ms will pay $100 per win 8 app that gets into its store

[Temmu]

lol, and o, how sad!
ms is now paying script-kiddies and others, (possibly desperate college freshmen) $100 per windows 8 app that gets into the windows store.

you don't suppose apple or google are paying anyone to create apps for their stores?
why? they aren't failed!

Microsoft?s $100-per-app bounty is both too much and not enough | Ars Technica <---clicky

i said it before most magazines and internet outlets did, windows 8 metro is a failed attempt.

ps
show me 1 (just 1) metro craplet that is on the scale of visual studio or visio.

 

[Will]

How do you mean "on the scale of visual studio"? How is a metro app comparable with a fully fledged IDE?

 

[cluberti]

Given the reason Windows 8 has both the modern/metro and desktop environment is so that it can handle more basic apps like those in the modern interface, and still be used for more advanced work (or, some could say, more legacy) as to run desktop apps in the desktop environment, I'm not sure how bashing it because it does both is appropriate. If you don't like the UI, stick to the desktop, stick to Windows 7 for the next 7 years, or switch to the MacOS (different UI) or Linux (different UIs). All this bashing and complaining is simply childish.

 

[LilBambi]

I think if any company wants to enter a market, they will have to do some things to bring in the developers. I am pretty sure all companies entering a market with new types of devices and OSes need to put out some sort of carrot to entice developers to further expand the ports of their programs/apps.

 

[Will]

The Ars Technica article is quite a good overview - paying app developers for submission does suggest the store isn't doing as well as anticipated. However, I imagine the same can be said for Windows 8 as a whole - I was an early adopter, but Windows 8 has hardly taken the world by storm. As the majority of improvements in 8 aren't that obvious to a normal user, all most people see is Windows 7 with a tablet interface. Add to that the fact Windows Surface tablets are hardly iPad killers, there are a lot of people who haven't ever come into contact with the Windows 8 app store.

I also don't personally like the app store. I don't think it's been designed well and I doubt I'll be using it before it gets a major overhaul. As for metro as a whole, there are good and bad aspects to Metro. I don't personally like full-screen apps, but I can see the benefits to the interface for tablet users. Overall, Metro hasn't been a 100% success, but it's a useful experiment for MS. I'm curious to see how it will evolve.

 

[GZ]

I have used the App store... I can now play Wordfeud on my PC instead of my phone! :lol:

 

[Temmu]

Will Watts

How do you mean "on the scale of visual studio"? How is a metro app comparable with a fully fledged IDE?

Exactly!

GZ

I have used the App store... I can now play Wordfeud on my PC instead of my phone! :lol:

Exactly!

cluberti

... All this bashing and complaining is simply childish.

Point is, as made by those above, the metro craplets are for games, for play, not for work.
no one has, or will, demonstrate a metro craplet that does work.
further, it is improbable that a metro craplet will ever be developed to replace visual studio, or similar productivity tool.

cluberti, is will watts childish for

...Metro. I don't personally like full-screen apps...

oh, not? i didn't think so. just me. :lol:

 

[cluberti]

Actually, my employer *has* built some apps that are used in the modern interface, and are precisely for work. Just because there aren't many doesn't mean it's not useful for it.

 

[Will]

Temmu, you're bashing MS a bit unfairly here. A change in the desktop interface doesn't mean the new interface is worthless - "metro" style apps can succeed and be very effective. Think about the iPad, you wouldn't claim that no one finds iPads useful would you? That seems to be what you're suggesting, that no tablet style app can be useful for anything other than games - the legions of business users who own tablets would probably disagree with you there.

I didn't actually get your point with the Visual Studio comparison. You wouldn't develop on an iPhone would you? That doesn't mean all iPhone apps are worthless. It's different, and it's not perfect - it will improve, and we'll have something better at the end of it.

 

[Temmu]

my point is that metro or modern or... apps on a business pc seem pointless and for play.

cluberti, you mention someone at work developed some usefull apps for.. a pc? well, cool. but as it sits now they may be one of the few in the country that is useful. (i know, we have to start somewhere... and you may be the pioneer.)

will watts, i do indeed use my ipad at work for work - i have a citrix plugin from which i run some ms access apps i've developed.
i'm not a programmer by trade, and no, i'd not write books, spreadsheets, develop ms access stuff, or try to use visual studio on a small screen w/o a keyboard. which is my point about the metro or modern win 8 interface.

