Microsoft Working On Its Own App Store 195
CWmike writes "Microsoft is working on a software distribution scheme along the lines of Apple's iPhone App Store, CEO Steve Ballmer said yesterday at a developer's conference in Sydney, Australia. 'There's not much money being made, but the general concept of giving developers a way not only to get their code distributed, but to really get visibility for the code, is a good idea,' Ballmer said. Ballmer hinted that something similar would be coming soon from Microsoft. While he said Micrsoft was not ready to detail the works in progress, he said '... fear not, we're hard at work, and you'll see some of the benefits [of that] with some of the concepts, particularly Facebook's.'"
Break out the copy machines... (Score:2, Insightful)
This company is pathetic. Don't they every ever come up with an original idea?
Live Maps? (Score:4, Interesting)
I think that's an example of something they did better.. They ripped Google off and put better, more detailed satellite photos in the "birds-eye view" on their mapping site. It's a little chunky to use but the photos are amazing. Now when I shop for a house I go to live maps and instantly get a view of it from all sides from about ~50ft away. It puts Google Earth to shame, and although street view is even closer and more detailed, it covers a lot more area than street view.
Sure, MS copies ideas, but it only really HELPS the consumer in the long run. Even if it's not always "better" than the competition, it gives us more choices. I, for one, am looking forward to the new app store on my HTC Kaiser.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah sharepoint was so original, Microsoft even made a concept video of sharepoint way before anyone was dreaming of even thinking about this stuff: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8734787622017763097 [google.com]
Little understanding of a new model (Score:4, Interesting)
The money being made is in smaller chunks but the volume could be quite high. This combined could quite profitable for small, independent developers. Also from Apple's standpoint they are not in it to make large amounts of profit for themselves from the app store. Like the music and video divisions, it will probably generate a small profit. The app store is a tool to sell more devices. MS unfortunately only sees that they can't make much money off it because their model relies on OEMs buying their OS software and their mobile software which means they will have to compete in some cases with 3rd party developers.
Re: (Score:2)
The apple App store model has huge problems (aka. you cannot run app X because we don't want you too) I don't think customers really want a repeat of that. iPhone and iPod users use it because they don't have an option. However once a way that allows them to run apps outside of the app store that will not cause the iPhone to brick on the next update then the new method will probably get far more popular. As you can get apps that really make the iPhone useful. Flash, Java, ways to share network connections.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The apple App store model has huge problems (aka. you cannot run app X because we don't want you too) I don't think customers really want a repeat of that
I suspect you're wrong. Users want somewhere safe where they can get apps that do what they want and know that they won't get some malware. If that means that they may miss out on a few apps that Apple doesn't like then a lot of people will be willing to accept that.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but I'm not convinced that'll last. I mean the "visibility" you get from the App Store is only really possible because it's still quite small. Imagine if there was a million apps in the app store, the UI would rapidly become a hinderance rather than a help. Most apps would instantly vanish into obscurity with no way to advertise themselves, except via the web, word of mouth etc, in which case there's not much advantage over just selling your app on your website as is done today for WM software. App Sto
Correction (Score:2, Funny)
Really? (Score:5, Funny)
... fear not, we're hard at work...
Start fearing.
Let me guess... (Score:2, Funny)
If this works, (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Thats not the problem. Its the benefit (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If they have a built-in download-and-install system in Windows, that could greatly improve Windows security as well as greatly benefiting free/OSS software on Windows. . It disadvantages Linux but helps both Microsoft (re: security), and the user...
Re: (Score:2)
Let's say Microsoft indeed wises up and emulates the Linux package management idea. The users will then always have the latest security patches applied. Maybe for all installed programs. That would be a good thing, wouldn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
iTunes is overwhelmingly the most used media player, Safari for browsing, Photoshop for editing, etc. On the other hand on Windows computers, VLC or iTunes are the most popular media players, Firefox the browser (for anyone who knows much about computers), Photoshop or The GIMP for editing, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking down my dock, I have 11 Apple apps running and no Adobe ones. I have five others, three open source and two from Omni Group (you'll find those on a lot of Macs, since they were bundled by Apple for a long while). Two of the Apple apps are X11 and the terminal, and both of those are running non-Apple software, but probably not the kind that the average user would run. If you discount developer tools and X11/Terminal, I am only running seven Apple apps - only two more Apple apps than non-Apple apps
Re: (Score:2)
I use as little Apple software as possible, and as much software that runs on all important platforms as possible, so I can easily switch from Apple to somewhere else if I want to. I realize that I am quite unique in that regard though.
