Could Android Die?

There is a lot written about Android, and there is no doubt, that it has taken market share within the world of smart phones by storm, now commanding around 40-51% of the smart phone market share (depending in which country you are).  But could Android start to lose its market share, so much so that it could even die off as an OS?

Well, let’s not get ahead, but it does have a number of problems which could see its commanding market position being eroded. Though each issues isn’t a major concern on its own, once you start adding all these together, you start to see reasons why manufacturers and consumers alike may well move away from Android…

 

IP issues

If you are an Android fanboy then you may not like this, but the fact is that the Android OS has some liberal code within it shall we say. It infringes on a number of intellectual property rights of a number of different companies, all of which aren’t happy about having their work stolen (in their eyes). Personally I can’t blame these companies for looking for compensation – after all they were the ones that invested the money in the first place in the necessary R&D.

Android has so many IP issues that most manufacturers that ship Android devices, now pay Microsoft a license fee to be able to do so. I know that many hate Microsoft in general and hate the fact that Microsoft is doing this, but again, you really can’t blame them from a business point of view.

This issue may not be a massive one, but it does make manufacturers look at other operating systems for their devices, and there has even been rumours that HTC and Samsung may even look to build their own operating systems (I doubt it though). As a manufacturer, if you have to pay Microsoft to use Android, isn’t it worth your time to also look at Windows Phone?

 

Orphaned hardware

One of the big issues with Android is that Android devices don’t get upgraded. Most Android devices are orphaned in less than a year, meaning that they don’t receive the latest updates to the operating system. For your bog standard user this isn’t a major problem, but for those who like to use apps on their device, this can cause some problems. There are many apps out there that are Android version specific, which means you could find the app you want won’t run on your particular Android device, though it’s an Android app. For the consumer, this is potentially a source of real frustration.

 

Hardware faults

Android devices go wrong more than any other device, which is reportedly costing carriers billions each year. Again this may not be a massive issue in its own right, because this cost must be being outweighed by the money coming in from Android, but it is another negative for Android. If carriers start to feel this cost is getting too high, then Android will have a very tough time of it very quickly.

 

 

Apple hate it…

Whenever we read about Android there are comparisons with Apple’s iOS, and you can’t help it. When you browse smart phones in a store, you can’t but notice that Android devices do look like a bit of a copy of the iOS user interface. With some manufacturers it really does look like they have blatantly copied the iPhone in every respect (I will not mention any names).  We all know that Steve Jobs hated Android and vowed to kill it off, and Apple do still seem pretty determined to do their best here, pursuing a number of injunctions globally stopping the sale of many Android devices.

 

User experience

When you compare the user experience to other mobile operating systems available, you get the impression that functionality wise, Android really does compete. However, as an experience, it’s not great. Many people complain it renders graphics slowly, that it’s clunky, that it’s not intuitive to use and I would personally agree with all these comments. When you compare it to iOS it feels like a poor man’s imitation, and that is not good. When you compare it to Windows Phone 7, well, you start to feel like you are comparing an Austin Metro with an Aston Martin in terms of looks, polish and performance.

 

The power needed and battery drain

Because the way the UI is designed, Android really does need quite a bit of power to start to deliver slick animations and performance. This is why we see Android devices boasting some serious hardware power, all that power is needed to make sure Android performs. But this comes at a cost. And that price is battery life. If you want to use your Android as a true smart phone, then you may well kiss good bye to your battery before you get home from work (probably a long time before you get home from work). Is your phone really smart if you can’t even use it as a phone before the day is out?

 

Viruses and Carrier IQ

Ahhh the dreaded virus word. Android is an open OS, it also has a very open market place, enabling rogue apps to easily make their way down onto devices. Throw into the mix that the OS itself is open source and you can see that it isn’t too difficult to start building rather malicious apps that make it onto the device. Not a great problem at the moment, but as more user make the move over to smart phones, more viruses will be created and the more of us consumers will get annoyed with devices that are so prone to them.

The carrier IQ incident really hasn’t done Android any favours. Though it was also found on the iPhone, it was to a lesser extent. RIM and Windows Phone (along with Nokia in general) won some kudos here by proving that Carrier IQ doesn’t ship on these devices.

 

Different flavours

Google likes to think it controls Android, but it doesn’t in all areas. A great example is Amazon and its Kindle Fire. Built on a “forked” version of Android, Amazon now maintains its OS for Kindle Fire. This doesn’t sound like an issue, but as a consumer things do start to get confusing, all these flavours of an OS is not good (one of the reasons why UNIX couldn’t defend Microsoft within the Enterprise).

 

No go for business

Android is a no go for Businesses in any way shape or form. Simply put, it’s too open and too risky. This won’t ever change.

 

Google and Motorola

The Google deal is of great concern to many manufacturers that use Android. Why would Google help them with Android when they are now in direct competition? Will Google make newer releases available to other manufacturers, let alone provide preview software versions? This coupled with Android IP issues are probably the two biggest concerns to manufacturers – and why we continually hear rumours of them looking at other options (including Windows or purchasing another OS).

 

Interoperability

As we start to embrace more devices and more cloud based services, so we expect to be able to do more things across those devices seamlessly. Android isn’t great for this. But there is a game changer coming, and that’s Windows 8.

Windows 8 enables real connectivity between devices, and seamless integration with cloud services. This is all done with a single UI experience across phone, tablet, notebook, laptop and PC. Once this is released to the consumer, this will be the level expected for all forms of devices. Can Google really get Android to do this quickly and in a fashion that doesn’t feel like beta software? I don’t think they can, but I believe Apple can, and will…

 

Nokia

They may not be dead after all, and if Nokia gets back into the swing of things in the smart phone arena then everyone else needs to watch out. Nokia still commands the largest market share within the mobile phone industry, and recent releases of the Lumia 800 in Asia indicate just how strong their brand is globally. Throw into the mix the deal with Microsoft and you can see the real possibility of a resurgent Nokia…

 

Conclusion

Android is going nowhere for the time being. But all of these points raised in this post are all issues that grouped together, could spell bad times ahead for Android. When looking at the mobile OS world, if you fall out of favour, you will fall out very quickly indeed. We need only look at Nokia and now RIM…

Connectivity, Efficiency, Experiences

When looking at BPM (Business Process Management) solutions, or talking about BPM the concept, many of us think of how it relates to actual business processes or business goals, cases, targets etc. This is the main aim of BPM, to address how a business achieves a goal or carries out “work”, agreed? Ok, but my observation is, Is this right? Does the term BPM limit our thinking in real sense?

