Microsoft to Take 30 Percent Cut of Metro Apps
Under Windows 8

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 05:03:52 PM. © Daring Fireball

Daniel Eran Dilger:

If Microsoft refuses to allow existing Windows apps to run on ARMtablets, that would force Apple to convert iTunes to a Metro appand begin paying it a 30 percent cut unless iTunes remained free,if Apple decided it made sense to distribute iTunes on Windows 8tablets in the first place. Microsoft has not yet spelled out anyplans to charge a 30 percent fee on in-app purchases, but such apolicy would suddenly become possible on Windows once Microsofterected its own Apple-like software store.

So many implications to this stuff. I doubt Apple would ever do a version of iTunes that goes through Microsoft’s app store, and they may not need to, even if Metro gains fast adoption. The purpose of iTunes for Windows is to support syncing stuff to iPods, iPhones, and iPads — but iCloud is intended to eliminate the Mac or PC as your digital hub. But still, it’s interesting to contemplate a Windows where iTunes isn’t allowed.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/09/16/microsoft_to_take_30_cut_of_metro_a
pps_under_windows_8.html

Digg this

The Oatmeal: Why Netflix Is Splitting Itself in
Two

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 04:03:57 PM. © Daring Fireball

Makes more sense than Netflix’s own explanation.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/netflix

Digg this

In Windows Phone 7 News

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 04:03:57 PM. © Daring Fireball

Developers can’t build a single binary that runs in both Windows Phone 7.0 and 7.5? (Via Steve Troughton-Smith.)

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.winrumors.com/microsoft-to-allow-windows-phone-developers-to-update-7-
0-and-7-5-apps/

Digg this

What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 04:03:56 PM. © Daring Fireball

Matt Drance pens a “why we’re splitting in two” explanation from an alternate universe.

“Netflix Classic” is a way better name for the discs-by-mail spinoff, agreed, but I suspect one unstated reason for the split is that they’re preparing to sell one or both of the post-split companies, and thus they want to keep the existing brand entirely on the streaming side. Drance’s explanation would go over better with Netflix users, yes, but it’s not just better-written — it’s a different strategy, and one that I think is at odds with Netflix’s actual goals here.

Still, though, it’s a bit depressing to see a company that people love make decisions that people dislike. That aforelinked Oatmeal comic isn’t really a great metaphor, but it conveys the frustration users are feeling, as they look at a future where the overall discs-plus-streaming Netflix experience is both worse and more expensive.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.appleoutsider.com/2011/09/20/netflixpr/

Digg this

The Joy of Tech Comic on the Netflix Split

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 04:03:56 PM. © Daring Fireball

Another comic with a more cohesive explanation for the Netflix split.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/1593.html

Digg this

Samuel L. Ipsum

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 03:03:54 PM. © Daring Fireball

“Do I look like a placeholder text?!”

?

Read The Full Article:
http://slipsum.com/

Digg this

Inside an Amazon Warehouse

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 03:03:54 PM. © Daring Fireball

Spencer Soper, reporting for The Morning Call on the working conditions in Amazon’s Allentown, PA warehouse:

During summer heat waves, Amazon arranged to have paramedicsparked in ambulances outside, ready to treat any workers whodehydrated or suffered other forms of heat stress. Those whocouldn’t quickly cool off and return to work were sent home ortaken out in stretchers and wheelchairs and transported toarea hospitals. And new applicants were ready to begin work atany time.
An emergency room doctor in June called federal regulators toreport an “unsafe environment” after he treated several Amazonwarehouse workers for heat-related problems. The doctor’s reportwas echoed by warehouse workers who also complained to regulators,including a security guard who reported seeing pregnant employeessuffering in the heat.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/mc-allentown-amazon-complaints-20110917,0,7937001
,full.story

Digg this

How to Clean Apple Products

post from Daring Fireball on 20 September 2011 03:03:54 PM. © Daring Fireball

Great support resource from Apple.

?

Read The Full Article:
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3226

Digg this

Doodle Munchies HD is taking over!

Doodle Munchies HD is so much more than your average jump game, or your plain old run forever game. Make your way through 5 unique planets by running, jumping, farting and flying! Help Bob unlock all of his friends as well as all of their special prizes. Doodle Munchies is super addictive, so get prepare to get Munched Now! BlankHed Gaming brings you "Doodle Munchies HD" Currently ranked #46 iPad Paid/Entertainment (US Store) after 2 days!

Read The Full Article:
http://prmac.com/release-id-31164.htm

Digg this

The Case for Going Metro-Only on ARM

Jesper makes the case that Microsoft will allow desktop (i.e. traditional) Windows apps to run on ARM-based Windows 8 machines:

Microsoft?s position on the environment duality is that thedesktop half won?t even be loaded until you use it initially.Metro apps run in a new environment with more rapacious processand power management and may not unto itself mean doom for batteryusage. With this in mind, Microsoft gets the chance to tout theonly alternative that remains fully a tablet OS as long as youonly do tablety things and that can be talked into runningOffice when the need arises.

