For Microsoft, the traditional desktop is old news. It’s on its way out, it’s legacy, and the harder they claim the desktop has equal rights, the sillier it becomes. With companies, words are meaningless, it’s actions that matter, and here Microsoft’s actions tell the real story. The company has announced the product line-up for Visual Studio 11, and the free Express can no longer be used to create desktop applications. Message is clear.
Other than the structure of Windows 8 itself – focus on Metro, desktop as an isolated application – this is probably the biggest plain clue yet that yes, people, the desktop is windows 8’s Classic. It’s there now because Windows 8 is a transitory release, and like the first versions of Mac OS X, users will still need the ‘old’ applications. Metro is the future, and the only thing Microsoft really cares about.
The product line up for Visual Studio 11 confirms this. Like before, the line up is split between Visual Studio Express editions, which are free, and Visual Studio Professional and Ultimate editions, which are not. Starting with Visual Studio 11, the free Express editions can no longer be used to develop desktop applications. In order to write desktop applications, you’re going to need to move to one of the paid editions, starting at $499 retail, or $1199 (renewal $799 per year) if you want an MSDN subscription with your purchase.
The message is clear: investing in the desktop is pointless. Microsoft wants to push people towards developing for Metro, abandoning the desktop in the process. Normally, I would applaud such a move (Microsoft has been notoriously bad at getting developers to use new stuff), but in the case of Metro, the situation is different. Metro and its applications are effectively toys compared to traditional desktop applications, so pushing developers towards something that is barely 25% as powerful and functional as what it is supposed to replace doesn’t look like a good idea.
It’s a shame really. Metro is really fun. Just not for people who do more than check the weather and read Twitter.
If one can’t develop applications with those tools, what is their use? Oh you can do “Metro” apps. ROFL
Express Editions are for hobby and education use only. They aren’t supposed to be “hardcore coding suites”.
How does that preclude developers wanting to use them for non-Metro applications?
Because they are learning Environments, that is it.
One does not need WinForm, WPF and all the other gumpth to do some simple app programming.
If you want to develop non-metro application there is the older VS Express Editions (you can still download the old versions) or use a different framework of your choice.
Edited 2012-05-21 22:30 UTC
Way to miss the point. This is not about other options, this is about what is signals: the end of the desktop, even though Metro is virtually useless.
This gets tiresome …
I just responded to both guys questions/commends, I really didn’t care much for your analysis.
…………….
Anyway. Since you pointed me out on it ….
I don’t doubt that Microsoft don’t want people to learn things like WinForms and all the other gumpth. It is shit, it is old … it is very 1990s way of developing.
I am a proper microsofty and I don’t care.
But I really don’t think a lot of people want to learn those tools either.
ASP.NET MVC is the cool kid in town (in the Microsoft World) and tbh most of the tools they are innovating on are for the ASP.NET web stack not the Windows stack.
The fact that most Metro applications can be HTML5 + JS … seems to be obvious that they want new developers to use this.
This isn’t the death knell of the classic desktop (well the part of it that is still there and I find perfectly functional as a VS11 Ultimate Beta Tester at my company, mainly to see if we can upgrade to 4.5 … we can’t).
The face is Thom that people don’t want to use the older techs like WinForms, MFC and all the other crap … it is just a bit shit tbh.
There are still plenty of .NET shops that are heavily invested in the older technologies such as WinForm, MFC etc and I don’t think support for that will end until a good few years.
Anyway as you happen to know “more operating system in you little finger” than I do, I am sure you will be able to find one that has a Windowing tiling system to meet your needs.
Gnome 2 I have heard is very similar to Windows 95.
http://piestar.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/lucid_vs_windows.png
Trolololo.
Edited 2012-05-21 23:17 UTC
Before you start to accuse people of voting you down because “haters gonna hate“, let me point out the rubbish you’ve posted:
old != shit
The very fact that cascading windows has survived this long is because it make a lot of sense for desktops.
Redefining the desktop paradigm to suit tablets doesn’t make any more sense than having a start menu and cascading windows on smart phones.
You may be content writing websites, but most application developers are not.
That’s your opinion. Personally I think HTML with embedded JS is more than just a bit shit for building modern interactive websites. The thought of having to build stand alone applications with this technology horrifies me.
Well obviously, otherwise MS would lose a lucrative gaming market as well as the creative professionals that prefer PCs to Macs.
I’m sure Sony and Apple wouldn’t mind though
It’s ironic you make such a condescending comment about Thom’s lack of OS knowledge while making two fundamental faults in the same sentence:
1/ You can have a tiling window manager and still support WinForms (et al). It’s not an either / or argument.
2/ For most people a tiling window manager is completely inappropriate for the desktop. So switching from Metro to xyz still wouldn’t be an improvement on the existing explorer.exe shell.
If you had even the slightest idea what you were talking about, you’d realise how idiotic that statement is.
Most people bitch about GNOME 2.x being an Mac OS knock off and you’re comparing it to Windows. Just lol.
Edited 2012-05-22 09:43 UTC
When it comes to WinForms way of programming, it is very dated (very similar to Java Swing which is from the 90s).
There are better options now with .NET (such as XAML), we shouldn’t be encouraging people to use older techniques when they are better ones.
The classic desktop isn’t going away, just maybe WinForms.
It isn’t, I been running Windows 8 now for quite a while and I disagree totally. Also Microsoft are still making improvements to the “classic” desktop such as
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/05/21/enhancing-windows-8-f…
Dual Taskbar etc. They wouldn’t be introducing these things if it was getting “killed”.
That wasn’t what I was talking about. People are comparing the Express Edition (which is cut down a little to much IMO) to the full Visual Studio Suite.
It is for learning the principles of the framework and the languages. The applications you are likely to create are small and won’t have a lot of functionality … similar to those that maybe used with Metro interface.
If you use JS libraries and use sensible design patterns like MV-VM (knockout.js) for JS/Ajax/Markup generation and use a Server side MVC framework such as RoR, ASP.NET MVC it isn’t that painful … in fact it is fun.
It is painful if you try to custom create everything or hack it which is what most people inexperienced with Development may do.
It depends what you like doing. But nevertheless Microsoft are pushing these platforms quite hard now.
The point is that the Express version of the product is not aimed at these developers. Express is for new developers to learn the “recommended” technologies.
The sort of application you would be making with Express would be metro (if downloading the desktop version) or it would be a blog or something using the Web Express edition.
You cannot make significantly complex applications (without it being a very painful experience) with Express because some of the more advanced features such as intellitrace just aren’t included.
I would have thought this is obvious intent. That is why I didn’t care for the analysis because it wasn’t considering what sort of application one would make (as I alluded to earlier in this comment).
Well most people are wrong, including you. Gnome 2 can be easily re-jigged to make it work like Window XP/2000 (in fact Suse 9.2 actually shipped with this setup because business clients were used to using Windows 2000/XP).
The full argument is posted here
http://piestar.net/2010/05/01/ubuntu-10-04-lipstick-lynx/
MacOSX doesn’t have a global Taskbar (showing open windows) like Windows, Gnome2 and XFCE (can have). The task bar is application centric, i.e. it shows the menu bar for the application.
Fundamentally I think Gnome2 is more like the classic Windows 95-XP interface.
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/01/dock-and-wind…
Edited 2012-05-22 13:18 UTC
I don’t think we’re ever going to agree on the HTML apps vs native Win PE debate, so I’m not even going to bother arguing further on that topic
Any nearly any DE can be rejigged to look like another OS (Windows included). We’re talking default set up and GNOME’s default set up is nothing like Windows. the fact that you’ve stumbled upon one Linux distro (and one that’s nearly a decade old now) which ships a non-default install doesn’t change my point. In fact SuSE has a long history of shipping non-vanilla desktop environments. But obviously you knew all this already
You can have GNOME rejigged not to have a global taskbar and instead have a dock. In fact that’s a popular customisation. So by your earlier reckoning, GNOME is exactly like OS X.
Seriously though – there’s more to user interface similarity than a taskbar alone. In fact remove that from GNOME (as many users do) and you’re left with something a lot more alien than the explorer.exe shell in Windows.
Edited 2012-05-22 14:27 UTC
However the setup for Gnome 2 was normally as follows.
http://library.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/2.6/figures/nautilus-sp…
* 1 Bar at the top with an “Applications Menu”
* 1 Bar at the bottom with a task bar.
Move the application menu and the clock down the bottom and you have Windows 2000/XP like interface. The Windows behave more or less the same and the task bar is the same layout.
I have done some googling because it has been literally years since I have used Gnome and opted to use XFCE instead, and I couldn’t find any instruction to make Gnome work like a Mac without using third party plugins.
All I could find without digging through links was this
http://voices.yahoo.com/the-problems-making-ubuntu-like-mac-os-x-56…
This guy admits it requires a lot of hacks and using third party plugins.
You’ve not looked hard enough. There’s hundreds of OS X-inspired themes, docks and so forth.
As I said before, most people comment on GNOME-based distros about how they’re “copying Apple” – not MS.
But then obviously I’m wrong because you’re an expert on every OS and DE – even ones you’ve admitted to not using in years – where as I’m just an inexperienced full time Linux user and UNIX administrator.
Anyway, I think this whole argument is stupid because regardless of whether you see more OS X or Win95 in GNOME2 – it is it’s own DE and not a direct knock off. the fact that it shares certain similarities just further proves my point that cascading windows are a saner approach for desktop interfaces than Metro – else the top Linux DE’s would be less like KDE / GNOME and more like DWM et al.
Edited 2012-05-23 09:23 UTC
SERIOUSLY??? … it may look like OSX, but it still WORKS like Gnome/Windows fundamentally.