 

Outside of the business

If we take everything that we do towards a desired goal or outcome as a process, then BPM applies to everything we do in life, it’s not just limited to Businesses! For example, our own bodies go through processes every second of every day to achieve a goal. Think how we breathe, there is a distinct process, think how we turn food into energy, a distinct process, think how we run, a distinct mechanical process.

Now these examples are to simply prove a point that processes are around us and a part of our daily lives massively, which means any one process is made up of many others. Me running is a process, but in order for me to run, my body goes through a number of other processes, breathing and turning food into energy. This means businesses should not see their process as “the process”, rather as simply a smaller part of an overall and far bigger customer experience.

 

Real world example needed

To get my point across I want to use a real world example. Ok, I purchase a printer from a store. On checkout I provide that store with some basic information about myself. I then get home, install the printer and start using it. I fill in the warranty card, post that off, and then forget about it. A few days later the product breaks down, and I need to get it replaced. From the point of view of the manufacturer they don’t need to take into account any of the process I have just gone through, in order to kick off the process of dealing with the fault, but should they?

I believe yes.

 

Connectivity

Connectivity of devices and processes can have massive implications on process efficiencies, and the ability for external processes (that may not be directly related) to have a positive effect on our business processes.

First off, connecting and sharing data between different processes obviously provides added efficiencies and data accuracy. If we take our printer example, the process of checking out and paying for my printer should be integrated with the process of me completing a warranty card and informing the manufacturer.  That’s a process I shouldn’t need to be doing, and with improved connectivity of processes and data, I don’t have to. Now relate that back to the process of me returning the faulty printer, you see that process will be improved because of this connectivity in a different process. Both the store, and the manufacturer now know me, the product and the warranty, I don’t need to go through a number of steps at the start of the manufacturer’s faulty product process.

Secondly, device connectivity can have a massive impact on process efficiency, especially when connecting multiple and sometimes very different processes together. In the typical BPM world, do we take this into consideration?

Since the rise of the Smartphone, we have started to take into consideration connectivity to processes from different devices; we now see not just eMail being accessed on our mobile devices, but also ECM concepts along with the ability to actually work. However, when we flit between devices, such as our laptop, tablet, PC and mobile, often we have to do things again. Think deleting emails from your mobile device you have already deleted, think re-downloading a document we were working on etc. These are small things, but they can rack up a lot of time, and frustration amongst your work force. Now think of this from the point of view of a customer? You can see how better connected devices mean we can deliver better connected experiences to our customers, which have an impact on process efficiency.

Connectivity is a big thing, and one of the problems with multiple platforms and operating systems is the lack of connectivity. As a consumer, we like single user experiences, and we now want and like flexibility to do things whenever we want and on whatever device we want. Unfortunately having a different OS on my phone to the OS on my tablet, to the OS on my laptop and PC is not great for connectivity or user experiences. I’m not sure big players such as Google and Apple get this. Apple do it better than Google, and currently Microsoft, they learnt from the disjointed approach of Microsoft in the 90s. However, Microsoft seems to understand this connectivity and single user experience far more now, and they are moving ahead of the others. With Windows 8 and Windows Azure, one connected OS across all devices is only a few months away. That potentially provides massive connectivity bonuses to business and consumers.

 

Efficiency

BPM, APG (Adaptive Process Guidance), ACM (Adaptive Case Management) all aim to help businesses in a number of ways, raising efficiency, increasing standards, increasing accountability, ensuring compliance and improving customer experiences. These are just a few arguments for BPM thinking.

Efficiency is often looked at in terms of processes businesses own. Let’s look at our example process again. The manufacturer can improve the actual faulty printer process internally; it monitors what goes on, tweaks it here and there and improves it. However, external processes and greater connectivity should be leveraged to drastically improve this process further. Make sense?

In order to get a working printer, I the consumer, will follow through a process, which is a bigger process to that which the printer manufacturer has for handling this issue. If we step back, we can see that this process of getting a working printer spans over the store and the manufacturer, but if we step back further it also incorporates the process of me purchasing the printer in the first place. Do you see how a bigger picture of a process now surrounds my manufacturer’s simple process of dealing with my broken printer? If you do, then you can start to see areas in which we can make the manufacturers process of dealing with the broken printer far easier and more efficient than what is currently in place.

Essentially, if along the entire process of me purchasing the printer the manufacturer was thinking about the returns / repairs process, then they would want to get the warranty and customer information at the point of sale. This drastically improves the process efficiency for returns, in terms of internal efficiencies but also from the point of view of the customer, improving their relationship with that store and the brand of printer they have bought. I’m not going to break down the process further, rather I believe I have made my point, that business can improve process by taking into account external processes, especially those of their customers…

 

Experience

This post is about delivering a better customer experience. Leveraging the connectivity potential of devices and the connectivity potential of processes, business is able to improve its own processes. Taking our faulty printer example we can see how improved connectivity leads to external processes improving the manufacturer’s returns / repair process, in terms of efficiency internally and for the customer. We also see how connectivity of devices makes the customer experience far easier, simpler and more efficient, including for the manufacturer.

So with efficiency in mind, we look to greater connectivity, put the two together and you get drastically improved experiences…

Cloud misconceptions

Recently I have read a lot of comments on blogs regarding the cloud, many of which have been made by in house IT specialists or the general public. While it’s always good to read peoples comments and thoughts on a subject, what is concerning is the amount of “misinformation” many of the comments exhibit.

 

Cloud = Death of the PC?

It seems that many in the general public really do see the cloud as attempting to kill off their beloved PC, or a way in which cloud providers can steal your information. I am a little concerned as to where these ideas have come from. I can think of one source, and that is Google…

Google has been pushing their version of the cloud for a while, and their vision of “Chrome” notebooks that simply run a browser and nothing else. The whole concept that we can do everything in a browser really isn’t true, and it’s aimed at people who mainly go on the web and do nothing much more…The Google vision of the cloud is not one that brings anything new to the table, its not a vision that is to help consumers or businesses, no its a vision that drives people to continue to use their search, and therefore a tool to allow them to charge more to companies to advertise with them. Nothing more…

The cloud essentially should be seen as an extension of the infrastructure and technologies we have today. Not everything a consumer wants to do will be in the cloud, nor will all their data and content. Rather cloud services are there so that you can have better experiences across multiple devices, rather you can use back up services seamlessly and that for some software, you can use it as a service. This is the correct vision of the cloud for consumers.

