sound like a lot, but is pretty absurd given that the update fixed a showstopping bug which was the result of MS's own submission process. All in all, it took several weeks from completion to actually appearing in the store - which is better than the App Store at its worst, but not exactly awesome... and, FWIW, we only started getting real answers after several layers of escalation (which I suppose isn't terribly unusual, but again, not really confidence-inspiring).
magg 15y ago
nothing new, MS basically begged Rovio to develop Angry Birds for WP7, ended up paying a large sum of cash and provided phones for the developers and such
Steko 15y ago
I love how Instagram is presented as a big hole in their app catalog when Android got it like 3 days ago. "Ms. Murphy declined to say whether Microsoft had paid for the app’s development. " I guess we know what that means.
jmitcheson 15y ago
I swear; This paragraph from the article reads like something out of "The Onion" "Ben Huh, chief executive of the Cheezburger Network, a collection of humor and entertainment sites, said Microsoft’s market share was too small to warrant in-house development of a Windows Phone app. But when Microsoft approached his company about making an application featuring funny photos of cats, he agreed. “They made it very easy for us,” he said. “They took care of everything.”"
nextparadigms 15y ago
Too bad Google isn't doing the same with Android tablets - or if they do it, they only do it for a few more popular apps and that's about it. I wish they realized how much of an opportunity they are missing by not being more aggressive with tablet apps.
foohbarbaz 15y ago
Has anybody seen like real people buying Windows phones? Meh. Zune.
- ttrashh 15y ago
  I always shake my head a bit when I see people mention Zune like this. The hardware (and software on device) was fantastic. Much better than the iPods at the time imho. Look at the reviews on Amazon sometime. http://www.amazon.com/Zune-Video-MP3-Player-Platinum/dp/B002JPITY8/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1333693397&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Zune-Video-MP3-Player-Platinum/dp/B002... The Zune software is beautiful. It's a little heavy on occasion but much better than iTunes (again heavy imho). Zune pass is a great music service as well. It's not as unique as it once was since Spotify and others let you play what you want on demand but it's price similarly and you get to own a few of the songs each month.
jtchang 15y ago
For all the naysayers don't count microsoft out yet. As a developer everything in that article rings true. I don't want to develop on the platform when there are 3 other ones vying for my attention. However, if Microsoft were to start paying for the resources this might bring an about face. Microsoft is doing exactly what it needs to do to compete in this market. They were late and this is the price of entry.
r00fus 15y ago
Perhaps Microsoft should copy Apple here as well. Apple and Kleiner-Perkins created iFund in 08 [1] to fund mobile app development. Zynga, Flipboard, Path and others have been funded through this. $200M in investments, not payouts. Startups. [1] http://www.kpcb.com/initiatives/ifund/companies http://www.kpcb.com/initiatives/ifund/companies
- ghshephard 15y ago
  That only makes sense from a VCs perspective, if you think the platform is going to be successful. Microsoft might be willing to do it at a loss, though.
  - r00fus 15y ago
    I'd say it was a bet on Apple's part as well... I mean, if the platform vendor isn't sure of the platform's success, then how would the VC have any excitement about it?
robomartin 15y ago
A long time ago I had the opportunity to work with the late Frank Zappa for a few months. I also had the opportunity to have long chats with him over dinner. Very interesting fellow. One night the topic of religion came up. He suggested that there was a market for starting a religion that enabled everything that all other religions said was not permitted. Funny, but probably true at some level. Take a look at everything Apple black-boxes and make it open while keeping enough controls to keep the platform consistent and uniform across devices. This could be huge. And please, give me the ability to talk to a serial port (or USB or I2C or SPI) without restrictions so I can put the devices to use in a lot of very interesting areas that are just about impossible to approach with Apple's offerings.
- Hari_Seldon 15y ago
  Your suggestions are geek level features, not sure how this could be "huge". I agree though that Zappa was an interesting man.
  - robomartin 15y ago
    There are so many applications that could benefit from hardware interfacing to a smart phone that it's hard to make a list. Apple makes doing this very cumbersome and expensive. Just to be able to talk to the serial port you have to be approved for MFi membership and comply with a million requirements that only add expense to a product. That's why you don't see a simple serial cable available for open use. You can't legally buy the connectors and you have to also buy a decryption chip even to use the simplest functions. That's why you have people resorting to the ridiculous (but it works) extreme of using the headphone jack to build such things as credit card scanners and the like. They don't regulate the use of the headphone jack and seem to be approving apps that use it. Headphone jacks were being used way back when (Commodore 64 and TRS80 days) to talk to cassette-tape based storage. It's literally going back 30+ years in technology. While, on the surface, open peripheral port access might seem like a geek feature I think that this is far from reality. If peripheral port access on the iPhone was open for all to use you'd see all kinds of very interesting things happening with hardware for the iDevices that you simply aren't going to see given the current framework. Also, this is the reason why there are no inexpensive iDevice compatible hardware products. Developing them is very expensive due to the nature of the process. If MS was open about their I/O and they achieved reasonable penetration there's a whole layer of the product world that would open up to their tech. I think that when you come from behind and have the financial resources you just can't afford to ignore any market, no matter how insignificant it might look from your current vantage point. You never know where the next killer app might come from.
shellehs 15y ago
There are many similar apps, like ebooks, novles, sexy girl photo apps, talking monkey, ... but lack of many useful / funny / cool apps.
bambax 15y ago
How difficult would it be for Microsoft to write an abstraction layer / virtual machine to allow apps from other platforms to run "natively" on Windows phones? That would very significantly reduce the effort from apps makers (depending on the quality of the VM of course). They could even make Windows phone compatible with Android marketplace(s)... why not?
54mf 15y ago
So who do I talk to about getting in on this? Faraday is already somewhat similar to the look/feel of the platform. I'd love to bring the simplest, cleanest calendar app to the simplest, cleanest mobile platform. Call me already, Microsoft. Sheesh.