Re: (Score:2)
Perian, Growl, Skype, Smultron, Scrivener, Firefox, Opera, Thunderbird, Cyberduck, Flip4Mac, GimmeSomeTune, Coda, FreeDMG, Himmelbar and PixelMator are all vital tools and plugins on my systems. The first six of those are on a lot of Macs used by people I know.
Then there are the little neat ones I use occasionally, but they're still not made by Apple. I use XCode (with most of its extra programs), Terminal, the address book and Safari most of Apple's own software. I also use a ton of widgets, some of them m
Re: (Score:2)
"Well, on just about every Mac I've seen, from corporate computers, to those of artists to those used at home, just about all the used software is from Apple or Adobe, with the exception of Office. "
And just about every Windows computer I've seen in exactly the same settings is invariably dominated by software from MS and Abobe, i.e. MS Office and / or Adobe Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Visual Studio on dev. machines, SQL Server and Exchange Server on Windows servers, etc., etc. The only wide-scale excepti
App store not making money? pfft (Score:5, Interesting)
They are making PLENTY of money off the app store, far more than they expected. Ballmer's comments about "there's not much money being made" is simply his way of discounting Apples success and predicting his own failure.
Re:App store not making money? pfft (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it is as much about discounting Apple's success as it is minimizing the "me too" nature of Microsoft's business.
are MS Windows programs hard to find? (Score:3, Insightful)
So what is the motivation here. Apple has it's store to control content. I don't think MS wants to do that. Google has it's store to insure that content is available, provide more pages to host ads, and eventually make a little money on the side, when they begin charging, something I thought they were already doing, but I forgot about their always freaky business model. MS business models are always very straight forward.
So as best I can figure this is a case where someone else it making a bit of money in the computer business, MS is not getting it's cut, which is driving MS crazy. So they open a store, even though they have no experience in it and will not pay anyone who has experience, and then use their partnership arrangements to make others use it, maybe even building it into the next version os IE. Probably have to have to have and MSN account to use it as well.
The primary motive: (Score:2)
What have MS really got to show for the last two years or so? A string of failures: Zune, Vista, Yahoo...
MS need to show shareholders that they are still competing with the other players and are not just burning their cash. Apple and Google have app stores (running or in development). Therefore MS better have one too.
The MS Windows shareware model is a mess. (Score:2, Insightful)
There's nothing in Microsoft land that equates to what Apple has with its application store. Windows shareware developers have to do shareware, first of all, which is pretty bad. In the Apple store, Apple has it set up that consumers have to pay first and then get the application, and that Apple approves the products and lathers its brand on things makes it great. In Windows, you have 2000 web sites all cheesily affiliated with a handful of players, no consistent payment collection mechanism, loads of cra
The MS hate on Slashdot is hilarious (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You mis-spelled p tags.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The poster compared it to apt-get. Apt get allows for updates and upgrading as well as checking for dependencies. I repeat... how is an app store like a repository???
Never once has [iphone app store] supplied the source code for me.
How did the source code requirement suddenly crop up? It wasn't in GGP. Source is not necessary for an MS Windows app store/repo anyway. If this keeps my family members from downloading crap from stupidweatherbugspywareriddledsite.example.com , I think it's a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
An app store would theoretically allow free apps, as does the iPhone app store. How are they different?
A repository (In Linux practice at least) is one of many software libraries accessed by a package manager They don't all have to be run by the distro maker. So third parties are free to set up their own repository and link it into the package manager without needing the distro maker's approval.
An apps store may allow free apps, but a repository only asks permission from the user.
For example. If I make an iPhone app to search and buy from the Amazon music store, Apple are entitled to refuse to distribute the
Hey I get this in Linux already... (Score:2)
apt-get install _________
That s simplifying it of course, but apt and it's relatives were always one of the majors reasons I loved Linux. Unlike windows, I didn't have to hunt apps down on shady sites, download random EXEs, etc. Everything is in one relatively simple to use place. Add some way to process payments and you have a ready made AppStore.
One Word: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Finally they take security seriously, it seems (Score:2)
Finally they are making repositories of software so people have at least some chance to find out if it's malware or not.
Finally Microsoft might get a package manager and people could install software without having to type "programmname free download" into the next search engine, and probably getting malware with the first 10 links.
That is, unless Microsoft messes it up which they will probabaly do. My guess is that they will not open it to "free" software or the whole system will be horribly insecure. Prob
Kill pirated software (Score:2)
I think this is just a way to kill pirated software. What if in Windows 7, like the iPhone, you can only install software you got from the MS App store? It's also a nice way to keep those irritating OSS programs like FF and OO off of their lawn.