 

[AceInfinity]

lol, and o, how sad!
ms is now paying script-kiddies and others, (possibly desperate college freshmen) $100 per windows 8 app that gets into the windows store.

you don't suppose apple or google are paying anyone to create apps for their stores?
why? they aren't failed!

Microsoft?s $100-per-app bounty is both too much and not enough | Ars Technica <---clicky

i said it before most magazines and internet outlets did, windows 8 metro is a failed attempt.

ps
show me 1 (just 1) metro craplet that is on the scale of visual studio or visio.

Your reasoning here is very very flawed. You don't see them (Apple) paying people because they have already been in the market for a while. Microsoft is playing catchup... What would YOU do if you had to play catchup? You wouldn't have a hope in hell if you didn't encourage development for your store, so I think it is a good thing. How is that a fail?

show me 1 (just 1) metro craplet that is on the scale of visual studio or visio.

Ok, it may be true, but apps were never designed to run with that kind of "power". You do know that the apps are designed to run on smaller devices like the Surface, and even Windows Phone right... NOW, you go and show me an app that is provided in the Apple store that would compete with the "power" of Visual Studio or any other desktop app like it? (See how you don't realize that you're targeting Microsoft without any real logic here?)

----------------------

my point is that metro or modern or... apps on a business pc seem pointless and for play.

cluberti, you mention someone at work developed some usefull apps for.. a pc? well, cool. but as it sits now they may be one of the few in the country that is useful. (i know, we have to start somewhere... and you may be the pioneer.)

will watts, i do indeed use my ipad at work for work - i have a citrix plugin from which i run some ms access apps i've developed.
i'm not a programmer by trade, and no, i'd not write books, spreadsheets, develop ms access stuff, or try to use visual studio on a small screen w/o a keyboard. which is my point about the metro or modern win 8 interface.

If you're going to compare the markets, then would you consider IDevice (Iphone, ITouch, etc...) apps "pointless and for play" too? Since none of them will be able to run the "likes of Visual Studio or Visio" either... So... Thinking about that question a bit more, why can't the Microsoft store be used for apps that can be used in the same way? The only difference in my opinion is that the apps can not only be used on a phone (Windows Phone), but they can also be used on tablet-like devices like the Surface, and even a desktop PC or laptop.

Just my two cents. If you're going to bash this thing, you'd better have good reasons. And if and once you DO, I'll unbiasedly decide whether I agree or not. You're not thinking about the bigger picture here though, and that would make it hard to take your statements seriously in all honesty. Put yourself in Microsoft's shoes.

So although there may be valid reasons for why people don't like Metro/Windows 8 (as a whole), these are not valid reasons at all and thus this "bashing" is a bit "childish", and I would agree with cluberti here... What are you trying to prove here? That because this is Microsoft, and they have their own Windows store they are expected to produce apps that are as powerful as some of the most resource intensive desktop software out there? I don't see Apple or Google doing this personally, so that is a bit unfair to make that comparison, and to expect that much...

Personally the fact that they are willing to put out money to build their own project, shows determination, boldness, and a good effort to get in the game with some of the other "big boys" that have already been in this market for a while, namely Apple. It's a bad thing because they are willing to encourage developers? To me, it more shows that they are willing to support consumers and that they aren't greedy.

:beerchug2:

 

[Temmu]

Your reasoning here is very very flawed. You don't see them (Apple) paying people because they have already been in the market for a while. Microsoft is playing catchup...

show me 1 (just 1) metro craplet that is on the scale of visual studio or visio.

Ok, it may be true, but apps were never designed to run with that kind of "power". ... that you're targeting Microsoft without any real logic here?)

----------------------

[me] my point is that metro or modern or... apps on a business pc seem pointless and for play.