96 points by sew 15y ago

As Microsoft tries hard, this looks like a good opportunity for hackers to set shop focusing on a niche market.

This is great news (if it's still news to anyone, they've been paying for apps for a while). Two big issues that are commonly heard when Windows Phone is brought up (among several) are the lack of apps and the lack of public awareness. I've recounted my tale here on HN several times of when I bought my Windows Phone. The salesman was so adamant that I was making a mistake that I actually had to go as far as calling the manager over before I could buy one. There was nothing I could do to convince him that I knew what I wanted. With Microsoft paying to fill out the app store (developers, developers, developers!) and Nokia paying for prime placement in AT&T stores, they'll be given a fair shake to let consumers know the options. Microsoft is the 1990's Apple when it comes to the mobile world. A strong and memorable start a decade ago that came to a halt very quickly as competitors took marketshare. I really, really hope Microsoft and Nokia know the limits, though. Combined, they have a lot of money they can throw around. Microsoft did that to beat Apple in the PC world 20 years ago, and it ended very badly for them. You can put money into gaining marketshare, but when it's time to stop, you better stop fast.

melling 15y ago
How did it end badly for Microsoft back then? They still have around 90% desktop market share. They're taking profits from that monopoly and they're desperately trying to avoid missing the Post PC era. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out. It's going to be a pain to have to write for 3 different platforms. This time I think Linux is gonna win, with Google behind it. :-).
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

igul222 15y ago

I experienced this firsthand when I attended a Microsoft-sponsored WP7 development course at which they were giving free phones to developers. My impression was that, for the price of maybe 30 phones, they got at least a couple high quality apps on their store. tl;dr: Microsoft is spending lots of money on WP7 apps, and it seems to be working.

gcb 15y ago

They did that for xbox, and it worked wonders.

PakG1 15y ago
Hehe, I said the same thing in another thread, but got majorly downvoted. But I think you're right.
cageface 15y ago
The same strategy could certainly pay off here if they're willing to play the long game. They've shown a lot more courage than Google in reconceptualizing the UI and they seem to understand how important this platform is for their long-term survival so I certainly wouldn't count them out yet.
- SlipperySlope 15y ago
  But Microsoft could lose the long game too! Suppose that Metro does not play well on ordinary PCs, and sales of conventional laptop and desktop PCs, not only stop growing, but actually start declining as users instead upgrade to very capable smartphone and tablets. Once PC sales decline, then Microsoft profits will suffer in a disproportionate manner because of all the money losing business units that are supported by Windows, Office, and enterprise cash cows.
  - corporalagumbo 15y ago
    As a user of bother OS X 10.7 and WP7, I have to say at this point I have more faith in Microsoft to successfully push the desktop UI envelope than Apple. Lion is pretty much a mess of conflicting UI and usability concepts, and Mountain Lion seems to be more of the same. Unless Apple is planning on completely overturning their entire integrated UI model (causing massive disruption to their carefully constructed iOS-OS X ecosystem) in the next couple of years, I think we're just going to see more of the same - basically a continued push to polish and refine the basic 90s desktop UI paradigm. Microsoft in the mean time seem to be pretty intent on throwing out all the old conventions and building the interface of the future. The tech industry is interesting, success can be very short-lived, and can come at a high cost - inflexibility. Microsoft is in a flexible position, and can move much faster than Apple. Apple's success in the late 00's may hamstring it for the next stage of the digital arms race. It's just a question really of how sharp Microsoft's strategists are.