More MS Mindset here --- (Score:2)
Here's an example of how Ballmer views the world.
Despite acknowledging that WebKit's open-source nature is "interesting," Microsoft's chief executive elaborated on why he says the software giant is sticking--at least for now--with its Trident rendering engine for Internet Explorer.
"I think there will continue to be a lot of proprietary innovation by us, and other people, inside the browser itself," he said. "A company like ours needs to have (its own) rendering service. It is important that we have a browse
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering that Apple didn't invent any of the things you listed either, I don't see what your point is.
Re: (Score:2)
I am pretty sure that neither of them invented the mouse or the GUI.
Re:No supprise here (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC. Microsoft simply copied them after they saw how successful it was.
Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action. I'm sure their app store will do fine. At least as fine as the Zune....
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, but Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC. Microsoft simply copied them after they saw how successful it was.
Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action.
On the other hand it took Apple few decades to put second button and wheel (ok.. "orb") on their mouse and they managed to get it wrong still.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The way I see it is that someone somewhere innovates. PARC, Linus or whoever, it doesn't matter. It seems to be less and less likely with any big company.
Apple gets hold of the idea and makes something very neat and appealing with it. The only problem I ever have is that it is too expensive. I own an iPod but have never felt able to justify the cost of a 'Mac.
Microsoft takes the idea and makes something much cheaper. It looks cheap as well. It runs on my PC but is no more open than the Apple stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
"no more open?"
Darwin's source is out in the wild thanks to Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
"Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC"
On a purely historical note, Apple licensed the mouse patent from SRI (where Doug Englebart, its inventor, worked), not PARC, although the fact that they bothered to do so reinforces your point about Apple actually having licensed many of the technologies they used in the Lisa and early Macs rather than simply plagiarising them.
Re: (Score:2)
How are you defining "Desktop Database"? This feels squicky to me. Your answer should be enlightening.
I'll get to the rest of your message later, after I've done some research.
Re: (Score:2)
uhhh, you apparently have never used Eclipse with Java.
It puts Visual Studio to shame. In fact, a lot of the new stuff Visual Studio has, was implemented as a direct result of Eclipse. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple invented the iPod as much as Microsoft invented the Zune. However, NEITHER of them invented the mp3 player, portable media player, etc. Even the mp3 player with a touchscreen was nothing new when Apple announced the "innovation"!
If you don't believe me check out Archos. They had touch screens + WIFI WAY before apple did.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'm pretty sure Apple invented the iPod.
That was Kane Kramer. http://gizmodo.com/5046463/apple-admits-british-man-invented-ipod-in-1979-uses-him-to-win-patent-lawsuit [gizmodo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Uh! I was wondering when someone would point that out.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure the mouse came from Xerox PARC.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No supprise here (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure the mouse came from Xerox PARC.
No, Doug Englebart invented it at SRI.
-jcr
I met him once a couple years ago. Really old (he's passed now) but he had a pretty interesting story. The part that really gets me is he never made a penny from inventing the mouse, aside from his salary at the company. He should have been made rich though!
-Taylor
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What few realize is that is that the mouse was preceded by the development of cheese as a user input device. If I recall correctly, this was an Al Gore invention which, unfortunately for him, didn't succeed to the same level as his better known invention - the internet.
Sadly, Al could not figure out an appropriate application of a block of cheese to a User Interface. Xerox PARC quickly picked up the ball and drew the obvious conclusion.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:monkey see monkey do (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, that division is currently making money [joystiq.com].
As a game developer, I'd hate to see MS shut down their Xbox division. They basically took some great developers, gave them a real budget, and said "do what you want." So far MS corporate has avoided messing with the console games division, keeping them from becoming another MS Bob.
On consoles, Microsoft is basically responsible for: Digital game sales, digital movie rentals, add-on downloads, HDD's on consoles, cross-title friends lists, and the general concept of a cross-title global experience. While they're also responsible for the most godawfully painful log-in/log-out scenarios of any console manufacturer, they did a lot of things right and really pushed Sony and Nintendo kicking and screaming into an online world.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:monkey see monkey do (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
MS should be sticking to the knitting, and paying dividends. Xbox, online services and Zune are all distractions that will never be worth the time and money spent on them.
-jcr
Why would they shut down a profitable division, and one that they predict will continue to be profitable in the near future? How would shutting this division down be more profitable? Revenue doesn't work the way you seem to think it does. The only thing such a move would do would be to give them immediate liquidity, which would be very stupid in this current market. I've been thinking about this, and I can't think of any occasion where this would actually get them a profit, not to mention the fact that they
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd hate to see MS shut down their Xbox division. They basically took some great developers, gave them a real budget, and said "do what you want."