Keeping in mind the amount of consumers who state their fears that the cloud is an attempt at killing off the PC, equally as many IT professionals seem to feel the same, if not worse. Many blog comments state they feel that cloud providers are trying to move everything to the cloud, that there is no need for servers in house, and that the model being proposed is that of the main frame days…Again, where has this come from?

The cloud for enterprise is nothing like the main frame model. If anything the cloud is an extension of client server, with applications being connected via the cloud to their content and data. It’s simply a different way of doing certain things, and not all things that businesses do (in terms of IT need / use) can be applied or work in the cloud. For many software providers the cloud will provide services which enrich the solutions they deliver, allowing them to provide additional features and functions. And for certain IT tasks such as backup and storage, sure you may leverage the cloud in a native fashion and remove costly in house servers and administration. But please remember, the cloud for enterprise is not about moving everything to the cloud…

 

Cloud definitions

It’s also worth noting that the Cloud still has different definitions, and probably always will have. Amazon cloud services are very different from those of Microsoft’s. For example Amazon sees a complete “Cloud” solution, where you use their infrastructure and move whatever you want (infrastructure wise) to the cloud. This is IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service). Almost like an all or nothing approach to those functions you chose to move to the cloud. Microsoft on the other hand delivers a cloud platform as a service (PaaS). This essentially is like another server that you can connect to and leverage, deploy software on it, content, storage and leverage services from it, it just so happens to live in the cloud and not in-house. This means you can have lots of things running in the cloud with Microsoft Azure, complete solutions if you wish, but you can also have very small components of bigger solutions that may run in-house, such as certain web services hosted in the cloud, but leveraged only by your in-house solution. The PaaS option is far more flexible to business needs and software requirements, and it is not intended to be seen as a replacement to the PC, nor the enterprise IT department…

 

Cloud = good

Well it does. It enables software and devices to understand user and application state, it enables better connectivity between our devices and solutions, and it enables the headaches of scalability for certain business needs to be removed from in-house. But, and it’s a big but, the cloud should never be seen as a replacement to in-house IT, it should never be seen as a replacement to the PC, and it should never be seen as a tool in which the cloud providers steal your personal information. Security is paramount to the cloud providers, without it, they don’t have a service to provide…

The cloud is a great extension to the way in which we use IT today, not a replacement for it.

Protecting the web, or just lazy and greedy?

There is a lot of talk of trying to legislate areas of the web. Here in the UK, BT will cut your broadband off if you are found to be frequenting and downloading content (music, films etc) from illegal file sharing sites. Many claim this just isn’t right, and that the UK government and BT are somehow trying to censor what we can or can’t do on the web. Over in the states, Google is thinking of divorcing itself from the Chamber of Commerce, because the Chamber supports legislation that forces internet companies to police websites that peddle pirated movies, music oh and fake Viagra (the latter being rather dangerous).  So what’s your stance?

Google - plain lazy and greedy?

 

Protecting IP and consumers

The music industry really suffered first here, with copy write basically being flaunted all over the web, with millions of people globally simply downloading illegal copies of music. The same now happens with films and even drugs (though the latter is often fake versions of drugs such as Viagra).

Legislation that Google objects to is all about protecting that IP, essentially ensuring people get paid for their work and don’t have it stolen from them. Is there anything wrong with that? At the end of the day, if we all chose to illegally download music and films, would there be enough money in the industry to actually have an industry? Would we be left with “cr*p amateurs” uploading their stuff to You Tube? Yeap we would, and oh dear…It seems that individuals who have a problem with this type of legislation have a problem with it, because if effects their own habits (such as downloading free music /
films from illegal sites).

So why does Google as a web giant object to this legislation, and why could it see them pulling out of the Chamber of Commerce? Well, a source close to Google said the company is “frustrated” about paying dues to an organisation promoting legislation that would “impose new liabilities” on Google. So what does this actually mean…Well it means Google are frustrated that the Chamber supports legislation that would mean Google would have to make changes to its search algorithms, which will cost money!

 

Does protecting IP and consumers from fake drugs lead to a lack of innovation and censorship?

A cracking argument I read over and over again (when talking about legislation on cracking down on illegal websites etc) is that such legislation would threaten innovation and encourage censorship and infringe on freedom of speech on the Web…To this I have to say “what a load of shi*”.

Such legislation will mean Google has to monitor what it indexes and displays. That’s work for them. In addition it also means they can’t just take money from advertisers who peddle illegal content, again work for them. But, how does that stop innovation on the web? Would this legislation have stopped the rise of iTunes, a legal source of downloadable music? No, but it would have stopped Napster from sharing millions of music files and loosing an entire industry millions of pounds. Would legislation really lead to censorship of freedom of speech? Again No! Though some may argue WikiLeaks
would suffer…But again, is that a problem? Is stealing content and then publishing it really a good thing? Were any of those stories in the public’s interest, did WikiLeaks not break data protection laws and many others? But let’s back track, this legislation wouldn’t have stopped WikiLeaks, rather it is focusing on illegal file sharing and the selling of fake drugs etc…

 

Plain lazy

Essentially Google and others don’t like this legislation because it means they have to do something, they have to invest in changes to their business to meet that legislation. Booo hooo. If anything, companies like Google should not have been indexing illegal sites from day one; there should not have been any need for legislation! After all, Google is effectively acting as a marketing tool for these illegal businesses. If I went to a local shopping centre and advertised where people can purchase stolen goods from, directing people to that “shop”, I am sure I would be spending sometime at her majesties discretion in jail! But, if I do it online and I am Google, that’s all ok…

 

The bottom line

For too long the web has been a place where people can get away with illegal activities because it’s all supposed to be “free”.  Google is just as much a culprit as the illegal websites that it indexes. It’s about time Google did something about it, and I hope legislation is made stronger for companies that advertise / index / direct people to illegal websites. Stop whining Google, do your job properly and
legally!