A third party widget is not part of “Gnome 2” … it is a third party widget … it like saying that Windows can be made to work differently if I don’t use the explorer shell (e.g. LiteStep).
I can make Windows XP look like OSX … however the Windows Management is still Windows XP.
Some other examples so you might understand …
I can make Winamp look like iTunes … doesn’t make it work like iTunes.
I can dress like Lady Gaga, it doesn’t make me Lady Gaga.
I can put on a pair of boxing gloves, but it doesn’t make me a boxer.
I honestly dunno Trolling or Stupid.
Edited 2012-05-23 10:45 UTC
Your point is absurd because all desktop environments fundamentally work the same. Nearly every single one will have a taskbar, dock or some kind of menu driven interface to launch and manage floating windows. Be that OS/2, Windows, OS X, KDE, GNOME, AmigaOS, BeOS, and so on. They all fundamentally work the same.
All you are doing is focusing on one arbitrary launcher and saying that’s the defining element of a desktop environment.
I know, I made that point when YOU originally exampled non-vanilla installs as the basis of your argument. So quit moving goal posts to suit your biased opinion.
The window management will be nearly identical to any desktop environment for the reasons I listed above. OS X doesn’t magically handle a new type of window that MS Windows does – it’s all floating windows managed by a horizontal launcher at the bottom of the screen. Funny enough more desktop environments work on the same basis (or similar).
You’re moving goal posts again as you’re now talking about the core mechanics rather than what the users would interact with.
You were originally talking about how GNOME looks like Win95 and now you’re talking about the core mechanics behind the interface.
GNOME2 mechanics actually functions nothing like Windows as every aspect of GNOME2 is configurable. Panels can be added, replaced, removed and changing in nearly any imaginable way. Win95 is just explorer.exe with a user changeable colour theme.
I definitely you’re are trolling given every argument you’ve given has either been based on code nearly a decade old, a bespoke set up or contradictory to a previous argument.
I think if we were to be really sane about this discussion (sensible discussions on the internet? lol) then you’d say GNOME can look and behave like either Windows or OS X depending on the users configuration, but by default it looks and behaves like GNOME.
However if you really want to be generalised as say it’s a “bit like” (as you have done), then it’s just a generic desktop environment. A little bit like Windows, a little bit like OS X a little bit like AmigaOS, a little bit like every other DE. Because Desktop environments rarely stray too far from that standard formula.
Edited 2012-05-23 13:02 UTC
TBH,
I am f–king bored of this. OSX Window management works fundamentally differently than Windows Classic.
Gnome 2 on its own works pretty much like Windows, that is a f–king fact.
If we take your argument to the extreme it comes down to … “they are all a really bit like the original Xerox idea therefore they are all the same.”
I am out, I am honestly fed up of arguing with someone who calls me an idiot and doesn’t understand that windows management is fundamentally different between the two most used User Interfaces in the world.
Edited 2012-05-23 13:30 UTC
I never called you an idiot – in fact it was you who keep making the condescending claims on ones intellegence (both towards me and towards Thom).
I just said you cannot single out one arbitrary function of GNOME2 and state that makes it the same as Windows, which it does not.
Edited 2012-05-23 14:22 UTC
BYE!!
When you close a program with the “x” in Gnome and Windows … it actually closes the program. In OSX it does not close the program.
oh wow, it’s like OS X is something entirely unique… that is apart from the other title bar buttons that behave the same as Windows and GNOME.
Also, GNOME title bar buttons are definable by design. It just defaults to Window’s standard. It can, however, be configured to behave the same as OS X (and without installing 3rd party plug ins).
The fact is, GNOME can look and behave pretty much like any DE if you can be bothered to configure it
Edited 2012-05-23 16:43 UTC
No they don’t behave the same.
If you press close on a Gnome2 or Windows title bar … it closes the application unless it minimizes to tray (my pet personal peeve).
As I keep on saying and you keep on ignoring the taskbar in MacOSX is contextual to the application … this is entirely different from Gnome 2 and Windows XP, where the taskbar shows all the Windows that are open. It is a fundamental difference in which Windows are handled … I find using MacOSX very difficult to use because I am used to “Windows XP” like interfaces.
Which is why I linked a howto to make Gnome work like a mac and it relied heavily on docky and Gnome-Do.
Edited 2012-05-23 17:09 UTC
I repeat: the other title bar buttons do behave the same and GNOME is fully customisable so you can choose which buttons to show and how they behave (without installing plugins).
I don’t keep ignoring that. What I keep saying is the taskbar isn’t the only user interface in a desktop environment. What you’re doing is staring so closely at one arbitrary widget that you’re missing the whole of the rest of the GUI. Things like system application menus, application icons sitting in the top right of the screen rather than on the taskbar / dock. The minimal design of system forms, and so on.
I wont deny that GNOME2 shares some similarities, but then every desktop shares some similarities with every other desktop environment (a point you’ve ignored).
Thus arguing about the taskbar alone (as you have done) to make the comparison is just silly.
tl;dr: all you’re doing is focusing on one sole point to make this claim and ignoring every single argument that contradicts your original claim.
I wouldn’t say having a dock as opposed to task bar is that significant when you actually look at the fundamental usages for both interfaces: Both have the ability to minimize / restore windows. Both can be used as a launcher too (albeit on pre-7 Windows you use embedded short cuts). And both are used to manage floating windows. The rest is just themeing. (square buttons rather than floating icons that bounce, etc)
You keep over playing the significance of insignificant features – some of which are nothing more than just a theme that can be hot-swapped with ease.
And as I said before, there are several ways to make GNOME look and feel more like OS X. You can remove the maximize button and change the X to minimize. You can set application menus to appear in global menu at the top of the screen and you can even configure GNOMEs taskbar to behave more like a dock without having to install a dock.
The only reason people have written custom dock solutions is because otherwise GNOMEs launcher would look a little more like the Win7 taskbar (ie square buttons) – but functionality wise it can behave just like OS X’s dock without any 3rd party add ons. However 3rd party add ons are prettier so people tend to prefer them and thus more guides are written using said add ons.
Furthermore, your whole argument seems to be based on using SuSE a decade ago – things have moved on since then.
Edited 2012-05-24 10:34 UTC
http://i.imgur.com/5Irgt.png
Gnome 2.32, if you move those elements onto the bottom bar you have the Windows 2000/XP interface.
I honestly don’t care whether you can piss around with GConf settings or what have you to make it “work differently” … out of the box it is the Windows Interface.
Edited 2012-05-24 11:14 UTC
So you’re allowed to change the config (moving panel locations, putting the sys-tray and system menu on the task bar, etc) but I’m not?
f–king hypocrite.
Also by your reckoning then nearly every DE is a windows interface (BeOS, Haiku, OS/2, XFCE, AmigaOS, CDE ….need i go on?). Some of which pre-date Win95 – but obviously they still copied Microsoft too *rolleyes*.
http://www.arcsite.de/hp/dapicture/bilder/screen1uk.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/AmigaOS_4.1_Update_2….
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ae/BeOS_Desktop.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4b/DECwindows-openvms-v7…
http://www.teknidermy.com/issue/6/images/hoverdesk.QNX.png
So I repeat: a task bar doesn’t automatically make something “like Windows”.
Or better yet, why don’t you just crawl back to whatever cave zealots like you worship in, and let everyone else use their preferred DE without your prejudice?
(I swear to god its like chatting to a Mac-fanboy who swears blind that Apple invented every technology)
Edited 2012-05-24 11:39 UTC
Drag and Drop is hardly “configuration”.
Even without moving those elements, it still behaves exactly like Win 2000/XP.
http://i.imgur.com/6rZB8.jpg
Oh look, I have “configured” it to work like a mac.
You can’t drag and drop the panel like in Windows. You have to go into the panel settings.
Which is yet more proof about how functionally (as you put it) they are different
Aside the fact that it doesn’t for all the reasons I’ve given previously and you have conveniently ignored and for the reasons above.
You really do like pressing the same tired point even when every bit of evidence proves you wrong
troll
Okay so a few comments ago you were arguing that most windowing environments have common features so Mac and Windows isn’t that different.
Then you say because you can drag panels about (never mind that Window management and how the basic UI works is exactly like Windows) … it is suddenly totally different.
As I said before … you are basically saying the Gnome is the same as Mac because it uses the WIMP paradigm.
“troll” …
You basically said earlier that most people think Gnome works more like a mac, (probably because it has a top bar … that seems to be your reasoning as well) … Thus the screenshot 😉
If I was trolling you I would probably try less to make sense.
Edited 2012-05-24 13:18 UTC
They’re not that different from the grand scheme of things. They’re all WIMP driven interfaces with overlapping windows. Compared to Linux tiling WMs, Metro, iOS, Android, WebOS and so on, OS X, explorer.exe shell and GNOME are all just variations on a theme.
Let’s not forget that this thread is (or at least originally was) about the comparison of Metro to explorer.exe – so by my comments are accurate given that context.
You are the one who is constantly switching context, picking arbitrary widgets as yardsticks and flittering between the acceptance of customisation and vanilla config to suit your needs.
I never said they were “totally different”. Once again you’ve misquoted me. I said they were functionally different – which they are.
You keep talking about the specifics of the interface (eg difference between close and background on GNOME vs Win vs OS X) so I’m arguing the same point as you by proving that when you look at the specifics of your chosen widget, that they do in fact behave differently. I will concede it’s an extreme and silly example, but you started us off down this road with your extreme and silly example. So suck it up or stop making stupid arguments.
However the reason I raised the lack of drag and drop was also to make a point that putting the task bar at the bottom is technically a configuration setting and thus just the same as the configuration points I was making (and which you dismissed). And thus proving your hypocrisy – again.