That explains a lot. Aside from the hardware problems, the XBox is one of the less flawed consoles. Now if only there'd put this much effort into all the other stuff they do...
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Yes if you ignore the multibillion dollar cost of the actual console which has extremely high failure rates.
Thats quite a big thing to ignore you know. :P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is from a gamer point of view, so, take it for what it's worth(eg: xbox fanboys complaining about the development difficulty when they've never even seen an IDE).
No built in harddrive? No HDDVD/BluRay drive? Godawful game pads? No built in WiFi? ADVERTISING EVERYFUCKING WHERE!? (When the new Xbox360 dashboard drops and it's not trying to sell me Axe body spray when I'm pulling out the DVD for something else, I'll drop this fucking point. Nothing pisses me off like selling products to stinky peopl
Re: (Score:2)
Are you guys talking about the XBox *360*!? I'd wish you'd said! I don't have one of those and couldn't possibly comment.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm saying the 360 sucks. I have like, a gajillion USB pen drives that are easily bigger than half a gig that I can buy from any store around me and yet I can't use it for save games or downloadable content? I have to buy a proprietary device? The same thing is true for the HDD, WiFi, headset, and the list goes on with peripherals.
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad the console isn't actually worth a damn. Between a DVD-only drive, locked down interface, limited support for USB devices, and optional harddrive, it's hard to imagine that the thing's worth developing for.
Re: (Score:2)
it's not that I stuck with the PS3 because I "thought it would win." I bought a PS3 because I wanted to play Metal Gear Solid 4. I haven't had the urge to buy a 360 because there just aren't many games on it I really am dying to play save Guilty Gear Overture or maybe Ace Combat 6.
(Sorry, Gamer doesn't always mean frothing at the mouth Halo retard, WoW playing shut in, or Starcraft loony. Sometimes, some gamers want to play all of those annoying games on the shelf that aren't FPSes, MMOs, or Rock Band/GH
Re: (Score:2)
MS's problem is that they're fixated on competition, not customers.
Boy, you said it, Chewie. Microsoft just wants to sell you the sizzle off the steak.
Re: (Score:2)
Micrsoft
Good Catch. Micrsoft wants you to burn up in the Earth's atmosphere if you don't use their sprockets.
Re:monkey see monkey do (Score:4, Insightful)
i actually think some of the Zune's WiFi features are pretty innovative. being able to share music/photos/images directly with other wireless devices is definitely a neat feature (though it'd be neater if more devices supported it). likewise with by able to broadcast a wireless profile to indicate what you're listening to.
frankly, i think the major PMP manufacturers should get together and create a standardized protocol for sharing files across portable media players. Microsoft kinda ruined a great concept by crippling it with DRM. they also missed a great opportunity by not publishing their protocol as an open standard. with the iPod still lacking WiFi capabilities, if Microsoft had made wireless file sharing a popular open standard by working with companies like Sony, Creative, Archos and even SmartPhone manufacturers, they could have made it a huge selling point over the iPod. but the Zune by itself isn't popular enough to make their file sharing feature anything more than a passing novelty. the whole "welcome to the social" campaign is kinda silly when you're the only one in the social.
however, i still look forward to the day when these features become standard on all portable media devices. it'd be cool to sit down on a train and see that there's a person across the room that likes the same music/movies/tv shows/games as you do and be able to swap music/videos/frags/etc. with them.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll admit that the Zune has some pretty nice features that I wish I had in my iPhone, but I'm not willing to give up what I have in my iPhone for some cool features I'll probably never use.
Re: (Score:2)
which is why i think an open standard would be preferable for something like this. without widespread adoption, p2p (portable to portable) features aren't going to be very useful.
if PMP manufacturers all adopted an open standard for wireless file sharing & user profiles (the last 10 tracks you listened to, the games you have on your system, etc.) then i imagine lots of people would be using those features. open standards are beneficial to consumers because they promote interoperability. you wouldn't hav
Re: (Score:2)
Since when did MSFT support open standards? Also did you know that the wifi features of a zune are useless? cool in concept but MSFT used their own stupidity and limited all songs shared by such a method to three days. even music that you recorded yourself and wanted them to have a copy of.
Zune like most MSFT products takes a good idea and implements it poorly, with no concern for the end user who actually wants that feature.