The Android debate

When anyone talks about Android there is a lot to be said, be it “Android is the most popular Smartphone OS”, to comments that it’s “the stolen OS”.  Steve Jobs even stated he would “kill Android”. But there is no getting away from the fact that Android is a feature rich OS, that it has now almost 40% of the Smartphone market share (though Smartphone’s don’t even make up 30% of the overall mobile market) and that Google owns it, and now a mobile phone company…

Competition

There are so many Android devices out there now, and from a range of manufacturers, so much so, that getting your hardware noticed is tough. When you walk into a store and see so many phones all running the same OS, how do you set your hardware out to be different (especially to the average mobile punter). Price…Oh dear…

Poor mans iPhone

So many people who have Andoird have it because they couldn’t justify getting an iPhone. I know many people who have opted for Droids because of price, but they really wanted an iPhone. The same applies to the “kids” that have Androids. Essentially many have them because of price, and once they get a little older move over to the iPhone. That must be a worrying trend. However,
is it a surprise? Probably not since Android feels like a cheap clunky copy of iOS in so many ways…

 It’s free, it’s Google

One of the reason Android has been a success is that is been seen as the free OS, allowing many a manufacturer to ship it on their devices, enabling Android devices to be “cheap” and swamp the market. That is essentially how Android has got it’s market share, and there is nothing wrong with that.

But is it really free? In the past couple of months we have seen a number of patent deals being agreed with Microsoft for Manufacturers being allowed to use Android. In addition to that, we have seen Apple halting many Android devices due to patent infringement. These are problems manufacturers can well do without. Ask yourself, as HTC or Samsung, do you really want to spend a lot of time on R&D only to have your devices stopped from getting to market? Do you want to have to pay a third party company license to use software that essentially belongs to another company? No you don’t…

Throw into the mix that Google now owns Motorola and has effectively secured its own hardware for mobile devices. This must be a worry for HTC, Samsung and all those that sell Android devices. Do you really believe that Google will continue to provide updates to their OS to give away to competitors of their own devices? If they do, then that’s crazy business thinking from Google.

 

Nokia?

I have read many a comment in the past day or so that Nokia should have opted for Android, or they should be making Android devices as well as Windows Phone. But that makes no sense from a business point of view. The Android market is all ready crowded, and how does Nokia regain its Smartphone market share by entering a dog fight with pretty much every other manufacturer
out there? Especially when all they can compete on is price and some nerdy hardware specs (maybe some design too). That’s just too tough. Throw into the mix the hassles you can have with Android and the fact that Google now owns Motorola, and Android looks very risky…

Windows Phone makes perfect sense to me. In many ways it is the overlooked OS, and that’s because no one really knows about it (phone nerds do, but who else). Not many have actually seen it advertised or ever even noticed it in stores. So for Nokia, Windows Phone market is easier to enter, and they know they can sell aggressively against the other Windows Phone competition.

The Windows Phone OS is good, very good. Pretty much everyone I have seen play with it, likes it, they find it intuitive, they like the live tiles and they love it’s simply integration with social media.  It provides something very different to Android and iOS, and as such, that means making a Nokia device stand out on a shelf is made that much easier.

Finally, Microsoft want to get involved in the mobile world, and they know Nokia are the biggest mobile brand out there (still), and that Nokia can get Windows Phones into the hands of millions of people, and ensure Nokia and Windows Phone grab market share.  I wouldn’t be surprised to see Nokia grabbing Smartphone market share quite quickly, which I am sure will make other manufacturers look closely at Windows Phone and start investing more in that OS. It is already happening to some extent with HTC and Samsung…

To finish…

Android has shocked us all with how much market share it has grabbed, but should we have been surprised? In many respects it’s a free, clunky version of the iOS that DOES cost manufacturers in terms of licensing etc etc. Now that Google owns Motorola are companies confident that they will be given the same OS to compete with Motorola? How many other instances of Android devices being banned can we expect?

All in all, Android may have shot to popularity, but there are many question marks above it, and it seems many more are being raised as time moves on. Will these question marks deter manufacturers from using Android? I believe they will over time, and I believe that Windows Phone will be there to grab market share – and that at the front of that pack will be a company from Finland, a company we all used to love…A company called Nokia…

Nokia are back. Watch out Apple and all Droids…

Over the past few months there has been a lot said about Android taking market share and that Apple is the number 2 mobile phone OS. There has also been a lot said about the failing fortunes of Nokia and the lack of market share Windows Phone 7 has since its launch just over a year ago. However, so many aspects of the mobile market get missed on all of these reports, and by so many phone “fan boys”, be they Android, Apple or whatever…

 

Global market

We have to remember that the Smartphone doesn’t even make up 30% of the global market, and even in markets such as the UK, it only just breaks that. So, even though we talk of Android having 40% market share, that Androids rule, that Apple offer the best Smartphone etc and that these phones dominate the phone landscape, what never gets mentioned is that that this is true for a small segment of the market place.

Today at Nokia world, Nokia reminded people of that.  Nokia has reminded people that they are still the biggest mobile provider and that non Smartphone markets are still the majority. The first part of the opening keynote focused greatly on countries / areas such as Latin America, China, Africa and other areas where Smartphone’s aren’t really available. Nokia chose to focus on user experiences in these areas and launched a number of new phones (named Asha), designed to “blur” the lines between a Smartphone and what we now term as a dumb phone. Nokia is well aware of these markets, and the fact that these markets are still the main stay for Mobile companies (something Google, Apple and many have forgotten).

The new phones offer some Smartphone features, and will no doubt be a great hit, offering Angry birds, music and dual sim capabilities. These were impressive devices, aimed at ensuring Nokia is still the number 1 phone provider across the globe.

 

Windows Phone marriage for the Smartphone device

It was 8 months ago that Nokia announced that it would concentrate on the Windows Phone OS for its Smartphone’s. Now that isn’t that long ago, thinking that they have started from scratch and now release two brand new devices. There will no doubt be a full range of them coming soon too.

Though many have slated Nokia for the deal, for me it makes a lot of sense. Microsoft need a way of getting their OS displayed, getting it into the hands of sales reps, business users and the public, Nokia can provide this in abundance. In addition, Nokia needed an OS that was different to what we have seen (from Symbian, Android and iOS), an OS that they could work with and
not have to dev themselves. So the marriage makes sense…

The result is the launch of two very stunning phones, a massive marketing campaign and we are led to believe, for the first time, a focussed attempt to market the Windows Phone. Nokia know what they are doing here, they know how to get networks and reps to sell their phones and they will make this works, I’m sure. Microsoft should be there to provide the OS, the ecosystem and support to Nokia, which seems to be the way the relationship works.