I said similar – not the same. Is this misquote #4 or #5? I’m starting to lose track now
Are you retarded or just incapable of following a conversation? This is the 3rd time in that post alone that you’ve misquoted me.
In fact your post wasn’t just technically wrong, it also missed the whole point of everything I’ve been saying!
I have repeatedly stated the irrelevance of using the task bar as the sole gauge of DE similarity as nearly every desktop has a task bar or similar (as proven by the screenshots I posts – some of which predate Win95).
In fact I’ve also already told you that my original comment wasn’t specifically about OS X but actually as much about OS 9 and below too.
So, for the love of God, please this bullshit about “well you said xyz” when we both know I had not as you’re just coming across as a simpleton now.
The wording of that would imply you’re not trying to make sense now – which would correlate with the rubbish you’ve posted (as proven by the countless misquotes I’ve debunked and contradicting arguments you’ve made)
Yes it is me who is clearly deluded.</sarcasm>
and I am out.
Yeah, because being deluded means looking at the big picture and making a global comparison across every WM and DEs rather than focusing on one minuscule feature and laying claim based on that then ignoring every piece of evidence provided that counters that argument….
I’ve been more than reasonable with my arguments in that I’ve said all DE’s share common usability features. They’re all just variations on a WIMP theme. I’ve also said that when you start looking at the specifics, they all behave differently (maybe not always significantly – but certainly not identical).
I’ve frequently said that GNOME behaves like GNOME. OS X like OS X and Windows like Windows.
But obviously a reasoned and rational option is typically associated with people who are deluded.
And for the record, I hadn’t actually called you deluded (not in so many words anyway), but I think that’s actually a good description of your arguments this week.
Good, I was getting tired of reading claims to comments I had never made and then seeing them used to disprove my position (which, at times, you had completely made up as well).
But obviously I was the deluded one
Edited 2012-05-24 14:56 UTC
At the end of the day you just didn’t want to be wrong.
Even when given a screenshot that clearly shows the obvious similarities (there were quite a few).
Have a nice life feeling like you are always in the right.
Neither do you otherwise you’d have given up long before now. So don’t even bother playing the superiority card when you’re just as argumentative as I am.
Yesterday you said theming is not the same as functionality and kept making the point about how you’re discussing functionality – and today you’re talking about appearance.
Once again your hypocrisy shines through.
Also, you provided one screen shot and I refuted it with 4 times as many screen shots – proving that task bars existed before Win95 and are in fact a common feature across nearly all desktop OSs. Thus cannot be used as a sole measure for commonality between desktops. A point you keep ignoring – and I suspect that’s because you know it disproves your silly claim.
I am right about this one because, unlike you, I have actually used all of the platforms we’re discussing. So I actually do know what I’m talking about.
I’m also not focusing on one specific widget to make an larger sweeping statement – again unlike you.
Normally I would say “lets agree to disagree” but in this instance you’ve been totally unreasonable with your claims and ignorant to boot (as proven by the number of statements you’ve made that I’ve subsequently debunked – the decade old non vanilla examples, the non-existent drag and drop feature, the countless misquotes, the numerous screenshots showing prior art to Win95, do i need to go on?)
Your original argument was absurd and you’ve failed to provide anything concrete to back that up aside “it uses a task bar like nearly every other desktop environment“.
Yet rather than admit when you’ve been proven wrong, you continue the argument for 2 more days, redefinition the parameters of your statement every other post, lying about points I’ve never made and completely ignoring the points that I have made. and then you top it all off by calling ME deluded! lol
I’ve come to expect better from you during my long stay on this site, but this week your arguments have been nothing short of retarded.
Edited 2012-05-25 08:30 UTC
Look like a lot of the asspie’s on this site.
If at any point you disagree with anyone, on the “popularly held opinion” … you will have people fight you tooth and nail over simple fact.
Tbh I dragged this out as long as I did because you were “white-knighting”.
I’m sorry but I’m not sure I understand what you’re trying to say. So please correct me if I’ve missed your point
I’m not defending GNOME because it’s popular or I like it. I defended it because i believed you to be wrong. While you’re correct that popular opinions can be wrong, sometimes those opinions reach a general consensus because it’s actually the correct logical conclusion. So to dismiss an opinion based solely on it’s popularity and without listening to the evidence presented is just odd.
However I’ll give you a bit of background about myself to prove I don’t just follow the crowds: I like GNOME. Never have. I don’t really like OS X’s interface much either. I actually like the layout of Windows and thus I much prefer KDE.
In fact – and perhaps ironically(?) – if you’d said KDE is a copy of Windows – then I’d have agreed. At times it feels like KDE is basically taking all the good bits of Aero and the explorer.exe shell and incorporating it as their own.
But KDE3/4 and GNOME2 are very much different interpretations of the classic WIMP – just as Windows and Mac OS 9 / OS X are. They all share common characteristics but when you boil the environment down to it’s raw behaviour (as you like to in this discussion) KDE and GNOME are very much step-brothers rather than relatives (though it’s fair to say it’s not always been this way as GNOME1 and KDE2 were very similar from what I recall).
So I wasn’t defending GNOME due to some misguided fanboy / gang mentality – i defended GNOME because I believed your argument to be outdated and misplaced.
Edited 2012-05-25 10:55 UTC
Use a Mac and get back to me whether you think it works like Gnome 2.x or not. That all I got to say on this now.
I do use macs. I’d already told you this. And I’ve never said GNOME works like OS X. I actually think it’s got more akin to OS 9 (again, not saying it’s the same).
The point I had always made was that GNOME is also nothing like Windows. It’s as different from Windows as it is from OS X. It is it’s own DE and not a carbon copy of any other.
I have to ask, are you f–king retarded? Because I’ve made these points about a dozen times now and you’re still coming back to the wrong conclusions.
Edited 2012-05-25 16:35 UTC
I had a iBook sine 2004-2008.
Mac OSX does not work like Gnome.
lol now you’re just trolling :p
No, I had an iBook from 2004 to 2008 … until I had an over heating problem.
Not that part :p
Well, you are both right, IMHO.
Visual studio express is not for real work. ( The first version of it I used, would flash a ” created with VS Starter Edition” pop up ever minute or two of using the compiled program).
But, yes, they do want to kill the desktop eventually, just not now. They haven’t figured out how to do everything in the metro paradigm.
Calling winforms old is funny and reminds me of the old .Net architect magazine, where each issue had articles with Microsoft buzzwords and technologies no one every used,showing what MS technologies you should use today, and what you should use for tomorrow, because everyone always wants to redesign their internal networks and business apps every year to keep up with MS.
No kidding. Who would want to have to use HTML, JS, SVG, CSS, XML, etc to create a stand alone application.
Its like someone thought “Since web apps can’t be as nice as native apps, lets force native apps to use the same tech so they’ll be just as crappy”
I’ll believe MS is REALLY serious about Metro when they port MS Office and Visual Studio to it. Which they can’t do for now, because Metro is little more than a toy shell for tech tards.
Until that time comes though, I’ll consider Metro as one of their little experiments that they might or might not abandon, depending on how well (or not) it catches on.
There are massive amounts of “legacy” applications that will be around for a long, long, time. Those applications will require developers to maintain them in the future. Those developers have to learn somewhere.
This is a footgun move from Microsoft. They’re basically relegating their legacy platform to the status of COBOL.
Moreover, the Express editions have been licensed to allow use for commercial development since the 2008 release.
Messing with native Windows API calls IS my hobby :-p
Is that officially or just in your opinion? I work for a general contractor and had to read the EULA line by line to make sure I wasn’t violating it by installing it there. My goal was to make plugins for Autodesk Revit 2013. After reading it, I concluded that there was no barrier to my usage of it in a company, for a company.
At the moment, I’m worried about future access to Express if I need to reinstall it… or if I’ll actually have to use Windows 8 at work just to use VS 11, which will also have to be bought this time, JUST to make plugins for a future version of Revit. Programming by-the-way is not my primary function, if I end up having to request new software purchases, they may just decide not to bother and I’ll just have to not make my plugins at work.
Yes there is nothing stopping you from using it, but the primary target for Express is learning and hobbyists.
I have made small commercial websites using Express and you can certainly make useful things, but you are missing out on some of the more useful aspects of Visual Studio.
No, incorrect. Microsoft lifted that restriction 4 years ago. Also, SQL Server Express has no restrictions about commercial use either now.
I appreciate the restrictions been lifted, but the Visual Studio Express is soo cut down, you can make a small e-commerce website out of it.
It is still meant for learning and hobbyists.
Not at all. It depends on what school of development you come from. When I started development, Intelisense and code completion did not exist. I had to type 100% of the code, and you know what? I knew what to type. Relying on the IDE to do all the work verges on brogrammer. Not that I’m implying you are incapable of any of the above, but honestly, it’s down to your own way of working.
Honestly, Indy development houses do use Visual Studio 2010 express, especially for Niche .Net 4.0, which isn’t available in 2008 anyway. People are making good money from free tools. This also completely ignores Sharp Develop and Mono Develop, the latter being more or less on a par with Express.
OMG … I can’t believe you are pulling the “Real Developers don’t need an IDE card”. I am not even going to debate this point (I used to do all my Java development using VIM btw).
Also .NET 4.0 is hardly “niche”, any .NET 2.0+ project can easily be upgraded.
Anyway from the horses mouth,
“Visual Studio 2010 Express is a set of free, entry-level products with streamlined interfaces and core capabilities that help you create applications for a single platform.”
http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/en-us/products/2010-editions/…
No I’m not. I said, over reliance on the IDE to do all of the work is a common sign of a brogrammer. For example, I code every day and I’ve never touched re-sharper. Apparently you find that astonishing. I also use Winforms, because our entire application suite was written in 2002 and the cost of redeveloping it with every whim that Microsoft has is not desirable. We could stay on VS2008 forever, should we choose to.