If you're going to compare the markets, then would you consider IDevice (Iphone, ITouch, etc...) apps "pointless and for play" too? Since none of them will be able to run the "likes of Visual Studio or Visio" either......but they can also be used on tablet-like devices like the Surface, and even a desktop PC or laptop.

you have again made my argument for me.
an app runs on a small device, usually for play (yes, i know email can be a work tool, just as text or voice...)
yes, an app is less powerful.
which is why they do so well on small (push button, touch screen) devices.

which is exactly why i say, why that on a workhorse like a desktop pc?
low power apps & touchscreen push buttons are almost useless there.
i have shortcuts & bookmarks (favorites) on my 7 machines to go to / do everything the apps do on my newish 8 machine.

ps
most apple, google apps are indeed craplets, most lower-grade copies of each other.
... and craplet is a great "word" used by countless others before me.

 

[Will]

If desktop users were able to run metro style apps in windowed mode, would you still regard them as crap? Here is one "craplet" that actually looks useful: Comprehensive collection of metro style icons by Syncfusion

There are also obvious benefits to having the same OS on your tablet as on your desktop. If you don't like the store apps, just don't use them. It's a strange situation when we're complaining about MS giving us too many features, and ones we don't have to use. Even if the store fails, or gets reinvented, this is hardly going to kill Windows. Both MS and Apple are moving towards merging desktop and tablet.

 

[cluberti]

One thing to remember is that *most* users are *not* power users - they CAN work on devices like an iDevice, or a Surface, or anything else running Windows 8 or RT. For those of us who need more powerful apps, the desktop exists (and I'd say it exists for "regular" users too, insomuch as they will need to run legacy desktop apps for awhile yet as vendors slowly get on the "modern" bandwagon or go web/cloud with their apps).

 

[AceInfinity]

Your reasoning here is very very flawed. You don't see them (Apple) paying people because they have already been in the market for a while. Microsoft is playing catchup...

show me 1 (just 1) metro craplet that is on the scale of visual studio or visio.

Ok, it may be true, but apps were never designed to run with that kind of "power". ... that you're targeting Microsoft without any real logic here?)

----------------------

[me] my point is that metro or modern or... apps on a business pc seem pointless and for play.


If you're going to compare the markets, then would you consider IDevice (Iphone, ITouch, etc...) apps "pointless and for play" too? Since none of them will be able to run the "likes of Visual Studio or Visio" either......but they can also be used on tablet-like devices like the Surface, and even a desktop PC or laptop.

you have again made my argument for me.
an app runs on a small device, usually for play (yes, i know email can be a work tool, just as text or voice...)
yes, an app is less powerful.
which is why they do so well on small (push button, touch screen) devices.

which is exactly why i say, why that on a workhorse like a desktop pc?
low power apps & touchscreen push buttons are almost useless there.
i have shortcuts & bookmarks (favorites) on my 7 machines to go to / do everything the apps do on my newish 8 machine.

ps
most apple, google apps are indeed craplets, most lower-grade copies of each other.
... and craplet is a great "word" used by countless others before me.

You should have read the other parts of my post.

And how can they be useless? What If I have a desktop PC or a Laptop with a small screen? There are some uses to an app comparative to a desktop program, even aside from that. cluberti explains my point better than I did:

One thing to remember is that *most* users are *not* power users - they CAN work on devices like an iDevice, or a Surface, or anything else running Windows 8 or RT. For those of us who need more powerful apps, the desktop exists (and I'd say it exists for "regular" users too, insomuch as they will need to run legacy desktop apps for awhile yet as vendors slowly get on the "modern" bandwagon or go web/cloud with their apps).

So because the desktop is still there, why bash on something that you don't even use if you are categorized as a power user, when someone else may use it all the time, desktop or not?

 

[Temmu]

i do not imply most users are power users, they are not, they are toaster purchasers. they wish make toast. to play. good for them!
my point remains that in a production environment when a programmer, network analyst, financial officer, systems admin, materials manager, voip dude, etc., want to get serious work done metro / modern & small and or touch screens cannot get the job done.

ps
rumor has it that windows 9 will have 1 large button that fills the screen (irrespective of size) that activates the 1 (and only 1) craplet that you choose at install time. just sayin'.