sriramk 15y ago

If they weren't doing this, I would advocate firing whoever was running dev marketing/partnerships. MSFT needs to jump start its dev ecosystem and using its bank balance is one of the easier tools to deploy. Now I would love to know how much Google paid Rovio + the other launch partners for their Google+ platform. :)

nigelsampson 15y ago
Agreed, the biggest issue highlighted in the new Lumia 900 views (which most are calling a fantastic phone) is missing some of the key apps in the ecosystem. I don't think the size of the marketplace is the problem, every user has about ten key apps they need on their phone (the trouble being it's a different ten for everyone), but every most of the cases covered will help them a lot. I expect them to do the same thing with Windows 8 and the store.
Lewisham 15y ago
Yeah, Microsoft did the same thing with the Xbox. They threw lots of money to developers in a climate when I think most people thought there was no way Microsoft could be cool enough to sell a console, particularly when it was going up against the PS2. Now, 360 is the market leader. NYT makes it sound like Microsoft is somehow cheating, but it's wise enough to realize that it needs to invest in order to bootstrap a new platform.

cageface 15y ago

Once you get to 100,000, the number stops being important I've been saying this for a while. You have to cover the major bases but beyond that it's just gravy. I've been tempted to dip my toes into the WP market anyway because frankly the iOS market is saturated already and Android is a pain in the ass for well documented reasons and I no longer have any particular goodwill towards Google. I think with C# Microsoft has the best development language, at least on paper.

ghshephard 15y ago
The issue isn't so much the number - I totally agree that you really don't need 500 solitaire applications in order to be a competitive platform for the user. What is important, though, is that the 15,000 to 20,000 Tier-1 Apps, and, most importantly (critically), the 1,000 or so AAA Apps are found on your platform. It's also important that the App developers show a little heart - six months in and my mother _still_ can't add her location on Path on her HTC-Desire-HD. 95% of the time, when a AAA App comes out, you can be certain that you'll have a full featured version of that application on an IOS device. That's true about 85% of the time on the Android - and it drops off a cliff immediately thereafter for the Blackberry and WP7 platform - with some Tier-1 developer who have already ported to the Blackberry starting to abandon that platform (Kayak) Owning an Android or IOS device means, today, being reasonably certain that the App you want will be on your device. Microsoft is showering people with money, training and hardware to make sure that will be the case for WP7. Now they just have to ship a killer phone and we'll have a horse race on our hands!
- cageface 15y ago
  A counter-point: my fiance and her sister each recently bought a new iPhone 4S. They use them constantly all day but the only non-stock app they care about is Skype. I have a feeling there are a ton of mobile users like this that are easily satisfied by a solid foundation of Web, Email, SMS, and Facebook.
  - SlipperySlope 15y ago
    How right you are!!! Android smartphones will continue to dominate the lowest spec hardware, especially in developing markets like China. Because the Microsoft OS cost adds to the device bill-of-materials, and Android -being open source- does not have this cost. By analogy, its very hard to see how Microsoft will produce low-spec tablets that are cheaper than what Amazon does with the Kindle Fire - and its successor products.

hristov 15y ago

I wonder how much they paid for the lolcats. Can't you just imagine a sweaty MS exec shouting to his subordinates: "We must have lolcats! Cost is no object!"

sopooneo 15y ago
I'd like to imagine it was Balmer himself.
- roc 15y ago
  s/developers/lolcats
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
smackfu 15y ago
More like a list of the top 20 iPhone apps, working down it until they get as many as they can. Because have you looked at the top 20 iPhone apps? Half of it is crap joke stuff that is downloaded like crazy.