OMG.. please! It’s a whole new VM backend. 2.0 to 3.5 is a safe bet, but 4.0 – no. That would require a complete regression test of all software. If it ain’t broken, no point in fixing it. As we deal with corporations, Windows XP and Windows 7 are here to stay for us for the foreseeable future. The only reason we may have to move to 4 is ASP.Net MVC and Razor.
Yeah, “entry level”. In no way does that mean “student and learning”. Honestly, if I buy and “entry level” Car in a specific range, do I have to be a learner driver? No. Same deal here. You are incorrect, plain and simple. Nowhere on the Microsoft MSDN or VS sites do they state “Express is intended only for education” or words to that effect. Nowhere.
The “educational and non profit” exclusion was removed because MS wanted to push the platform, e.g. if you installed any of the early XNA versions, you were *required* to use the express version. It was actually impossible to install them in a retail/MSDN version of the Visual Studio shell.
Yes you did.
I don’t use Resharper, but anything that makes my job quicker and easier … I am up for it.
That doesn’t make me a “brogrammer”, it makes me want to be more productive. If tools like Resharper and Code Rush help me become more productive, then I am all up for them.
However I am pretty fed up of being told by developers that I am “not as good as them” because I choose to use things that make me more productive as for some reason that makes me a lesser being.
So because you don’t use it … it is suddenly niche?
I appreciate it is a new VM, but I haven’t seen anything break being run on 4.0 as yet.
The car analogy … here we go.
Everywhere I have worked that was a Microsoft House, it was Visual Studio Pro or above and SQL Server Developer Edition.
You can argue the toss all your want, but it is a cut down product to give people a “taster” … it is pretty freaking obvious to me and most other people I have spoken to at my work.
I am pretty bored with this conversation so I am out.
Edited 2012-05-23 12:12 UTC
Good for you. No one told you to stop. But I’m also guessing you can code with “any text editor” also. Those that can’t fall in to the brogrammer camp. Nothing I said implied any different.
And I’m tired of programmers looking down on my because I use the technology dictated by my employer.
At the moment, 3.5 is the standard runtime most apps target. I’m sure it’ll be 4.0 soon enough. Nothing stops 3.5 from working at that stage though.
Just because it doesn’t blow up right away, doesn’t mean there aren’t subtle issues lurking.
Good grief… delete “car” and replace with any product. The meaning was the same.
There’s no requirement. Indeed, I’ve seen plenty of start-ups using Express, and more websites than I care to mention using SS2008 R2 Express as their back-end for an Umbraco CMS.
But it’s still not a definitive label. Otherwise it would be like me telling everyone that Android is rubbish or iPhone is expensive or Windows Phone 7 is doomed… it’s pure opinion based on hearsay. By your own definition – if you can get the job done, what is the issue? You can’t have it both ways. Compare Express 2010 to Delphi 1 and then try telling me that Express 2010 is a poor experience. Seriously, if you believe that you really do need a lesson in history. But you know what – we wrote over 30,000 lines of code in Delphi 1 and had a leading product in the industry we were in. In the process, beating our large American competitor to the punch on implementing the latest requirements for the financial body the software created data for. No fancy code completion of re-factoring tools. Nothing clever at all. Even the syntax highlighting was a bit weird. You deal with the tools you have and get stuff done. End of discussion.
There are no boring conversations, only closed minded and unimaginative people.
Fair enough
Snap
I appreciate this, I was being somewhat trite. It depends how your software was built, how easy to verify whether it will run on 4.0.
It is okay if it is low volume traffic, remember only 1 CPU. It ultimately depends, I work in banks, healthcare and Gambling, they normally get you the full version.
Whether or not it is a definitive label, one can read between the lines.
Not quite.
While I agree with the sentiment, one would have to wonder if you wrote something similar in Express vs Pro how much time would be saved?
It boils down to the specifics of the project and the people working on it. I’ve seen programmers be astoundingly unproductive using the best tools on the market. I’ve seen programmers achieve amazing results using an editor no more complex than notepad.exe. It is mainly the calibre of the developer that dictates quality output vs. time undertaken.
Yes. Its a shame. Metro on Smartphones and Tablets are a big deal, but un the desktop?
I mean, i can’t just think of a metro application of SPSS or Stata, thus i need them for university. And just think of self programmed applications for other scientific use? For years they will be sticked on Windows 7.
Err Visual Studio Express being Metro only, does not mean you can’t run Matlab or whatever on Windows 8.
I will seriously LMAO if they have a VS11 C++ edition, after this comment.
Uhmm, because Matlab equals science? Oh my. While there are fields where Matlab could do everything (I highly doubt that), there are a lot, where it’s just not enough. E.g. almost all of our coding is for scientific purposes, yet if I would need to add all my Matlab use in a year, it would most certainly be less than a month. We can’t drop Windows coding, since most of our colleagues live only in Windows-land, some of us gradually move most of our coding (99% c++) to Linux. Why? Performance, stability (including less idiotic changes), and c++ compilers and good editors won’t go away anytime soon.
Well, command-line tools provided by Windows SDK aren’t going away. And they are provided for free, including C/C++ MSVC compilers. No IDE, yep. But if you need IDE you can find one beside MSVS. There are SharpDevelop for .net development and I think it is possible to use Eclipse CDT with MSVC.
While in general you are correct that cl.exe / link.exe is available as a part of the Windows SDK, MS’ C/C++ compiler has been more-or-less neglected in last ~5+ years, while both GCC and LLVM-clang have been quick to advance.
A couple of months ago I compile a piece of cross platform DPI software using both GCC-MinGW (4.6) and VS2K10 and in most aspects, GCC was 10-15% faster.
Keep in mind that in-order to maintain VS2KX compatibility the code doesn’t include GCC specific optimizations (E.g. macros w/ return value) that could further increase the gap.
– Gilboa
Edited 2012-05-22 08:54 UTC
Actually…
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/hh852363.aspx
“The Windows SDK no longer ships with a complete command-line build environment. The Windows SDK now requires a compiler and build environment to be installed separately.”
Thanks for the heads up.
The text you linked to says “(* To create desktop applications for Windows 8, you need to use Visual Studio 11 Professional, or higher, Microsoft says.)” Did I interprete anything wrong?
I downloaded the Visual Studio 11 Beta Product Guide from microsoft.com and read it a bit. It has a chart near the beginning that very clearly states:
Development Platform Support
Windows Metro-style Application Development: (All versions checked)
Desktop Windows Application Development: (Only paid versions checked)
…I’m sure the document has more detailed information, but I only gave it a quick glance.
Edited 2012-05-21 21:22 UTC
I think that means, “If you are using VS 11, you need Professional version or higher to create desktop W8 apps.”
But one can still use VS2010 Express to create such apps, and VS2010 Express will continue to be supported and made available for downloading.
See: http://www.osnews.com/permalink?518904
VS2010 doesn’t run on Windows 8.
I’ve seen this claim multiple times, but I can’t find any source. Can you provide a link?
Thanks.
I’ll restate what I’ve said before: I want nothing to do with Twitter OS. Unfortunately, as a computer salesman and technician, I’m going to have to learn to like it, no matter how painful it gets. People are already not educating themselves enough to do simple things with their computers, they take the attitude that because we’re there to fix them, they don’t need to learn how to use them (imagine applying that logic to cars, don’t bother learning how to drive, the mechanic can fix your fuckups, and you can act all indignant when he expects to be paid for it!). Just wait until an entire new paradigm gets dropped on the average-Joe user. Most of the people using computers today, I think it would be fair to say, never used anything but Windows XP, with a percentage of those people migrating to 7 when they were left with no choice (but there are a lot of XP machines still going through our workshop), and people hate change. They hate the superficial cosmetic differences between XP and 7 (from a use-case scenario, but there is a lot less superficial stuff going on under the hood), and they’re going to loathe having their much practiced desktop taken away. A Windows 8 world will really lower the barrier for people not in the know to get a Mac, or at least raise the barrier to Windows high enough that a Mac seems an easier option, and among the technically inclined, it might push some small growth to Linux. I wouldn’t count on that, though. Year of the Linux Desktop will never come, unless someone like Canonical can team up with a big vendor who’ll exclusively push Linux in their lineup, and actually market it (unlike Dell, who had less than a handfull of Linux machines on offer, buried them in their website, and had “Dell recommends Windows 7” banners plastered all around them).
Lrn 2 Paragraph.
Aren’t this exactly normal in case Microsoft wan’t to get rid of legacy APIs?
Metro won’t get new applications if no one is willing to write them. Giving free tools which can produce only Metro style applications is logical way to direct freeware and shareware developers or students in that direction.
Will just use mingw, which works fine.
The question is what newcomers will use. I wonder if mingw-based IDEs primarily geared for alternative class libraries (eg. Qt Designer) will gain any market share from this.
I’ll save you the wondering. The answer is no.
The Qt creator
http://qt.nokia.com/products/developer-tools
installer includes everything to start developing applications. And it’s free/libre software 🙂 .
Yep, just use qt creator.
Visual C++ is a terrible IDE anyway, and Qt is a much better toolkit than microsoft ever managed to make (I’ve used MFC, windows forms and WPF, and they’re all shit in a way or another)
No big loss.
Edited 2012-05-22 12:00 UTC
Ironically Qt Creator 2.5, released last week, no longer includes MinGW. They removed it because of legal reasons:
“updating the shipped version is a legal hassle as long as the binaries are provided through Nokia”
http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2012/05/09/qt-creator-2-5-0-released/
Pau: ja m’has fastidiat 🙂
Thanks! While they work on the new Qt SDK version, which would include Qt Creator 2.5, in https://qt.nokia.com/downloads we are reminded that “Qt Creator IDE can also be downloaded as a standalone application, although we recommend to get it via the SDK“.