Re: (Score:2)
The ipod touch has wifi...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
but he should shut down his unprofitable ego-trip ventures like the Zune and the Xbox
The Xbox division is profitable, and it's been a long time coming. Unlike other parts of Microsoft, the Xbox division truly has an innovative product that is continually being improved in creative ways that benefit the user. The same can't really be said for Windows...
The Zune is also a very impressive piece of technology. Having played with one (and speaking as a loyal Mac user) I have to say it rips the hell out of the iPod classic's UI.
You've listed the two products that MS should not shut down under any
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: Obscure references FTW! (Score:2)
However, I did by being thorough enough to look them up as I see them!
Lit for Nerds, Stuff that Matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm, people like the XBox more than Vista?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually this is going past what Apple has done.
Microsoft is going to extend this to PCs and not just their mobile product.
I have been saying that one of the Linux distros should have done this a long time ago.
Click n run wasn't a bad idea it was just tied to a not so good distro.
This is actually a good idea and a bad thing that say Red Hat, Ubuntu, or Suse didn't do first.
Re:monkey see monkey do (Score:5, Informative)
You do realize people have been buying music and software from Microsoft Online services for over 7 years right?
Really? MSN Music launched in 2004, a year after the iTunes Music Store (2003), and it is the first online music store from Microsoft that I can find any references to. I'm aware that Microsoft has had an online software store for a few years, although I've yet to encounter anyone who's bought anything from it (and any non-geeks who are even aware of its existence).
Re:monkey see monkey do (Score:4, Interesting)
your point would be...
Originally Microsoft started out selling music store servers and DRM to Walmart, Yahoo, etc. rather than sell music themselves. Then they went thru a few changes in DRM schemes selling multiple types to multiple people. Then Plays for (not) Sure, then because they promised not to compete in the "one music file" market they created a new type ZUNE that works on Live. Only in the last iteration have they actually mattered compared to Apple. Ironically Live ties music to Zune and Xbox 360 even tighter than Apple ties to iPod and Apple TV.
They have had a "product store" tied to windows since at least ME.. and it was a pale attempt to sell you regular software stuff in a retail box and mail it, a few things might be downloadable now. All I remember is that it never had anything interesting and never updated... ever. Microsoft would have made a killing with online buying of small apps integrated into their website that automatically installed into windows in the "preferred" method, but they constantly try to hijack ISV sales so nobody would touch such a store for Windows because they'd block you out.. a la Defender, ForeFront..etc. A store might work for CE devices, but those are so varied and Microsoft allows carriers to lock out various features so the apps wouldn't be "WinMo" apps they'd have to be "AT&T WinMo" and "Verison WinMo" and "TMobile..." Apple's 5 year deal bought them the kind of control over their devices to make the system really shine. Microsoft would be violating anti-trust to even ask for such a thing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
your point would be...
Just what you took time to demonstrate in your post, Microsoft was doing all of this crap before Apple.
Therefore, the comment "Monkey see, Monkey do", would better be suited at an attack at Apple, as they are the 'me too' once again. Of course their fanbois wouldn't know this, and probably still think they invented everything, as long as Apple marketing tries to make people believe it.
And yes Apple INTENTIONALLY tries to create this perception. When they run ads about the first 64bit
linux package management (Score:4, Interesting)
Probably something like Linux package managers, only you have to pay for the privilege of a less functional version.
Get current (Score:3, Interesting)
And, on Windows it will probably actually WORK.
I know you're a whiny astroturfing AC troll, but I can't let this pass.
If Microsoft OS software had a feature that worked like GNU/linux's software repositories, that would be a huge benefit for the end user and a major selling point. Install any of many thousands of apps in every category for free just by clicking on it? Free apps so plentiful they require their own search engine? Automatic dependency resolution? Integrated updates for all apps in one system? Slam dunk. There's even a spot for it in
Re: (Score:2)
Every commercial software vendor would port to GNU/Linux the very next week,
Why would they (commercial vendors) do that?
They can still sell their products.
Also, freeware/shareware vetted by an MS community could also go in the MS repository as well as 'pay for' software.
Imaging this: Get you CC debited for Norton's Premium HyperSmart All-In-One Global Professional Internet Security with Anti-Virus + AntiMalware + AntiRogue + AntiSpam download all from a central place!
Users and developers will flock to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Am I the only one who reads this and thinks that even with microsoft strictly controlling this, this is a possible spawning ground for malware?
Re: (Score:2)
Why doesn't somebody make this? Either as an open-source effort or as an aftermarket add-on to Windows?
More better!!! (Score:2)
I prefer "Runs for sure!" It has that link to their DRM efforts that foretells the conclusion, without ruining the ending for the neophyte.