robomartin 15y ago

Here's something Microsoft and Google seem to not get in a big way: iPod. Put out a lower-cost non-phone device already! Call it whatever you want. The W7/8 "Gamester" or whatever. Offer that choice and your market just multiplied tremendously. Follow the iPhone<->iPod model. Case in point. Each of my kids has their own iPod. They'll don't have their own iPhones. What mother wants to hand a 3 year old their phone at a restaurant? We've done it for those unavoidable emergencies (you have to know three-year-olds). There's a huge market for non-phone devices like this and it just blows me away that these guys are battling hard over phones while ignoring the huge market that non-phone but 100% software-compatible devices represents. As a developer I see that the iPhone + iPod ecosystem multiplies the number of devices that my apps go into by a significant and non-trivial number. Furthermore, it expands the demographics as well. These are all important factors when considering which platform to focus on. Add to that the code-compatible iPad and you have an absolute 1-2-3 punch winner. Google and Microsoft (and everyone else trying to beat Apple at this game) seem to be blind to this for some strange reason. Am I missing something fundamental?

MatthewPhillips 15y ago
Heard of the Zune?
killedbydeath 15y ago
There is Galaxy Player: http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3-players/YP-G70CWY/XAA http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/mp3-players/YP-G70CWY/XAA
atpaino 15y ago
Google actually does have an iPod competitor of sorts in the Samsung Galaxy Player (in both 4.0 and 5.0 inch screens). The adoption of these hasn't been great, however this might be due to the lack of advertising for them (especially when compared with Apple's rather large marketing campaigns for the iPod touch). I would like to see a non-phone device running WP7/8 though.
roc 15y ago
> "Am I missing something fundamental?" Price. Apple's supply chain, the one that's turning out tablets that no-one can match on price, has been doing the same thing to the PMP market with the iPod Touch. Android PMPs either have a price premium over a stock iPod Touch or they simply don't run well enough to meet consumer expectations. Microsoft is in largely the same place price-wise. Though their more-controlled product should be easier to optimize for cheaper/slower hardware and their services/brands have found a better reception in the market. (XBox, Live, Marketplace, Zune) I think Microsoft is just too focused on the phone market to give it a serious try. Though a Phone 7 PMP could also be a victim of Microsoft's strategy crisis: the bit where they seem to be so hell-bent on pushing Windows onto everything, that despite the critical reception, putting Phone 7 on anything that isn't a phone is still anathema.

farnsworth 15y ago

I really really want Microsoft to succeed with WP7. I know Microsoft/Windows hate is popular, and I'm not saying it hasn't been justified at times, but we need a solid third competitor to Android and iOS. More competition -> everybody wins. But - reading this, I realized I had almost no idea what Microsoft's app store is like, or even how typical apps look. I looked up the Facebook app ( http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/apps/82a23635-5bd9-df11-a844-00237de2db9e http://www.windowsphone.com/en-US/apps/82a23635-5bd9-df11-a8... ) and have to say... do they all look like that? Where almost 1/3 of the view is dead space? Even on the screen where it's partly used, it looks like they just couldn't get the layout quite right. Then there is the massive title on each "tab", and I've always kind of liked the metro look but does it have to take up so much space?

bmelton 15y ago
It's interesting you bring that up, as my Xbox and ICS Galaxy S started somewhat converging on a boxy layout style at around the same time not long ago. While I am obviously biased, I feel like the changes were a big UI improvement in Android, as, while the layouts are definitely boxy, they fit together well, and do a great job of highlighting action items and guiding my interactions. On my Xbox, I've found that it often leads to extra clicks being necessary where they weren't before. I quit questioning the design decisions when I (not too irrationally) concluded that they must have done it to assist with Kinect users, dragging a large virtual hand around the screen... that is, until you posted those screenshots, and the layout really, really looks about as busted as it does on the Xbox. It's somewhat visually appealing, and while I think that, generally, it still looks like a better alternative to the usual Microsoftian clutter, it's definitely a long way from being good (IMHO).
zmmmmm 15y ago
> I've always kind of liked the metro look but does it have to take up so much space? This has actually been a well known criticism of WP7 that goes under the name "low information density". People counter that by saying it's a feature, not a bug. For me, it creates a problem because every time I pick up a WP7 handset it feels like a feature phone. The nicest feature-phone I ever held, but it still has this limited, focused, prebaked feel that I find hard to explain but which exactly reminds me of the same feeling I get with feature phones. I think the smart phone market is very much an aspirational one where people expect to feel like they're stepping into the future, and WP7 just doesn't feel like that. As much as everyone praises iOS for it's polished and slick nature, that's not actually why people are buying phones (and also why Android succeeds in spite of having missed the polish). They are trying to empower themselves with something more advanced than their previous phone which probably already had things like a facebook widget and weather app, etc.