 

Nokia and Windows Phone can compete

With a range of new windows phones, the Nokia brand, the Nokia relationship with carriers and retailers and some special features, Nokia has really announced that it is going to take the competition on in the Smartphone arena. Nokia is even giving the devices to those who sell them, ensuring they know the device, love it and promote it. Sensible…

There are also some key features only available to Nokia, and these revolve around Drive, Music and Sports. These are three areas which will appeal to many a Smartphone user, and for sure, sets them apart from the others, including iOS.

Drive is a turn by turn voice operated navigation system, that’s free with a Nokia windows phone device, impressive. You can also gain access to music for free, with Nokia Music (which to me looks like a Zune pass for free for certain things). Finally, ESPN hub, exclusive to windows phone and Nokia, allowing you to follow all your sports, teams etc and to pin just what you want to the start screen, again for free.  Throw in Office, Sharepoint and other business tools, and you soon see that Nokia Windows Phone makes sense for business users as well as the casual user. Oh and if you think there is a lacking ecosystem behind Windows Phone and not many apps, I might remind you that there are now over 30,000 apps available and the marketplace is growing rapidly…

Nokia (via Symbian) maybe number 2 (just) in the Smartphone arena, but with Windows Phone, their hardware and drive, I believe their aim is to have Nokia with Windows Phone leap frog Android, leaving Apple in a distant third…Is it possible, I believe it is. We also have to remember that Microsoft makes money from most Android sales, so as Windows Phone grows in
popularity (and I am sure it will), Samsung, HTC and alike will no doubt look more seriously at focusing more on Windows Phone than Android…

 

Lumia 800 Device

This is a stunning device, quite simply the best looking Smartphone on the market. I know a bunch of fanboys will disagree, but once you see this and feel it, I’m sure you would agree. Nokia knows how to build hardware and they still lead the way here, the Lumia 800 is a reminder of that. It’s basically a smaller N900, which everybody loves (hardware wise).  It may have a smaller screen (3.7”) but it’s
quite an impressive bit of kit. Spec sheet here Oh and the price is very competitive, coming in at under 420 euros…

Nokia Lumia 800. Taking on Droids and iOS

I am hoping that Nokia offer other Windows Phones, devices with screens similar to that of the Titan (especially for us business users), but also because larger screens really make a big difference to high end users. Visit here for Nokia Lumia 800

 

Lumia 710 Device

Not quite as high end as the 800, but none the less, still stunning and at a price of 270 euros, Nokia has made the powerful Smartphone available to many more people. (And this is the start).

Nokia Lumia 710 offers a cheaper entry point. Smartphones for everyone?

 

Quick Conclusion…

Nokia is very much still alive, and are focusing not just on Smartphone’s, but emerging markets. Nokia aims to be a global leader and as such, is not just focused on Smartphone’s. That being said, Smartphone’s are the future, and Nokia know this. Their marriage with Windows Phone is one they must make work, and by the looks of things so far, will make work. A lot is riding for them in the next few months, but I think we will see them, and Windows Phone starting to make some rapid progress…

I used to love Nokia phones, they offer the best build quality and now, finally, offer me an OS I am willing to use. I think the future looks good for Nokia and Windows Phone, and I think my love affair with Nokia may be starting a fresh…

Disappointed with the cloud?

A recent eBizQ question has sparked this post, essentially it asked “Why are so many disappointed with the cloud?”, and this question was based on the fact that few organisations have made the move to the cloud, and those that have, many are stating they are disappointed with the results…So why would you be disapoointed? After all, it does what it says on the tin…

 

Cloud variants

A big problem is what do people mean when they say the “cloud”? If we take a look at the big players here, Amazon, Microsoft and Google, we see 3 different interpretations. Amazon deliver IaaS, which is Infrastructure as a Service. So essentially they deliver you an infrastructure for you to leverage as you please. This is very different to Microsoft’s Azure take on things, in which Azure delivers PaaS – Platform as a Service. Think of IaaS as your physical servers, all connected with nothing on them, and think of PaaS as physical servers, but running the server OS. Essentially Azure is the operating
system for the “cloud”.

Unfortunately, “cloud” is a very broad and “loose” description, so organisations must understand what type of “cloud” they are leveraging or buying into.

 

Expectations…

First off, let’s remember that the “Cloud” isn’t a solution, it’s just another platform. As a company you didn’t purchase Microsoft Windows Sever and expect it to solve all your IT needs did you? The “cloud” is a platform, nothing more, and yet as a platform it has capabilities that just aren’t available anywhere else.

Convenience, or something more?

Some argue that Cloud can be seen as IT convenience, which is true to an extent. If you view the cloud as nothing more than convenience, then you will no doubt also argue that the cloud makes far more sense to small organisations, as opposed to mature companies that have invested heavily in data centres – effectively providing them with cloud like capabilities. In many cases this is
very true, I myself have written posts illustrating reasons why the “cloud” is not applicable to some companies or IT solutions. Yet, “cloud” is more than just convenience, it’s about scalability, availability, reduced administration and reduced IT overheads. If you are a mature organisation, then no doubt your data centre will be specified to meet your maximum demands placed on it, as it
has to. For most of the time this means you have a lot of “spare capacity” and in effect, are wasting money. With the “cloud” and especially PaaS, you only pay for what capacity you need at that time. So you can quickly scale to meet demand peeks, but when you have little demand, your costs decrease as you lose that spare capacity.

We also have to look at capabilities here, using “cloud” based solutions we have a real option for continuous connected availability across a range of devices. We can share “state” between devices etc which makes it far easier to jump right back into work, where I was, even when I swap from my work PC to my work tablet or laptop at home, heck even to my Phone.

 

Security

This is a big issue, and unfortunately many security concerns are simply invalid. The cloud doesn’t mean open access to all! However, in some cases, compliance and regulatory demands mean you cannot jump to certain cloud providers or solutions. For example, for compliance you may well need to keep your data stored in your geographic location, so you can’t have it physically residing in the US when your company and the owners of the data are in the UK. That will include your data back too. So, you need to be aware just what your cloud provider is doing with your data / files, and make
sure they can meet your compliance needs.

