| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
msmobiles.com_robot
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 16777215
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:24 am Post subject: Windows Mobile ecosystem discussed by Microsoft, hard issues not mentioned |
 |
|
Many Windows Mobile software developers are leaving Windows Mobile for iPhone because in one month with iPhone software they can earn more money than in several years with Windows Mobile software but once again a Mi...
Read more at http://www.msmobiles.com/news.php/7519.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BrianC
Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Posts: 183
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
1. Handango is a independent company and their business model is run based on buisness decision. If developers feel that they don't get a good deal, they should look at somewhere else. It is a free market. And there is nothing to stop someone to setup a business to resell other people's software if that makes business sense. It is really an open market for MS software. Is it a good thing though is arguable.
2. It would be interesting to see if MS does pursue the path of having its own site to sell 3rd parties software. Effectively that create competition to others business who want to resell the same software. Can MS maintain a good relationship with its business partners and at the same time competiting with them.
_________________
Proud owner of HTC Touch Diamond and i-mate JASJAM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alcedes
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 273
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | why still it is not possible to purchase Windows Mobile software from within Windows Mobile |
It is possible. For Handango the name of the on device software purchasing catalogue is "InHand"
The description on the website describes it as follows:
| Handango wrote: | | Handango InHand is an intelligent, on-device catalog of applications that you can use to find, buy, and download content with amazing simplicity and rock-solid security... |
See their website for more information.
The author provided a nice explanation for the general pathway that Windows Mobile updates go through that may or may not result in a firmware update.
_________________
MCAD .Net , MCTS (Web, Windows)
Last edited by alcedes on Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adamz
Joined: 28 Oct 2005
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
InHand came preloaded on the T-Mobile Wing if I remember correctly. Also, Sprint includes an App store on their Windows Mobile devices. It's just a shortcut to a web page, but still.. certainly possible.
Microsoft could just include a directory of available applications on Windows Mobile (or even just a website shortcut) that links to existing product purchasing sites. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EJR
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 2629
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adamz wrote: |
Microsoft could just include a directory of available applications on Windows Mobile (or even just a website shortcut) that links to existing product purchasing sites. |
not good enough! -- the same inHand of Handango that does not have freeware and only limited choice.
Microsoft should provide a) hosting of apps for Windows Mobile b) access to them from Windows Mobile so that they could be downloaded and installed from Windows Mobile - both free and commercial, c) commission not bigger than 30% i.e. 70% must go to developers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alcedes
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 273
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EJR wrote: |
Microsoft should provide a) hosting of apps for Windows Mobile b) access to them from Windows Mobile so that they could be downloaded and installed from Windows Mobile - |
Given that one doesn't want to endorse crapware I could not see Microsoft doing this without ensuring that the applications at least pass the "Designedd for Windows Mobile" logo test. As of yet I have not found any software titles on the Windows Mobile catalog that don't have this. That cost about 400 USD for the first attempt to pass and 300 USD for each subsequent attempt for the same application, which may be a significant cost to the independent developers that would want to take advantage of such a service.
_________________
MCAD .Net , MCTS (Web, Windows) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EJR
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 2629
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="alcedes"] | EJR wrote: |
That cost about 400 USD for the first attempt to pass and 300 USD for each subsequent attempt for the same application, which may be a significant cost to the independent developers that would want to take advantage of such a service. |
if Apple managed to solve this issue then Microsoft should too - at App Store for iPhone one can download directly to phone even freeware ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
evilbert420
Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:30 am Post subject: Good grief! |
|
|
The constant MS bashing is only proving that those who run this site don't have a clue about what MS's strategy is around Windows Mobile. All I see is crying about how "MS doesn't get it" from people that obviously aren't talking with big companies about their mobile strategies and how they're going to get their mission-critical applications to people that don't want to carry laptops around.
Windows Mobile = Way to get .NET, SQL, and Exchange to people in a portable fashion. That's IT. Look at MS's efforts behind SCMDM and its developer strategy and if you're not completely clueless than you'll discover that berating MS for not going after the iPhone is absurd.
Windows Mobile isn't about consumer products, sorry very much to those people who want it to be. The iPhone is all about consumers, despite their failed attempts to make it "corporate-ready" with the 2.0 software (its Exchange support is a joke, and there's simply no management infrastructure which is absolutely essential to any corporation deploying mobile devices). If a developer can make tons of money writing stupid little applications that do countdowns or some other nonsense that really serves no other function than to say "that's cool" then they SHOULD be writing for the iPhone App Store.