The present Qt SDK version, 1.2.1, released on April 11th, that can be downloaded from https://qt.nokia.com/downloads, contains:
– Qt libraries version 4.8.1
– Simulator for Symbian phones and the Nokia N9
– Qt Creator IDE version 2.4.1
– Qt Mobility version 1.2
– Qt development tools
– Remote compilers
In Windows, that is
– Online installer – 15 MB
– Offline installer – 1.7 GB
1.7 GB only if someone wants to install *everything* (!)
But you forgot to specify that Nokia said their main reason is that the compiler is already provided in the SDK, and wanted the IDE to be more independent (used by people who has latest MinGW installed).
Edited 2012-05-23 01:03 UTC
That was already possible. I have been using mingw-w64 builds for a long time already.
I’d say the main reason they have removed MinGW is the “please ship a newer version of MinGW” was a recurrent topic in the mailing list. And then people would argue about mingw.org vs mingw-w64 vs TDM vs something else. Those were very long threads.
Personally, for Windows .Net dev, I’d look at Mono Develop or Sharp Develop. Probably the latter.
Most people using VS Express were using it for WP7 development anyway. Any serious developer couldn’t stand to not have Resharper or Unit Testing.
That being said, you’re free to use VS10 Express and target the Desktop. Either that, or use Dreamspark to get VS11 Pro if you’re a Student.
For the hobbyist developer, Metro is the future. They largely don’t care.
People doing heavy LOB WPF or WinForms can use the options above.
VS Express hasn’t always existed, this is nothing world ending.
serious developers write crossplatform code with primary development on a unix platform where coding isn’t hampered by stupid build limtations and does verification testing using release only builds on the windows platform. The express edition is quite sufficient for serious development builds.
Then use Visual Studio 2010. Knock yourself out. Either that, or port your application to metro.
If they’re VSDs ( very serious developers ) the your application should be architected in a way to make this feasible. If not, use another compiler, or an older IDE.
Besides, if you use a command line based build system, the vc11 compiler will still spit out code.
I would like to point this article out to all the people bashing Mozilla for complaining about lock out. The desktop is dead and Mozilla needs to be a full player in the mobile market.
VS Express has never always been about, and has always been “express”.
VS2005/2008/2010 … Web, Desktop (managaged), C++.
Express is always to get hobbyist and students to get them using Microsoft’s latest tools.
I am honestly not surprised at all.
Now will SQL Management Express Management Studio be Metro? .. that will be interesting!
@Thom, Micorsoft in the development space have been pushing heavily for developers to keep upto date with their latest tech.
Let me list the first few from the top of my head ..
LINQ, EF Code First, NuGet, ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET Web API, Signal R, Github (yes they are pushing Git/Gibhub over TFS).
Lets not forget they have also mentioned projects like Nancy and Service Stack.NET which run on Mono and ASP.NET
Read some .NET tech blogs for christ sakes.
Edited 2012-05-21 21:52 UTC
People creating legacy desktop apps can either stick with VS 2010 Express, if they’re on a budget, or upgrade to the latest professional version. The latest full version of Visual Studio will continue to support desktop applications. Turn the issue around, why would Microsoft support legacy software in the free version of their suite?
and that’s exactly the point. MS says the desktop is not being abandoned, but it’s clearly considered legacy
shame really… win7 was real good and still running my home-pc. Laptops on Mac/Fedora though…
ah well, move over MS
Tom UK
Than people who don’t understand the .NET stack opining on the .NET stack.
Don’t use the dev tools as part of your Windows 8 hit piece of the week.
…he’d have come across this:
(Those who wish to use just specific languages outside of the platforms can use the legacy Visual Studio 2010 Express editions products, which will still be made available freely.)
So, yes, VSE 11 is Metro only. If you want to create desktop apps please continue to download and use VSE 2010.
Woosh.
You assume that it will be only used for “toys”, but I think you’ll be mistaken on that.
For example:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/20/2886608/microsoft-metro-dynamics-…
http://blogs.technet.com/b/next/archive/2012/04/26/microsoft-dynami…
Besides that, but “buzz” is that Office 16 will be metro. We’ll see, I guess.
CEO dashboard toys are still toys.
Lol calling dynamics crm a toy
Not exactly…. I am calling the reports pinned to metro a toy. Content consuming screenshots were referenced, not content creation.
Edited 2012-05-22 04:28 UTC
Do you think its fundamentally undo able in Metro? It just requires a bit more though than just dumping a data grid with editable cells on form.
Its an interesting discussion to say the least.
Assuming the rumours are true about WinRT being extended in later versions to support traditional desktop applications then I guess Microsoft wish to get the next generation of programmers used to the new way of programming. If the rumours aren’t true then it is going to be a horrific clusterf-ck of a disjointed code base at many software companies who want to simultaneously cater for Metro users as well as traditional win32 desktop users.
One can write Metro apps using any .net language or C++.
You can use DirectX in a Metro app:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh465077.aspx
So, whats to prevent writing a complex app, like say blender:
http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/features/
Blender is essentially a full screen app, does not use “traditional” windows style menus, and is a fairly complex app. Does anybody even use blender non-maximised???
And how the f*ck am I supposed to be using my IRC, e-mail client, browser, music player, torrent downloader etc. when I can’t even multi-task properly?
Microsoft and everyone else with their shitty pro-Metro stance can say what they want, but you just cannot answer a simple damned question.
No thanks. Power users who want to get real, serious work done will stick with Windows 7, and most will definitely just switch to another platform. Enough with this toy interface bullsh!t.
Nothing in WinRT functionally prevents this. Wtf are you talking about.
Hello?!? Have you even tried the public Windows 8 beta’s? The programs are maximized ALL THE DAMN TIME, and in Microsoft’s infinite wisdom, they decided to nix the taskbar, so you can’t even take a look at the status of the other programs, let alone switch to other programs and running them side-by-side! How f*cked up is that?
Trust me when I say that Windows 8 will be WAY WORSE than Vista. You haven’t seen a flop this bad since Windows ME.
You can snap two apps side by side, apps can have toast notifications and live tiles to surface content to the user.
You’re showing your ignornace with that comment.
Oh, spare me the “power user” crap. One thing I’ve come to understand recently is that self-proclaimed “power users” are probably the whiniest babies on the planet. And ironically, “power users” tend to spew the most ignorant nonsense when it comes to tech. I guess it’s because they think they know everything and so tend to make authoritative statements more than others. Self-proclaimed “power users” aren’t nearly as “tech savvy” as they claim to be.
“Power users”. lol Give me a break. lol
MollyC,
“Oh, spare me the ‘power user’ crap…”
What’s wrong with being a power user?
It almost sounds like you are blaming power users for having advanced needs rather than blaming metro for not meeting those needs.
Lol, lol, lol. <— What are we, 12 years old? I’m not even going to waste my time arguing with someone who clearly has no more intellectual capacity than an ostrich. Enjoy your Metro crap while the rest of us use something superior!
The windows interface has always been very poor for heavy multitaskers anyway… No virtual workspaces, apps geared up to run maximized, crude ways like alt-tab for switching apps, limited space to display currently running apps.
I typically have 10 virtual workspaces, any of which can be accessed instantly with alt+number, all of which have several apps laid out in them ready to use and i remember which number corresponds to which use.
Virtual Workspaces suck if you don’t have a good spacial memory (such as I).
Making impression of serious work, you mean?
Yeah, most, just like Vista… (or with DOS to Win shift – the first two releases of the latter were also “pushed”)
for those that want to use VS Express to make desktop apps.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudio/archive/2012/05/18/a-look-ahea…
“If you would like to use a language specific Express edition (C# Express, Visual Basic Express, or C++ Express) without specialized tooling for the latest platforms, you can use the Visual Studio 2010 Express editions, which will continue to be available as free downloads.”
http://www.microsoft.com/net/hailstorm.asp#007“ rel=”nofollow”>http://web.archive.org/web/20010529111319/http://web.archive.org/web/20010529111319/
2- http://www.microsoft.com/net/hailstorm.asp#007
Edited 2012-05-22 02:43 UTC
Former Microsoft Engineer Hal Berenson has a great quote from his blog (http://hal2020.com/2012/02/15/dear-developer-excuse-me-while-i-slap…):
“Consumers increasingly reject the old experiences in both their personal and work lives. For the 20-something and under crowd, the current Windows desktop experience is about as attractive as the thought of visiting a 19th Century dentist.
That entire article is excellent. Puts things in perspective for snobby developers. We serve the consumer, and the trends are overwhelmingly pointing towards a walled garden with curated apps with first class touch support.
PCs have gone mobile which means we need better battery life and that itself necessitates a new execution model. Having all apps running all the time is extremely wasteful.
Microsoft is for once, ahead of the curve when it comes to a converging ecosystem with a strong developer story. This leap into a new era will pay dividends for them.
Nelson,
“Puts things in perspective for snobby developers. We serve the consumer, and the trends are overwhelmingly pointing towards a walled garden with curated apps with first class touch support.”
Call me cynical, but I believe microsoft wants us to serve their platform *instead* of the consumer.
“PCs have gone mobile which means we need better battery life and that itself necessitates a new execution model. Having all apps running all the time is extremely wasteful.”
Not quite. There is absolutely nothing about the old win32s that necessitates applications to be running all the time (foreground or background). At their core, most windows applications are fundamentally built on top of a simple loop which is event oriented. So as long as the operating system is not sending it any events, the majority of existing applications won’t use any CPU time. Go ahead and look at the task manager and check to see if your minimized programs are using more than 0% CPU, in the majority of cases the answer is “no”.