 

Cloud based solutions

The big problem why organisations are disappointed with the “cloud” is the actual applications, their capabilities and user experiences. To be blunt, most cloud based “apps” pale when compared to traditional desktop based applications. Why is that? Well it’s mainly down to implementation of the software application, nothing really to do with the “cloud” as a platform.

Most “cloud” solutions are fully in the cloud, so essentially you access them through a browser. This is a massive problem and hindrance, and for business, web applications just don’t meet the needs. I don’t care what anyone says; running software in a browser is ok for only a handful of solutions – not for everything. Some of the problems with web based applications are listed below, and these are real problems and cause for disappointment with cloud based solutions at the moment:

1. Integration – how do you integrate multiple solutions? How do you integrate a cloud solution with standard desktop bound solution?
2. Customisation – do you really have an option to have your software customised to your needs? Again probably not, as the solution is there for “all – in the cloud”, not just you
3. Cross platform – HTML 5 is what keeps getting mentioned, but the issues still remain about how it performs within different browsers. In addition, think a bit wider. Does HTML based apps really deliver what you want cross platform? Think “cross devices”, how can you get the best user experience across multiple devices and their operating systems. Think PC, Mac, Windows Phone, iPhone, Android, Tablets, Laptops, XP, Win 7 etc
4. Asynchronous – many web based apps aren’t really Asynchronous, which means your user experience can suffer, especially when you are making round trips to the cloud and back (same problem applies to basic websites that are implemented poorly)
5. Data Extract – what is available, does it meet your needs, and whats the user experience here
6. Synchronisation – Can you synchronise between devices and return to your application in the same state?
7. Backup – what backups and formats can you get?
8. Application upgrades – will you be charged for upgrades?
9. Service Level Agreements – just what agreements can you get in place?

 

Improving the cloud experience…

So I have spent some time highlighting why organisation may well feel disappointed with the “cloud”, but now I want to point out how cloud providers and more importantly, software vendors, can replace disappointment with real excitement…

First off, your “Cloud” provider, you need to choose carefully, make sure you understand what they are providing (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS capabilities) and then understand what they do to meet you compliance needs. Take into consideration what you want to deliver via the “Cloud” – does your desired solution even work in the cloud or on a particular cloud platform?

I personally recommend the Microsoft Azure platform, simply because it delivers far more than just typical PaaS, it delivers brilliant development tools, application capabilities and synchronisation capabilities (it is also tied in pretty tightly with the up-coming releases of Windows 8 and Windows Server 8 – keep that in mind).

Windows 8 leverages Cloud capabilities heavily (Microsoft's Azure)

Secondly, and most importantly, choose “cloud” solutions that leverage your devices – so that’s your actual PC, Mac, Phone etc…The big change is how we use the “cloud”, moving away from a single UI within the browser to an actual “application” solves so so sooooo many of the issues highlighted. So what do I mean?

Cloud based applications need not run in the “cloud”, they need only be distributed or leverage cloud services, data and content. So the application is installed and runs on the device, accessing cloud services, data and content. When we move to this model, you see how usability, experience, and capabilities all drastically increase. So:

1. Integration – This is made a lot easier, real application integration can take place, be that using cloud services in another application, or actually sharing data on your device between applications (this can be taken further with Windows 8 and the use of contracts and charms)
2. Customisation – Customising applications for a client is made a lot simpler, it becomes something that is in essence, not that different to customisation of typical desktop in house applications today
3. Cross platform – well the iPhone has shown us that using platform specific technologies deliver the best user experience. Would you rather use the iPhone app for that, or trundle off to the website. You will use the app. So this is no different, deliver “Apps” for the desired platforms and HTML 5 for platforms where you will not support apps. (Remember, that you are not maintaining multiple versions of solution code, rather multiple front ends, nothing more)
4. Asynchronous – Running typical applications allows developers to really use asynchronous capabilities within their solutions, improving performance and the user experience, not to mention
   dodging the browser time out issues
5. Synchronisation – with apps you can leverage the cloud to then store your synchronisation data, which makes it possible to synchronise your applications across all your devices in real time
6. Upgrades – these are made easier, even for customers who run highly customised applications

 

Quick finish…

Essentially, disappointment in the “cloud” is actually disappointment caused by “cloud” expectations being wrong, choosing the wrong cloud provider, or using cloud solutions that are limited, limited because they are stuck in a browser…With time, we will see greater understanding of what cloud providers actually provide, greater understanding of IaaS vs PaaS and we will see software providers delivering “apps” as opposed to just browser based solutions.

See the cloud as a platform, nothing more, and choose solutions based on their capabilities for meeting your business requirements. Good cloud based solutions, that leverage apps, will not only meet your expectations, but will offer you more features, more functions, less administration and ultimately run at a cheaper cost for you…

Kindle Fire in the tablet market? errm…No…

So yet another tablet has been launched, this time the Amazon Kindle Fire, and again we find another entry into the tablet market is being touted as a possible iPad killer. But is it really? Have companies, such as Amazon, RIM, HP etc actually got it right when it comes to tablets? I don’t think so…

Is the Amazon Kindle Fire anything new in the tablet marketplace?

In the beginning there was Bill…

It seems an age ago that we heard Bill Gates telling us that the future of mobile computing was with touch, and he showed us a number of “Slate laptop” type things. I loved this concept, but unfortunately the UI just didn’t lend itself to this kind of touch environment, and as a result, business and consumers didn’t embrace the whole thing.

Fast forward a number of years and we have Apple announcing the first iPhone, which to be fair was not a great phone in terms of features. However, what Apple did was deliver a user experience that was not even closely matched, they delivered a sleek easy to use, touch based UI and consumers loved it. Add on top of this the “app” store capabilities and we soon have what we know as the leading smartPhone on the market.

 

Phones lead the way for tablets

Essentially tablets were dead, until Apple then decided to manufacturer what seemed to be, a bigger iPhone but without the phone capabilities, tablet. The iOS suited touch, and was easy to use, and it
appealed to consumers who liked the idea of surfing the web from their sofa on something bigger than their phone. It appealed to us running Apps on a bigger screen. And, well, the iPad has taken off. It dominates the tablet market place, and when you look at the competition, you can see why.