Read the whole thing. His take is reasonable. If Windows 8 does ship with support for classic non-Metro apps on ARM machines, these well be the reasons why.

But there are other good reasons, I think, for why Microsoft should cut the cord cleanly and go Metro-only on ARM.

For one thing, no matter what Microsoft decides to do, there is going to be confusion. Windows 8 is going to support two different CPU architectures: x86 (a.k.a. “Intel”) and ARM. Same OS, two different CPU architectures — just like when Mac OS X supported both PowerPC and Intel. But when Apple switched to Intel, they included Rosetta, an emulation layer which allowed existing PowerPC apps to run on the new Intel machines without being recompiled by the apps’ developers. Microsoft has explicitly ruled out such an emulation layer for ARM — x86-compiled apps will not run on Windows 8 on ARM. What’s in question is whether existing Windows apps will be able to be recompiled/ported by the developers to run natively on ARM; if not, Windows on ARM will only support Metro apps.

So the inevitable confusion is that either way, no existing x86-compiled Windows apps will run on ARM machines. Intel-based Windows 8 machines will run everything. ARM-based Windows 8 machines will run only new compiled-for-ARM apps. In either scenario, there will be some apps that run on Intel-based Windows 8 machines but which don’t run on ARM-based ones.

Normal people do not understand what CPU architectures or binary instruction sets are. There is going to be confusion here either way. But everyone is going to be able to understand the difference between old-style Windows desktop apps and new-style Metro apps. Just look at them.

In the Metro-only for ARM scenario, Metro apps run on all machines, and classic Windows apps run only on Intel machines. In the allow-classic-apps-to-be-recompiled-for-ARM scenario, Metro still runs on all machines, but users need to know what CPU architecture a classic Windows app has been compiled for. So Microsoft’s choice is between (a) asking users to tell the difference between classic and Metro apps, or (b) asking users to tell the difference between classic apps that have been recompiled for ARM and those which are Intel-only.

These CPU transitions are hard. For app developers, it seldom involves just flipping a switch in the compiler. Look at Mac OS X, and the transition to Intel. Even now, six years after the transition was announced, there are commonly used apps that can’t be used on Lion because they’re still PowerPC (and Lion no longer includes Rosetta).

Apple had another advantage Microsoft will not: in 2006 Apple made a months-long one-way transition. Once started, Intel machines were the new ones, PowerPC machines were the old ones. Non-technical users may not understand the difference between PowerPC and Intel binaries (or Universal binaries that support both architectures), but they do understand that old software eventually stops working.

Microsoft isn’t switching from Intel to ARM; they’re adding ARM as a second supported architecture. The current plan is for brand-new Windows 8 tablets (and perhaps notebooks) next year, some of which are Intel-based and some of which are ARM-based. I think the easiest way to minimize confusion would be to market ARM-based Windows machines as “Metro only”. Intel gets classic Windows and Metro apps, ARM gets Metro.

‘Must’ Beats ‘Should’

As Jesper points out, Microsoft promises that even on Intel machines which support classic Windows software, if you don’t launch the Windows desktop, none of that code even loads, and you’ll get the performance benefits of Metro’s non-legacy design.

But humans aren’t entirely rational. In an ideal world, that sort of setup would work. Everyone would get on board with Metro as quickly as possible, and the classic Windows desktop would be available when necessary. But developers are human and thus have a natural tendency toward the path of least resistance. Developers are more likely to undertake more work (in this case, completely rewriting and redesigning apps for Metro, instead of merely recompiling classic apps) if they must rather than merely should.

Consider Flash. Apple ships two platforms, neither of which ships with support for Flash Player: Mac OS X and iOS. On the Mac, users can install Flash themselves. On iOS, they cannot. There are far more websites and online services that have undertaken the work to support iOS with non-Flash solutions — either through the App Store or through open web standards — than there are for the Mac.¹

MLB has (excellent) native apps for watching live baseball games on the iPhone and iPad. On the Mac, they require the user to install Flash. Netflix has a good app for the iPhone and iPad. On the Mac, they require the user to install Silverlight. I could list dozens of similar examples.

Microsoft will not (and should not — it’d be suicidal) go Metro-only on all platforms with Windows 8. But if they go Metro-only on a subset of Windows 8 machines — compelling ARM-based ones that offer iPad-esque price and battery-life advantages — it will greatly encourage developers to write Metro apps. The message could be, more or less, “Windows 8 supports an incredibly wide range of hardware, and Metro runs everywhere. But our most advanced mobile hardware designs are Metro only.”

Otherwise, too many developers will think, Why rewrite and redesign my entire app when I can just recompile it for the classic Windows desktop on ARM?

Microsoft may well go that route, but if they do, I think it will hinder developer support for Metro.

It’s worth noting that Microsoft faces the same issue with Flash Player on Windows 8. In Metro, IE will not support any plugins, but the desktop version of IE will. Websites will be much more likely to serve web standards-based content to Metro users if they don’t have the option to tell Metro users to switch to the desktop version of IE in order to view Flash content. ↩

Read The Full Article:
http://daringfireball.net/2011/09/the_case_for_going_metro_only

Digg this