“Microsoft is for once, ahead of the curve when it comes to a converging ecosystem with a strong developer story. This leap into a new era will pay dividends for them.”
It’s interesting you should say that. I used to think microsoft was more developer friendly a decade ago when I developed entirely for windows. Then everything changed around the time of Vista. OS programmers like myself were upset to witness our platform imposing new non-elective kernel lockouts and DRM controls that put a huge wrench in open source development. Even commercial developers were shafted when microsoft broke thousands of drivers. And customers were shafted when their hardware was no longer usable. 2K/XP drivers would already work as is if not for the DRM and lockout restrictions designed to make them not work. It was a slap in the face when 3rd party tools designed to allow end users to install XP and open source drivers were banned.
That was really the turning point for me as independent/open source kernel developers were clearly unwelcome on windows any more. Now they’re going even further and restricting the installation of user space applications…well this is what I have to say about that:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=mr+yuck
Edited 2012-05-22 06:08 UTC
Maybe in a singled threaded world, but most multi threaded applications are consuming CPU resources while minimized.
CPU utilization is just one facet, there’s stuff like utilizing the network which can prevent the PC from entering low power states for the network card which becomes a concern. Same thing with audio playback.
I think Metro, with OS managed background tasks (which have strict resource caps and policy imposed) are a great middle ground between battery efficiency and multitasking.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Nelson,
“Maybe in a singled threaded world, but most multi threaded applications are consuming CPU resources while minimized.”
Certainly an app can spawn threads that consume large amounts of CPU time in the background, however it’s likely that these threads are just reacting to more events such as network activity or topping up audio buffers. If you have a music player or P2P app, then running it in the background is often exactly what the user wants (who wants to stare at the P2P screen all day?). Can we say a background application is wasting energy when it’s doing what the user wants in the background instead of the foreground?
I think the bigger problem is applications that waste cycles in the background doing non-productive things. One example I’m thinking of now is a game that keeps running even when minimized, but I really don’t know if this is a common problem in practice.
“CPU utilization is just one facet, there’s stuff like utilizing the network which can prevent the PC from entering low power states for the network card which becomes a concern. Same thing with audio playback.”
Well yes, but if the user is playing music or downloading files, he probably doesn’t want his device to go to sleep until those tasks are done. I wouldn’t classify these things as wasteful when the application is doing what the user wants it to do.
I have to wonder whether shutting everything down in the background (win32s or not) would cause frustration that applications can’t do work in the background (like downloading, teleconfrencing, music, etc). If an OS permits these 3rd party background tasks, then I don’t see why win32 is worse than alternatives. If it does not, then it should be possible to suspend a win32 application while it is backgrounded.
“I think Metro, with OS managed background tasks (which have strict resource caps and policy imposed) are a great middle ground between battery efficiency and multitasking.”
Not to deny this, but I’m not seeing why this excludes the win32s. Although it may seem that way, I’m not really trying to promote win32s, but I’m not convinced their depreciation was motivated by poor resource utilization. I suspect that resource utilization in desktop apps won’t be much different than their metro counterparts. Now I might be all wrong, but I haven’t seen anything technical to convince me otherwise.
“Thanks for the thoughtful reply.”
Thank you as well!
Edited 2012-05-22 07:28 UTC
Of course the deprecation of Win32 does not have anything to do with its technical merits or capabilities. WinRT exists for Appstore lock down. It is a business decision not a technical decision, or a decision based on what costumers want. Its based on what customers apparently will tolerate (based on the success to date of iOS) and the fact that MSFT wants 30% of every app sold. Its a straight money grab. If they thought they could do what they are doing with Win32 there would be no WinRT.
WinRT is an object oriented API with a cross language object model, strong versioning, and brokered permissions. Its not mutually exclusive to metro apps.
In my C++ desktop app, I use WinRT(via WRL) to use networking stuff and behave better wrt mobile networks, data caps, etc. Its all asynchronous using ISO C++, and works a hell of a lot better than writing a wrapper over I/O CP.
Its not ust Metro that benefits, this will make Desktop apps better.
But those APIs are Win8-only. Why the heck would anyone write a Win8-only desktop app?
I was making the point that WinRT can be used outside of “App store lock down”. In case I wasn’t clear.
This is kind of missing the point. MS has completely blocked desktop apps from running on Windows on ARM and in addition they are removing support for developing desktop apps from the Express edition of Visual Studio. So basically they are strongly “encouraging” everyone to scrap desktop apps and move to Metro.
I think you miss Nelson’s point. Above, shollomon says thta WinRT has zero technical advantages over Win32. Nelson’s response seeks to counter that FUD.
I’m sure the user has a good faith intent, but often this is abused by poorly written programs. Many times I’ve had to kill tasks of programs which pegged my CPU for no reason.
The Win8 execution model says: “If programA wants to use the Network, it must explicitly state so declaratively, and then when it does, it must behave predictably or be killed.”
Background Tasks are limited in CPU usage and memory, and execute for limited amounts of time, so it forces devs to use better practices.
Most programs, realistically, don’t need to always be running. The ones that do, there are a bunch of background tasks for them to use.
I agree, but in my own experience its been more than a few timesI’ve had to kill tasks.
Windows 8 tablets and laptops support ultra low power states in which the network card will wake itself back up when data comes in over the wire. Something that can’t be done if an application is polling doing a blocking read.
With Win8 you hand the OS a background task, and you’ll have your network data pushed to your app when it comes in, its basically a “Don’t call us, we’ll call you”. In fact, its the only way for Metro apps to maintain a socket connection in the background.
Its handled like I said above, if you want to learn more you can read up on ControlChannelTrigger for Metro Style Apps.
I think its demonstrably true that Metro Apps use less resources. A great majority of them do not run in the background at all, others use resources moderated by the OS, and there is less resident memory taken up by the apps.
Another point to make is that (for pure Windows RT tablets) is that lower memory consumption by tombstoning background apps can lead to them shipping tablets with less ram and by extension less power draw.
Nelson,
“The Win8 execution model says: ‘If programA wants to use the Network, it must explicitly state so declaratively, and then when it does, it must behave predictably or be killed.'”
I understand that, but there’s no technical reason this kind of meta data couldn’t also be applied to win32s, which is just an API. The OS is always free to manage resources like it always has. As an example, the linux kernel can run processes inside cgroups which can monitor process resource usage and apply hard/soft limits whether or not application binaries are aware of them. Adding these features to linux didn’t require developers to abandon their APIs and rebuild apps from the ground up. I don’t see a technical reason OS resource enforcements in metro cannot be applied against desktop apps if that were a goal.
“Most programs, realistically, don’t need to always be running…”
Of course I agree with that, but by far and large I think applications which don’t need to be running in the background are *already* not running in the background because the OS isn’t sending them any events to handle. And those that are running in the background are doing it because they’re doing real work (like an SFTP client transferring files).
“I agree, but in my own experience its been more than a few timesI’ve had to kill tasks.”
I’ve inadvertently programmed such tasks myself on more than one occasion, but these were quickly discovered, and in principal one could apply the same quotas against both metro and win32 apps such that the performance degradation of endless loops would be the same in either case.
“Windows 8 tablets and laptops support ultra low power states in which the network card will wake itself back up when data comes in over the wire. Something that can’t be done if an application is polling doing a blocking read.”
Hmm, polling and blocking are totally different approaches. Polling is extremely bad, but I honestly haven’t seen too much of that since the days of DOS. Polling has been replaced with various kinds of blocking mechanisms (event passing, asynchronous callbacks, IO threads, …). In all cases though when a thread is blocked on input it is asleep and not consuming any CPU. The OS chooses when to wake it up to handle new IO events.
“With Win8 you hand the OS a background task, and you’ll have your network data pushed to your app when it comes in, its basically a ‘Don’t call us, we’ll call you’.”
Then I’ll need you to explain how the mechanics are different from a win32 event loop, other than being a different API, since the win32s can also be described as “don’t call us, we’ll call you”.
“I think its demonstrably true that Metro Apps use less resources.”
I am skeptical, I’d love a citation for that.
“A great majority of them do not run in the background at all, others use resources moderated by the OS, and there is less resident memory taken up by the apps.”
I understand this, but I feel like your insinuating that most win32 apps do run in the background when minimized when I actually think they’re blocked on input and are completely asleep. Even if they are not, an OS could always force them to sleep until they’re brought back to the foreground as policy demanded.
Again, I’m not trying to undermine the merit in winrt, it may be a wonderful API (apart from certain restrictions…). I just don’t know if there’s any substance to the argument that win32 inherently wastes more energy.
Edited 2012-05-22 17:41 UTC
Well, you’d run into compat issues with previous Windows desktop apps. Metro benefits from the clean break and can afford a new execution model.
But furthermore, Metro is more than the sum of its parts. Its an entire cohesive thing. You have an execution model, a cross language abi, language projections, etc.
Well, the end goal isn’t to make things harder. Its to enforce these policies, and provide facilities to do things the right way. That’s the value prop of WinRT. Yes there are restrictions, but here are ways to play within our sandbox.
There’s a difference, suspended Metro apps are not scheduled at all. The processor can effectively operate in low power states more frequently.
win32 apps aren’t designed for and don’t expect such things, Metro apps are. Metro apps are designed to save state, Win32 apps are not.
My point is that while Win32 applications may or may not use best practices. Metro apps must use best practices.
Newer hardware supports ultra low device states in which you can be suspended, and only be awoken when new data is on the wire. As noted above, the app isn’t even scheduled until new data on the transport channel triggers it. The data is then pushed to you.