Many state the tablet market is highly competitive, and that is true if you aren’t Apple. Essentially everyone else is fighting it out for Apple scraps in this marketplace, which Apple has a monopoly on. All the other offerings have come at the tablet market in pretty much the same way, thats use a touch based phone OS and get it on a tablet…Namely Android in the majority of cases.

 

What a consumer actually wants?

Yesterday with the launch of the Amazon Kindle Fire, many people said it will succeed because it delivers what consumers want, well I’m not so sure. Analysts are constantly stating that Amazon has people’s card details, so it’s easy for them to open up their online stores and make content and apps highly available to the consumer, allowing the purchase sequence to be seamless. Well I am sorry, having to re-enter some card details is no barrier to a consumer at all. Also, do we really feel comfortable with so many companies now holding our card details? Just look at the Sony incident? In
addition, we are all making the assumption that all the consumer wants to do is consum simple Apps, books, videos and music on their tablets. Well I don’t agree…

 

Problems…

So is what the Kindle Fire offering more of what consumer’s want (well the Price maybe), but probably not. Do we honestly see people looking at the iPad and then thinking, No, I will opt for the Amazon Kindle Fire? I don’t. Do we really see people looking at other tablets that aren’t the iPad and thinking, I will go for the Amazon device because the seamless payment is better? No. Do we see people opting for the Kindle Fire to replace their Kindles? Now that’s a BIG NO…People bought the Kindle as an eReader, and it’s brilliant at that. Not because its easy to buy books on (though that is true), not because Amazon has my card details, but because I can actually read a book as if it was a real book. Dont get this confused with the user experience. The eInk screen is brilliant, you don’t get eye strain like you do from a tablet, you can read it outside, and essentially, it works well…The Kindle Fire, is not the same, it’s a standard colour tablet, which means I am not going to be getting rid of my Kindle to read Kindle books on that…

So there are a number of problems here. Finally, do we see people going for a tablet that is so small? So far, tablets of around the 7” size haven’t made much of an impression, and I can see why. With smartPhones offering almost everything a tablet does in term of apps etc. what is the real benefit of having a tablet that in some cases is only 2” bigger? Amazon Kindle Fire or HTC Titan Phone?

 

Flexibility, consumer need and business drivers

Tablets are here to stay, but the next big thing in them is actually to deliver real flexibility in terms of how we use computers today. At the moment, tablets are too much like big phones than they are small portable computers. But don’t get me wrong, for many consumers this is perfect for them. I know some people run quite complicated Apps, but this is a rare feature. If I want to do some real computing, and some real tasks I need at least a notebook, or a laptop, hell even a fully blown PC in many cases…

Let me give you an example. One of the Directors I work with, bought an iPad 2, which he takes to all meetings we have, which he loves and uses a lot. However, I take a notebook running Windows 7 Starter. Why? Well it’s my need. I would love to take a tablet, but none exist that allow me to do all the things I want to (at the moment that is). While he looks at the odd app, browses the web on his iPad, and that’s about it, I have to plug my machine into projection screens, I have to run presentations, I have to modify those presentations, I have to go through technical prototypes and even
demonstrate applications, proof of concepts and much more, all from that little notebook. And that notebook is holding real databases on it, real development environments.

When I go on holiday, I take the notebook with me, as I can pretty much do everything I need on it (well within reason). I would love to swap it for a tablet, and have that user experience you get with a tablet for the 60% of my needs, but I simply can’t because of the other 40% of needs. So for me, I make do on my phone for what people use tablets for, and I own a notebook. What I want is real flexibility in the tablet marketplace…

The same applies for businesses. While some have adopted the iPad for certain applications, many find that it doesn’t quite deliver everything they need. The limitations of using essentially a Phone OS is too limiting for business and power users. We even find that businesses want to be able to run certain applications on a tablet, but this just isn’t possible, so reps etc use notebooks or take fully blown laptops with them…

 

Tablet market future?

Well who knows. I for one don’t believe iOS is going to be rivalled by any Android based tablet. Nor do I believe that the iPad will come up against much competition based on devices that rely on “content access” and “seamless payments” as major selling points. No, the Apple iPad will only be challenged once more is possible with a tablet than is currently on show in the market.

Enter Windows 8…Windows 8 could potentially be a game changer in this market. On many tablet devices it will run only “Metro”, but it is running real windows and delivers the power of a PC, and that flexibility to a tablet. In addition, on some tablets (just like the one given away by Samsung at Microsoft’s BUILD conference just a few weeks ago), you will have the full power of a PC, with “Metro” and access to the real desktop.

Windows 8 could be the game changer in the tablet marketplace

What does this mean? Well it means for typical “tablet needs” that we see in the market today, you have that with Windows 8. You have access to the Microsoft App store and you will have access to content from Amazon, eBay etc just as you do from your PC. In addition you have a full PC there, in your hands, so if you need to do more with it you can. You also have the option of different devices running the same software, and at different price ranges (just like we have today with PCs).

Going back to my own example. Windows 8 on a tablet would mean I would ditch the notebook. I would use the tablet 60% of the time, just like people use their iPads today. But, when I need to, I am able to carry out that other 40% of tasks on the same device. (Note I will not be replacing my PC, anyone who things we will only own tablets instead of PCs is wrong, or they see us with tablets accessing far larger screen). I will take away a USB keyboard and maybe a docking station for the device, and I can use it just as I use my computer at work. Now that’s real flexibility. Throw in all the added benefits of being connected to Azure with Windows 8, and I find that my little tablet is my PC at home, it is my PC at work…Now that’s real flexibility which opens up the tablet market to many more business users, and consumers…

The tablet market isn’t competitive at the moment. But I believe it will be, just not until we see Windows 8.

Silverlight, WPF, HTML 5, Metro and err…Flash…

There is a lot of talk about these technologies, especially
after the Windows 8 BUILD preview. For many, Silverlight and WPF appear to be
dead, simply because it isn’t supported in the Metro world of Windows 8…This
technically is and isn’t true, depends what you think is in a name…

Looking for Files from any application in the Metro world, 1 single user experience

WPF and Silverlight

Both of these are essentially built on .NET libraries, which
in the desktop mode are still there, just as they are in Windows 7. However, in
the Metro world, these libraries have made their way into the WinRT library
collection, with this in mind and the fact that Metro runs XAML, you see that,
well the names may have changed, but Silverlight and WPF does run in Metro.