kgrin 15y ago

Having just had a series of incredibly frustrating experiences trying to ship a WP7 app, and given the awful support (or lack thereof) from MS throughout their buggy-as-all-hell app submission process, my sympathies are quite limited. What I found particularly absurd is that while there were some technical issues with the platform, they were pretty minor in the grand scheme of things - bugginess-wise, nothing worse than what you encounter on Android... but the App Marketplace submission and approval process was an unmitigated disaster, and is of course the thing that you have the least control of.

jmspring 15y ago
Can you elaborate on your challenges with the submission/approval process? The stories of the iOS app store being a black box are well documented. I'm curious what WP7 is like, as I am playing with something I might submit...
- kgrin 15y ago
  Sure. Problem 1: the actual upload(s) of the XAP to App Hub just failed sporadically - we got an opaque error code which, when we looked it up, translated to essentially "either there's a problem with your language settings... or there was a random network error." Eventually it just worked, with no rhyme or reason - one out of every few times, it would get through. Problem 2: the first time we were able to complete the submission, the app was rejected because we had marked it for worldwide distribution. Turns out the [free] app was barred from three countries (China and I forget the other two) because it had a few "inappropriate" images (of museum exhibits). OK, fine, some countries are censorship-happy - not MS' fault. So what does MS do? Reject the app wholesale (rather than just in the problematic countries). We resubmit (going through all the difficulties of #1 above), exclude the problematic countries from the "where do you want your app available" checkboxes... and wait as it goes through the full 5-business-day approval cycle. Problem 3: OK, the app is certified and made it into the store! Woot! But wait - it has a pretty serious bug - can't play any audio! (It's a museum tour, so that's rather unfortunate!) The bug didn't exist in the version we tested (in the emulator and two real devices), and after several days of back-and-forth with MS, they acknowledged it was a bug in the "XAP ingestion" process (what App Hub does to your XAP once it's submitted). They suggested a workaround, which we implemented right away (it was trivial, albeit not-really-obvious). At that point - this is after talking to several-layers-up support engineers - we asked that they push our update to the store ASAP (given that it was their bug we were working around). The best they could do is "expedite" the certification/approval process, which still took 3 or 4 business days - which doesn't sound like a lot, but is pretty absurd given that the update fixed a showstopping bug which was the result of MS's own submission process. All in all, it took several weeks from completion to actually appearing in the store - which is better than the App Store at its worst, but not exactly awesome... and, FWIW, we only started getting real answers after several layers of escalation (which I suppose isn't terribly unusual, but again, not really confidence-inspiring).

magg 15y ago

nothing new, MS basically begged Rovio to develop Angry Birds for WP7, ended up paying a large sum of cash and provided phones for the developers and such

Steko 15y ago

I love how Instagram is presented as a big hole in their app catalog when Android got it like 3 days ago. "Ms. Murphy declined to say whether Microsoft had paid for the app’s development. " I guess we know what that means.

jmitcheson 15y ago

I swear; This paragraph from the article reads like something out of "The Onion" "Ben Huh, chief executive of the Cheezburger Network, a collection of humor and entertainment sites, said Microsoft’s market share was too small to warrant in-house development of a Windows Phone app. But when Microsoft approached his company about making an application featuring funny photos of cats, he agreed. “They made it very easy for us,” he said. “They took care of everything.”"

nextparadigms 15y ago

Too bad Google isn't doing the same with Android tablets - or if they do it, they only do it for a few more popular apps and that's about it. I wish they realized how much of an opportunity they are missing by not being more aggressive with tablet apps.

foohbarbaz 15y ago

Has anybody seen like real people buying Windows phones? Meh. Zune.