Its simple, suspended apps are not scheduled, and during low memory situations their memory is reclaimed.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/04/17/reclaiming-memory-fro…
That’s true, but it seems odd reasoning to me to say that battery life can be improved by starting over – with no existing applications – as opposed to improving Win32, and having improved battery life with a nonzero number of working applications on day one. Especially if those applications that are broken can be fixed with more minor changes instead of a rewrite, it’s more likely to happen more quickly.
What Alfman’s getting at is that operating systems do not schedule threads that are blocked waiting for something to do, whether it’s a new UI message or blocking network IO. These processes consume zero CPU; not a small amount, but zero. The memory manager is free to take back any pages associated with these processes, and will do so, if it believes it can use that memory for something else more important. In other words, we already have that capability, and modern systems rely on this all the time.
That’s really it in a nutshell. In Win32 if you want to write a process that uses background processing for something, battery life goes down, but you can write the application. In WinRT you can’t. Which is better depends purely on your values (absolute battery vs. flexible applications.)
That new hardware would work fine with existing blocking or async network APIs (recv, select, WSAAsyncSelect, the works.) The thread is asleep doing nothing, and when the hardware tells the OS it has data, the OS can schedule the thread and tell it that it has data.
If a process contains no threads that have been scheduled for a long period, the memory manager will trim the working set of that process. The reclaiming aspect in low memory situations hasn’t changed much. What has changed is when the process is suspended the _entire_ working set can be pushed out, including to disk, in a sequential fashion. This means it can be read back sequentially rather than faulting page-by-page when the application becomes active again, making resume times faster.
Ironically, this only works because resuming a suspended process is a more heavyweight operation that happens less often than a random context switch to a thread that hasn’t run in a while. So switching to a suspended app is marginally slower than switching between traditional running applications, but the benefit is that in the worst case, when out of memory, the IO patterns are better when switching.
That said, be honest here, how often do you use a system that is paging data to/from disk so aggressively for this to matter?
maixau,
Ah, it turns out my post repeated alot of things you said in yours.
Thanks for explaining how Metro swaps out it’s entire working set. It didn’t stand out to me but it may be the source of some minor differences.
“In Win32 if you want to write a process that uses background processing for something, battery life goes down, but you can write the application. In WinRT you can’t. Which is better depends purely on your values (absolute battery vs. flexible applications.)”
I personally don’t like not being able to run things in the background, even if it’s something I as a user would have to grant on an individual application basis, I’d rather be able to do it.
I wonder how a metro dvd burning software would work, or P2P, video conference overlays (aka netconf), or whatever that I’d want to run in the background. Microsoft might carve out some exceptional APIs for these, or it may not. Maybe it’s not supported at all, maybe only privileged commercial software will be granted exceptions. Maybe only microsoft software will be allowed to do it and we’ll be forced to interface through it.
What sucks about all this is that independent 3rd party developers are no longer in the driver’s seat, we cannot build new innovations on top of metro without mother microsoft’s consent no matter how much customers may want it.
Edited 2012-05-23 16:21 UTC
More info on Metro background tasks:
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=27411
Below are some snippets. Metro background processing quota’s are above “zero”, but still extremely limited.
“Scenarios that are not appropriate for background tasks are indexing mail, transcoding photos, running SETI type workloads, or anything that requires user interaction through displaying UI or audio.”
Table 5 – CPU resource constraints on background tasks
Lock screen app: 2 CPU seconds per 15 minutes
Non-lock screen app: 1 CPU second per 2 hours
Table 6 – Example network throughput for background Data throughput, in megabytes (MB)
Lock screen apps:
From 188KB to 3.5MB per 15min depending on bandwidth (avg 208B to 4.2KB per s).
Non-lock screen apps:
From 3MB to 60MB per day (avg 34B to 694B per s)
“Critical background tasks
Real-time applications like VOIP that rely on the Control Channel or Push Notification trigger may not want their critical background tasks to be suspended due to resource constraints in the middle of something important; for example,. an incoming call. Hence, background tasks that use the Control Channel or Push Notification trigger receive guaranteed application resource quotas (CPU and network) for every running task.”
“if a device is running on AC power then background tasks are not network constrained. They are free to use as much network bandwidth as they need … Note that CPU usage for a background task is always resource constrained even if the device is running on AC power.”
“Threading model for background tasks hosted in the app
If background tasks authored in C# or C++ are hosted within the app instead of the recommended BackgroundTaskHost.exe, there are some threading model complexities to keep in mind.
Decoupling the background task from the app
For non-JavaScript apps, the background tasks are hosted in an in-proc DLL that is loaded in a multi-threaded apartment (MTA) within the app. For JavaScript apps, background tasks are launched in a new single-threaded apartment (STA) within the WWA host process. The actual background task class can be either an STA or MTA threading type. Because background tasks can run when an app is in a Suspended or Terminated state, they need to be decoupled from the foreground app. Loading the background task DLL in a separate apartment enforces separation of the background task from the app while allowing the background task to be controlled independently of the app.”
This is all ok for power constrained tablets, but it’s kind of wasteful to impose on owners running metro on multicore desktops with oodles of ram. A better approach is to give owners a choice in the matter so they can configure metro however they want.
Edited 2012-05-23 18:14 UTC
Nelson,
“Well, you’d run into compat issues with previous Windows desktop apps.”
Possibly, but lets look at a comparable situation: windows applications already go through very lengthy hibernation periods with *zero* energy consumption when the whole system hibernates. Nobody demanded a new API when windows added support for hibernation and most existing applications do survive hibernation cycles without any deliberate effort by application developers. As long as the OS keeps it’s application resource state in sync with the application itself, then the application can work obliviously as though no hibernation ever happened. So I think compatibility problems are a bit exaggerated.
“There’s a difference, suspended Metro apps are not scheduled at all. The processor can effectively operate in low power states more frequently.”
Please elaborate. Operating systems are ultimately responsible for when applications are scheduled to run. Either an application is permitted to do something in the background or it is not. If it’s OS policy to put background applications to sleep and deny them any background processing, then it doesn’t matter whether they’re winrt/win32, they’ll still have the same power state footprint. It’s true end users may become annoyed existing win32 apps won’t run in the background like they used to on an older OS, but lets be clear – it is OS policy restricting them, not the win32s. They’re expectations of background processing need to be corrected for the new OS.
“win32 apps aren’t designed for and don’t expect such things, Metro apps are. Metro apps are designed to save state, Win32 apps are not.”
I don’t know why you’re making this so complex.
Please see above, win32 apps weren’t “designed to save state”, yet hibernation works. Any win32 application can handle power management events if it chooses to. Any additional functionality in metro could have been added to win32s.
“My point is that while Win32 applications may or may not use best practices. Metro apps must use best practices.”
But you were trying to highlight a difference that’s not there. Busy waiting causes all multitasking systems to crawl, which is why win32 applications don’t do it. Show me an existing windows application that employs busy waiting that you’d like to run on metro?
“Newer hardware supports ultra low device states in which you can be suspended, and only be awoken when new data is on the wire. As noted above, the app isn’t even scheduled until new data on the transport channel triggers it. The data is then pushed to you.”
Ok, but you need to understand that even with win32s, using either blocking threads or asynchronous events, the application thread is NOT scheduled to run until the data is “pushed to you”. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding that win32 apps work by polling everything all the time, that’s probably the source of nearly all our disagreements, so maybe we should go through a a simple example?
“Its simple, suspended apps are not scheduled, and during low memory situations their memory is reclaimed.”
Well the link goes on to explain the principals of virtual memory and memory swapping. I could be missing something, but A cursory reading didn’t reveal anything to me that was specific to Metro.
While I agree with your view, if I accept that the target demographic contains only regular content-consuming users, most of the time since Win8 appeared on the scene backers simply seem to ignore that a large number of Windows users are such developers (I mean devs writing complex software and algorithms, not webapp coders) for whom such a task management policy is neither comfortable nor useful. While currently this is not such a big problem, it could become a huge issue if the “classical” desktop eventually gets dropped in favor of walled-garden Metro-only apps.
Edited 2012-05-22 11:35 UTC
I think by the time that bridge comes, we’ll have more exotic thoughtfully designed background tasks to help ease the pain. Undoubtedly though, some redesign will have to happen, and often its for the better.
I call BS, driver developers had over 3 years to get ready for Vista, and they dropped the ball. It had nothing to do with DRM, it had everything to do with the developers. MS changed the driver model, boo hoo, they do that once in a while. They did to the graphics card manufacturers with XP, they did it to the rest with Vista.
Please, get over this fictitious DRM issue. The hardware developers just basically refused to ship drivers.
BluenoseJake,
“I call BS…”
“Please, get over this fictitious DRM issue. The hardware developers just basically refused to ship drivers.”
I was one of many windows kernel devs disgruntled over the vista changes. Most drivers for windows XP actually did work *without any modification* when Vista crypto verification and DRM restrictions were circumvented, but these tools were subsequently revoked by MS. Here are a few links + excerpts that might change your mind with regards to the Vista DRM issues, bare in mind that they are from MS sources.
Thanks in advance for apologizing about the BS statement 🙂
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463417
“The Microsoft® Windows Vistaâ„¢ operating system introduces a new type of process known as a protected process to enhance support for Digital Rights Management functionality in Windows Vista.”
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg487431
“Drivers must have the correct content-protection signing attribute to handle some premium content. Microsoft Windows XP audio drivers work in Windows Vista, but cannot handle certain types of premium content if they do not have the correct content-protection signing attribute. If the content requires this attribute, the new protected user-mode audio (PUMA) engine enforces the requirement.”
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/forums/en-us/mediafoundationdevelo…..
“In order for you to receive the Protected Media Path compliance and robustness rules, you will need to send an email request to [email protected]. WMLA will provide you with the licensing requirements and steps you will need to take.”
