SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella was busy explaining to a stock holders meeting that the company's plan to improve the Windows Phone's sales was to appeal to Windows developers by allowing them to write universal applications that work on computers, phones and tablets, targeting a larger array of devices than just Microsoft's handsets.
Steve Ballmer, still a major stock holder, blurts out
"That won't work, Instead, the company needs to enable Windows Phones to run Android apps."
He was possibly right, but the outburst was about as welcome as a cactus in an outhouse.
The Application market for Windows phone is a mess. If it is free, Facebook, Skype, Twitter, it gets downloaded. If the developer charge much of anything at all, apps just don't sell. And developers just aren't spending any time developing for Windows Mobile.
It's not clear exactly what Ballmer meant by his comments, however. Was he implying that Windows Phones need to run apps that were originally designed for Android, and then ported over to Windows? In that case, he's probably aware that Project Astoria, the Windows "bridge" tool that will allow developers to port Android apps to Windows, has been reportedly put on hold.
Ballmer's cryptic comment could also imply that he thinks an emulation layer might be the best bet.
But there is a third option: As strange as it sounds, a Windows-branded Android phone might not be so far-fetched.
The Fine Article at PCWorld goes on to explain that Android is mostly Open Source. And Microsoft could fork Android just like Amazon did, just like Barns and Nobel did, and then simply put a Windows Skin on it and substitute their own app store for Google's app store.
Reports are that the Windows Phone is not actually horrible. But it is still unloved.
Does anyone here believe this would work? Has Microsoft waited too long?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 06 2015, @08:05AM
MS should go full-on embrace-and-extend.
Android is really two things: (1)Android Open Source Project (AOSP) [android.com] which is the OS and a little bit of the userland. And (2) all the APIs that google bundles up into closed-source libraries.
The problem for WInPhone is that no one wants to target the WinPhone APIs because the marketshare is too damn small. But if MS ports the WinPhone APIs to AOSP then any developer that used WinPhone could also run on all android systems too - eliminating the biggest reason to avoid WinPhone. MS gets the benefit that any WinPhone app on android will also be a simple recompile away from running on WinPhone hardware too.
In order to pull it off MS would need to make WinPhone on AOSP a fully functional, non-sucky implementation of the WinPhone APIs - it must run fast, it must not be buggy, it must implement the full API, it must be an equal dev target - it must be easy to develop for WinPhone on AOSP without even needing WinPhone hardware. And it must not lag in release schedule compared to WinPhone hardware either.
Once you've got enough major apps using WinPhone API, then MS can offer incentives to run the apps on WinPhone hardware, like more free cloud storage, cheaper app-store fees, etc.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Sunday December 06 2015, @11:05PM
. But if MS ports the WinPhone APIs to AOSP then any developer that used WinPhone could also run on all android systems too - eliminating the biggest reason to avoid WinPhone.
No, the biggest reason to avoid WinPhone is Microsoft. No API is ever going to fix that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @02:11PM
That's great. Rah, rah for your tribe!
But that's not a consideration for 99.9% of app developers.