If a developer wants to write a front-end to a real business application, like for example a retail store, a utilities company, or a distributed sales force, then Windows Mobile offers SO MUCH MORE than iPhone. Any bloke looking at what MS is both doing and saying should be able to come to the same understanding that the mobile battlefield will eventually come down to corporate standards and not consumer devices.
The HARD questions are "how can you make it easier for developers to translate their exisiting .NET investments to a mobile platform?" and not "how do you keep a bunch of consumers buying the iPhone?" How about "how does a company know whether to deploy SCMDM, SCCM, or Exchange to manage their mobile devices securely?"
Seriously, I hope the people running this site start to understand more about the platform their site is based around. Bringing up Handango is embarrassing... Handango users are NOT the people buying Windows Mobile en masse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
evilbert420
Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:36 am Post subject: Follow-up since the forum system won't let me edit... |
|
|
| And the comments that "nobody gets fired from MS" are absolutely absurd. Can you show the world that you're any more ignorant of what's really going on than to throw out blatant lies and assumptions like that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EJR
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
Posts: 2629
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:03 am Post subject: Re: Good grief! |
|
|
| evilbert420 wrote: |
Windows Mobile isn't about consumer products, sorry very much to those people who want it to be.. |
and here lies huge mistake of Microsoft: Windows Mobile must be appealing to everybody, also to consumers, to keep people, also profesionals/busines people to use it. Without ease of use, fancy screen effects (like fluid transitions) and fun features like multi-touch, also professional users will switch to iPhone.
and it is not bashing of Microsoft but pointing out the mistakes that Microsoft itself does not see. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alcedes
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 273
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EJR wrote: | | if Apple managed to solve this issue then Microsoft should too - at App Store for iPhone one can download directly to phone even freeware ! |
I don't think Microsoft sees it as a problem to be solved. The model that you are suggesting is possible but has other impacts on the Windows Mobile ecosystem. Changing the model would require the current model be reviewed.
Part of their business model is based establishing parnerships and allowing those partners to have economic opportunities. Handango and PocketLand are part of their Independent Distribution Partnership, and the certifying entities (QualityLogic, NSTL, Veritest) are all part of a partnership. ISVs can still sell their applications through the distribution partners without certification, but Microsoft won't attach their names to such titles. I can understand why since when a program causes a system with a Microsoft system to experience problems Microsoft would frequently receive the blame (ex: bad hardware drivers). Doing away with or lowering the fees could also cause a potential problem. That fee encourages one to not submit a program for certification unless he/she is confident that the application will pass. If the fee were low or non-existant then there would be less of an incentive for trying to pass in one attempt.
As things are today if you make an app that you think will have low to moderate sales then you can upload it to a distributor and receive a check for a portion of the sales and it has only cost you your time (The minimal set of application level software tools for developing for Windows Mobile are free). If you're confident that the program will be a good seller then bye all means get the certification as an investment on your application; the higher exposure that your application receives due to certification may cause faster recovery of the cost.
Apples model is different. The App Store is not just a distribution channel, it is the distribution channel. Outside of the minority of people that jailbreak their phones there's no other way to market and sell iPhone applications to iPhone customers in a non-warranty voiding way. That gives Apple more control over what what can be loaded on the iPhone, but ultimatly means that certain types of applications can't be marketted to iPhone customers. In some scenarios this can be seen as a good thing, in other scenarios a bad thing. Registering as an iPhone developer is about 99 USD (until registered the iPhone development information on developer.apple.com is inaccessible).
BTW: I did find confirmation that Microsoft requires certification before they will promote one's title in the Windows Mobile Catalog. It is on the Mobile2Market site.
| Microsoft wrote: | | Certification is required for participation in Microsoft promotional activities, including the Certified Software Catalog, and is also a prerequisite for many mobile operator and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) programs. |
_________________
MCAD .Net , MCTS (Web, Windows) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alcedes
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 273
Location: Phoenix, Arizona, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Take a look at this post on "The Unofficial Apple Weblog" (TUAW).
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/07/25/iphone-2-1-sdk-disappointments/
If what it says is true then we can see some of the drawbacks of having application distribution locked to a single entity. While it looks that apple is demanding quality it also appears there are a few bottle necks in getting applications through Apple's testing and to the end user.
| TUAW wrote: | They tell us that Apple is busy rejecting Applications from the App Store for grammar mistakes in onboard help files (not a joke) and for not presenting the user with the best playability options (also not a joke). Many of these frustrated developers tell us that some of their products have been waiting for review for four weeks and up and that their updates are getting caught in the gears. One wrote that his apps are getting poor reviews while fixes can't see the light of day.
|
I'm sure there is a way of taking the best of both models.
_________________
MCAD .Net , MCTS (Web, Windows) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