 

[AceInfinity]

i do not imply most users are power users, they are not, they are toaster purchasers. they wish make toast. to play. good for them!
my point remains that in a production environment when a programmer, network analyst, financial officer, systems admin, materials manager, voip dude, etc., want to get serious work done metro / modern & small and or touch screens cannot get the job done.

ps
rumor has it that windows 9 will have 1 large button that fills the screen (irrespective of size) that activates the 1 (and only 1) craplet that you choose at install time. just sayin'.

Your point remains for virtually any other app market out there, so I don't see the point behind it. I am a programmer, and I wouldn't even use any Apple/IOS app to get "serious work" done either, inclusive of Google and a few other minor markets. But that doesn't mean I don't find them useless just because they can't get all the work I do, done. I use Windows 8 for my automation, desktop, and web based programming, no problem. I actually found a few apps that allow me to get web based programming done as well, and I think that's worth mentioning here because I do use them. There's also general code editors that I use when I don't feel like powering on my desktop (that I do use).

Just as a note, there is no way that you can possibly speak for all of these categories of people, as I don't think you would have all of that experience. I don't even have that kind of experience, but I am sure apps are useful outside of being a programmer myself as well. For networking, why can't there be an app like the Apple market has to detect network connectivity and network maps? You are judging the still-in-development Microsoft store market, before it has even had it's first year to develop, and that's completely unfair. For anything financial, I know lots of accountants that use their Iphone apps for managing money and doing various calculations, so why can't a Windows app do that?

How about I put you into a boxing ring with a few veteran boxers and then laugh at, or mock you for not making it through the first round against a more experienced boxer? That's essentially what you're doing here in my opinion, and you are skipping the good things that can result or have been going on so far with the apps. Competition is good, so if Microsoft makes it up there with Apple eventually, then how can this not be a good thing from a business perspective? It's easier to make a Windows app than it is to create an IOS app in my opinion, so that's another positive in my books.

This has been dragged on too far though in my opinion. I'm going to respectfully leave this conversation as for the reasons given I think the points you're trying to make are a bit childish against apps for Windows 8.

 

[Temmu]

How about I put you into a boxing ring with a few veteran boxers and then laugh at, or mock you for not making it through the first round against a more experienced boxer?

yikes! how violent of you! you must be really frustrated. try taking a few days off of work and listening to calm music.

 

[Corrine]

Quoting LilBambi from the AeroGlass thread:

A person's opinion, is by it's very nature, a very personal thing, their very own opinion and they are entitled to that opinion. We, or others, may or may not agree, but they are entitled to their opinion. :thumbsup2:

It is time to agree to disagree regarding any value added or not added by Apps from the Windows Store.

 

[GZ]

I have stayed out of this conversation for the most part... The main reason is that we all have differing opinions...

Let's have a fact-check here.

Windows 8 includes a fully-functional desktop interface that is compatible with, nearly, every piece of production software written... A functional start menu can be had by using a small program (free and/or paid).
Windows 8 includes many new features that will HELP productivity, including the updated Admin tools, native disk-image (.iso) mounting and Hyper-V (Professional).
Windows 8 includes a new UI that supports small, full-screen Apps.
The main reason MS pushed the new UI is for cross-platform familiarity and compatibility.

Like it or not, the new computing world is Mobility based. Why should MS write two separate OS (one for mobility/portability and one for Workstation productivity) when they can combine the two? A bold move, yes... Well thought out, perhaps not... BUT. It is here.

Whether or not the new UI Apps are productivity-related or not is not an issue.

Quite a few good points have been made in this discussion.

The APP store is new.
Microsoft has to make up for lost ground and wants to encourage application developers to develop for the new platform.
As the App store grows and matures, there will be more productivity minded apps.

Regardless of the new UI and how anyone personally feels about the new App platform and MS store, it is all based solely on personal opinion and conjecture.

In my opinion Windows 8 is an excellent OS, despite MS forcing the new UI. It's improvements far outweigh the drawbacks. Windows 8 is NOT another Vista... (Even though Vista did have it's charms).