ttrashh 15y ago
I always shake my head a bit when I see people mention Zune like this. The hardware (and software on device) was fantastic. Much better than the iPods at the time imho. Look at the reviews on Amazon sometime. http://www.amazon.com/Zune-Video-MP3-Player-Platinum/dp/B002JPITY8/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1333693397&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Zune-Video-MP3-Player-Platinum/dp/B002... The Zune software is beautiful. It's a little heavy on occasion but much better than iTunes (again heavy imho). Zune pass is a great music service as well. It's not as unique as it once was since Spotify and others let you play what you want on demand but it's price similarly and you get to own a few of the songs each month.

jtchang 15y ago

For all the naysayers don't count microsoft out yet. As a developer everything in that article rings true. I don't want to develop on the platform when there are 3 other ones vying for my attention. However, if Microsoft were to start paying for the resources this might bring an about face. Microsoft is doing exactly what it needs to do to compete in this market. They were late and this is the price of entry.

r00fus 15y ago

Perhaps Microsoft should copy Apple here as well. Apple and Kleiner-Perkins created iFund in 08 [1] to fund mobile app development. Zynga, Flipboard, Path and others have been funded through this. $200M in investments, not payouts. Startups. [1] http://www.kpcb.com/initiatives/ifund/companies http://www.kpcb.com/initiatives/ifund/companies

ghshephard 15y ago
That only makes sense from a VCs perspective, if you think the platform is going to be successful. Microsoft might be willing to do it at a loss, though.
- r00fus 15y ago
  I'd say it was a bet on Apple's part as well... I mean, if the platform vendor isn't sure of the platform's success, then how would the VC have any excitement about it?

robomartin 15y ago

A long time ago I had the opportunity to work with the late Frank Zappa for a few months. I also had the opportunity to have long chats with him over dinner. Very interesting fellow. One night the topic of religion came up. He suggested that there was a market for starting a religion that enabled everything that all other religions said was not permitted. Funny, but probably true at some level. Take a look at everything Apple black-boxes and make it open while keeping enough controls to keep the platform consistent and uniform across devices. This could be huge. And please, give me the ability to talk to a serial port (or USB or I2C or SPI) without restrictions so I can put the devices to use in a lot of very interesting areas that are just about impossible to approach with Apple's offerings.

Hari_Seldon 15y ago
Your suggestions are geek level features, not sure how this could be "huge". I agree though that Zappa was an interesting man.
- robomartin 15y ago
  There are so many applications that could benefit from hardware interfacing to a smart phone that it's hard to make a list. Apple makes doing this very cumbersome and expensive. Just to be able to talk to the serial port you have to be approved for MFi membership and comply with a million requirements that only add expense to a product. That's why you don't see a simple serial cable available for open use. You can't legally buy the connectors and you have to also buy a decryption chip even to use the simplest functions. That's why you have people resorting to the ridiculous (but it works) extreme of using the headphone jack to build such things as credit card scanners and the like. They don't regulate the use of the headphone jack and seem to be approving apps that use it. Headphone jacks were being used way back when (Commodore 64 and TRS80 days) to talk to cassette-tape based storage. It's literally going back 30+ years in technology. While, on the surface, open peripheral port access might seem like a geek feature I think that this is far from reality. If peripheral port access on the iPhone was open for all to use you'd see all kinds of very interesting things happening with hardware for the iDevices that you simply aren't going to see given the current framework. Also, this is the reason why there are no inexpensive iDevice compatible hardware products. Developing them is very expensive due to the nature of the process. If MS was open about their I/O and they achieved reasonable penetration there's a whole layer of the product world that would open up to their tech. I think that when you come from behind and have the financial resources you just can't afford to ignore any market, no matter how insignificant it might look from your current vantage point. You never know where the next killer app might come from.

shellehs 15y ago

There are many similar apps, like ebooks, novles, sexy girl photo apps, talking monkey, ... but lack of many useful / funny / cool apps.

bambax 15y ago

How difficult would it be for Microsoft to write an abstraction layer / virtual machine to allow apps from other platforms to run "natively" on Windows phones? That would very significantly reduce the effort from apps makers (depending on the quality of the VM of course). They could even make Windows phone compatible with Android marketplace(s)... why not?

54mf 15y ago

So who do I talk to about getting in on this? Faraday is already somewhat similar to the look/feel of the platform. I'd love to bring the simplest, cleanest calendar app to the simplest, cleanest mobile platform. Call me already, Microsoft. Sheesh.