“What you are describing is certainly possible in Media Foundation using Protected Media Path (PMP), however MF does not ship with such a network sink. A DTCP enabled network sink would need to be written and it would need to be signed by Microsoft in order for it to be loaded and used by MF.”
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc748650.aspx#_Protected…..
/
“PUMA and PVP define interfaces and support specific to audio and video players, device drivers, and hardware, but PMP also relies on a general kernel mechanism introduced in Windows Vista called a protected process. Protected processes are based on the standard Windows process construct that encapsulates a running executable image, its DLLs, security context (the account under which the process is running and its security privileges), and the threads that execute code within the process, but prevent certain types of access.”
“Further, to prevent compromise from within, all executable code loaded into a protected process, including its executable image and DLLs, must be either signed by Microsoft (WHQL) with a Protected Environment (PE) flag, or if it’s an audio codec, signed by the developer with a DRM-signing certificate obtained from Microsoft. Because kernel-mode code can gain full access to any process, including protected processes, and 32-bit Windows allows unsigned kernel-mode code to load, the kernel provides an API for protected processes to query the ‘cleanliness’ of the kernel-mode environment and use the result to unlock premium content only if no unsigned code is loaded.”
As a vista developer, you can get your driver signed by microsoft’s chain of trust, but unless you pay/qualify for PMP certification, then your driver will taint the Vista kernel, imposing additional DRM restrictions on end user systems. When the kernel is tainted, the entire system mysteriously enters a reduced functionality state where hidef video & audio quality can be capped and ports can be disabled; the user is left wondering why things are broken. For example, this next guy came to the conclusion netflix was rejecting his new hidef monitor for hidef 420P streaming, but I actually suspect the actual cause may have been a non-PMP driver tainting the Vista kernel and consequently telling netflix not to render premium content. Even though he never uncovered this, his further comments seem to fit with this assessment.
http://davisfreeberg.com/2008/01/03/bad-copp-no-netflix/
You can blame manufacturers for not revisiting older hardware/software and spending resources to update/certify their older drivers. But MS deserves to share the blame for preventing unsigned/self signed drivers from running that were otherwise completely compatible at an API level. Also MS deserves all the blame for all DRM related driver problems.
Edited 2012-05-24 05:58 UTC
Is everyone just looking deeply into the gifted horse’s mouth? Seriously, it’s a free application that you’re complaining about, go ask for your money back if you’re so disappointed.
For one, I’m happy that at least Windows will allow me to use the same framework to build tablet and desktop apps. On Android or iOS, I’ll have to write an app separate from the desktop equivalents.
Gifted horse? What, can it do trigonometry and then stomp its hooves to give you the answer?
Seriously, ALWAYS look a gift horse in the mouth. If people are willing give away a horse for free, unless they are a close friend, there is almost always some kind of hidden surprise waiting down the line.
I think you miss Thom’s point. He’s pissed that VS Express 11 only supports Metro apps because it means that MS is emphasizing Metro over Desktop apps. Thom doesn’t like that direction.
I think he overplays it because the non-free VS editions support desktop apps, and the free VS Express 2010 supports desktop apps and will continue to be supported and made available for downloading, along with the Metro-only 11 edition. It’s not like support for building desktop apps is being terminated.
Edited 2012-05-22 05:46 UTC
I have to agree here. The first thing that came to my mind when I read the article is that this is really reaching for the straws, trying to portray this as something bigger than it is.
Basically, Microsoft is doing what any sane business would do: by giving people a free IDE for developing Metro applications they ensure that there’ll be atleast some people developing for it, while at the same time they realize that not everyone is content with developing for Metro and thus they can generate some income from these developers. In other words it’s just god damn basic business operation.
While VS2011 Express will not come with the Windows Platform SDK by default I really doubt that MS will actively prevent you from linking your application to it. And this is not the first time this happens – the Visual Studio versions before 2008 came without the SDK – and you had to install it separately in order to develop Win32 apps. And of course you can use other APIs – like wxWidgets ot Qt.
which are better, more developer friendly and open source.
wxWidgets or Qt (shudder) better than WinRT / WinForms !?!?
I SERIOUSLY HOPE that was meant as sarcasm.
wxWidgets ???, seriously 1990 called, they want their bad MFC clone back to work with the horidly broken MS C++ 1.0
he message is very clear – migrate to Linux ASAP.
If you want to be treated like a grown up and actually control your computer with an actual desktop stay as far away as possible from windows8.
Yeah you’re in so much control with GNOME. Ofcourse, for that control you need to spend months of analyzing and rewriting source code. Personally, you’re first person I’ve met to do that, kudos!
The control is choice. Don’t like Gnome? Switch to KDE. Don’t like KDE? Switch to XFCE. Don’t like XFCE, switch to LXDE. Don’t like…
People have complained about Linux having too much choice. Now you see the effect of having no choice at all. At least the former is pushed forward by competition while with the latter all you can do is praying that you can still use it the way you want in the next version.
Huh? What does your comment or this entire subthread have to do with the subject at hand?
There are free Windows dev tools besides Visual Studio, so the “choice” is there for Windows devs. So what is your point?
For everyone saying Express 2010 can still create desktop apps, sure, but it doesn’t run on Windows 8.
Express 2011 will only create Metro apps.
Metro apps are only available/installable through the MS app store.
Distributing Metro apps through the store require a paid developer account.
This is all extremely lame. I’m getting increasingly frustrated with the direction personal computing is headed.
So Microsoft is trying to kill the desktop huh? Somebody should remind them that’s where a large slice of their profit comes from. As a matter of fact, it’s their 2nd biggest and right on the coat tails of their first, the business division.
I understand certain people get a stiffy whenever they think they’ve uncovered some secret Microsoft plot to destroy the computer industry and bring the sky crashing down…. If nothing else, at least those theories are sometimes mildly amusing.
These are my own conclusions after trying Win8 with legacy applications:
· In Windows8 32 bits still work some applications (as RM-Cobol runtime we use at work).
· Winform application based on 3.5 Net framework works, althout it asks you to install 3.5 automatically. After that, all runs fine.
· What have happened to WPF that MS pushed us about 4 years ago ?
· There are 3 big visible buttons on top screen of Win8 and this is the key: One for the desktop, better to think a backdoor to be deprecated some day. Other for the remote desktop: one way to go -> more windows servers. And one button for IE: the other exit to complex applications.
So in my own thinking the future of potent desktop computers it what is going to be drastically reduced. MS is pushing the consumer market to thin clients and “cloud computing” (terrible term). This is not new, but sometimes we forget about it.
I thought MS was slowly killing themselves in one way or the another, well, it seems that they are bored and stepped up the game, they are using a hell of a digger!
The free tools the give away aren’t to your liking? Boohoo.
They still give away phone tools. And Xbox tools. And you can use any number of compilers to target the desktop. There’s also the platform SDK…If I’m not mistaken it comes with compilers.
There’s the .Net SDK…it comes with everything you need to start building desktop applications.
You could use any of those options or you could cry about it. And before someone chimes in with…”this is an os discussion site, stop telling me not to complain”…There are plenty of options…you are either too biased or lazy to do an article discussing the actual technology involved.
yeah its just bad old Microsoft again…man I wish the Amiga had won the PC wars!
Edited 2012-05-22 23:56 UTC
While I agree that this is stupid, I still don’t think it’s a sign that the desktop will die in the future. It’s just a sign that Microsoft (and really the industry in general, but especially Microsoft) is terrible at promoting the new shiny without (temporarily) taking all the oxygen away from its existing investments. We’ve seen this before when (including some non-Microsoft stuff that Microsoft and the industry were promoting)
* COM was going to kill Win32
* IE/HTML was going to kill native development
* Java was going to kill everything
* .NET was going to kill COM and Win32
* WPF/XAML was going to kill HTML
* HTML was going to kill XAML, .NET and Win32
yet all of those are (a) still around and (b) coexist without any of them killing each other. This will be the same, in a few years they will have another new baby, we will all get really sick of them trying to make us look at the new baby pictures 24/7, and Metro style apps will just be another boring “old” (but hopefully still alive and improving) thing just like the desktop is now.
Edited 2012-05-23 01:05 UTC
This compiler move along with the Windows 8/Metro direction is gonna end either in success or a massive (worst than Vista/ME) failure.
People will not upgrade cause the apps lock-downs.
Companies like always will not upgrade until platform is proven (1-3 years after), and giving the massive changes, probably never will.
One question. With the new API introduced in Windows 8, which aims at both “Desktop” and Mobile platforms. Are they ditching .Net???
Off topic: the “Desktop” (in quotes) because for me it looks like a magnified (larger) phone screen, lol.
No, they aren’t ditching .NET. .NET can be used to create both Metro and Desktop aps.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/
Best ever written line since Windows 8 saw the dawn of day.
I don’t understand. Why would Microsoft — which makes half its revenues from the laptop/desktop — diss its own cash cow?
Even if they’re desperate to get into smartphones, tablets, etc, it still makes no sense to cut off their monopoly cash cow.
Can anyone explain this to me?
Microsoft thinks that the destop paradigm is dying and there’s no way to save it even if they wanted to, so they don’t want to be stuck on that paradign while the world moves on.
Artificial scarcity doesn’t work, dear Microsoft. People will be turned away from Visual Studio 11 Pro/Ent and use other solutions that are free (as in beer), or pirate the program.
And no, forcing Metro on us will not work.
I think you misunderstand. It’s only the express edition that is Metro-only. All the other editions support everything. If you want to do WinForms/WPF/etc., just use VS Express 2010. It’s really that simple.
Message is clear: People develop more in Java. They will definitely develop more and more in Java.
lol
Well in a way we most likely will, via Android…