To “Metro” your application you do have to make some
changes, and these are very small indeed, we are talking a few changes to
include libraries and that’s about it. These changes though appear to be mainly
focused on touch enabling your application fully in the Metro world.

So if you wrote WPF applications and or Silverlight apps
that run OOB (out of browser), then things are pretty much business as normal. However,
if you wrote RIAs in Silverlight and had them running in the browser, then you
won’t be too happy. You see IE10 in the Metro world will not support plugins,
and that’s probably all down to touch and touch based libraries. If you want to
run Silverlight in a browser, then you need to be in desktop mode and use IE10…Not
perfect, but makes sense…

We also have to remember what we want to have as our
experience on the machine. You see, Silverlight in browser mode, and even
Flash, does deliver “Applications”, but the user experience can be very
different between apps. In the Metro world, Metro isn’t just about making your
apps run on that part of the OS, but is also about a seamless experience, look
and feel between all applications. It is also about integrating these
applications with the OS and other installed applications. What does that mean?
Well you cant have a Flash or Silverlight app running in Metro that then doesn’t
behave as other apps do, or more importantly how a user expects them too. In
the Metro world we can “Search” inside apps, we can seamlessly share content
and data between apps that never knew anything about each other. If we allow a
Silverlight app from a browser to run, then it won’t support this level of
experience, and more often than not, it won’t look and feel like a “Metro” app.
That consistent look and feel is what users want, expect and Microsoft has to
enforce…

All apps should behave the same, deliver that same look and feel and support functions such as "Search" and "Share" in the same way. A single user experience

Apps

Apps are essentially the future for the desktop and the web,
Microsoft understands this, just as well as Apple does. You see the web was
never designed to deliver us “Applications”, rather it was designed and
architected to distribute and deliver content. This is primarily why we have
plug-ins for browsers, as even HTML 5 has limitations on what you can and can’t
do. Throw into the mix the horrible issues that arise with browser
compatibility and you see why Apps are far better for the user and for the OS.

Just as we have with mobile phones (and Apples iPad for
example), we will have an app store, which allows us to purchase (or get for
free) applications, for Windows 8, these will be XAML (WPF / Silverlight apps)
or HTML 5 with Javascript (though I believe and suspect XAML will be the
technology of choice).  In this way, Apps
will behave in similar fashions, so it makes it easy for any user to add more
apps to their machine and use them quickly and efficiently. This isn’t the case
with browser plugins nor with typical “chrome” based applications.

Death of Flash?

Well not really, but I do fear this signals the beginning of
the end for Flash. Essentially if you develop in Flash, I would be jumping ship
fast! I also have a chuckle when I think of apps such as Tweet Deck, which essentially
will have to be “Metroed” or make its users have to move to the desktop. Since
I have seen Tweet@rama in demos on Windows 8, I think Tweet Deck will have to
get itself “Metroed”, if it wants to stay alive…

Flash will be on the desktop side of things only for Windows
8, and that includes AIR. So what does this mean for Flash? Well why would a
user want to “flip” into desktop mode, go to a website or open a Flash based
application and leave the lovely Metro world behind? It isn’t going to happen.
Sure for business applications, complex studios (such as photoshop), users won’t
mind moving back to the desktop, but then it makes sense to be in desktop mode
for these kind of complex applications. But most things in Flash are either to
enrich our web experience or to provide a cross platform simple(ish)
applications – such as Tweet Deck. So in the new world, those apps would be
delivered by XAML in Metro and by HTML 5 in the browser, leaving nothing for Flash
to deliver.

The future…

Well the future of the web is HTML 5, the future of real
RIAs is Apps as too is the future of desktop applications. For complex
applications and legacy applications we will have the classic Desktop mode from
Windows 8, and I think this makes a lot of sense. Essentially Windows 8 is
everything to everybody; no matter what they want, expect and need to run…

WPF and Silverlight developers will simply be named Metro
developers (or something similar), web developers HTML 5 developers and Flash
will slowly disappear from the PC as it has already the iPad and probably Mac
OS…

BUILD and Windows 8…

So last week saw Windows 8 developer preview being shown off at Microsoft’s BUILD conference, and well, there was a lot to take in. BUILD was also showing off Windows Server 8 and a host of other Microsoft initiatives / solutions, including Windows Phone 7.5 and Windows Azure. With all that being shown off, it was hard to keep up and understand what exactly Microsoft was telling us about their future products and services. Unfortunately, as with most things Microsoft does, this meant that there was a lot of “dodgy”, to put it politely, blogging and tweets being thrown around. Essentially many tweets and blog posts were simply wrong, or written by pure Microsoft haters, so the messages coming out from BUILD did get a little lost for some…

Anyway…Let’s have a look at Windows 8 and what it could mean to consumers and businesses…

Metro

Well this is the new interface style if you like, what Windows now looks like by default. Metro is something Microsoft has been pushing, but it’s essentially a design look and feel. Many people see this as
primarily just for tablets, but I disagree. I like the idea of switching on my PC to see the “live tiles” environment, allowing me to peer into applications without needing to open them. It’s a feature I like on the Windows Phone 7+ platform, and I personally think it works really well for the PC, laptop, tablet market. Metro applications also look and behave great, and I have no problem with moving away from “chrome” based windowed applications.

Windows 8 new Metro UI. It's Alive...

The “Metro” side of Windows 8 only supports “metro” style apps and HTML running in IE10 (currently no Silverlight or Flash in the Metro browser experience). Metro also provides a design methodlody for applications, and as such, a framework for developers to work within when delivering “apps”.

There are also “contracts” in place between applications, allowing them to share functionality via “charms”, such as the “search charm”. What does that mean, well it means you can search inside your app from the standard search dialogue. Even better, you can share content between apps using the “share” charm, so I am in one app, and I wish to share some content, I can click on the system charm and simply share it with another application. This provides a real slick feel to using the system, as if the Apps are part of Windows 8, as opposed to a single bit of software that simply runs on Windows 8. There is quite a difference there…Essentially metro and charms all adds to the user experience, and rich environment, Windows 8 aims to deliver.

Using "Charms" with touch screen keyboard to search within apps

Many though have stated, why ship Metro style for the PC if you are also supporting the more traditional “desktop” look and feel, which essentially is Windows 7 updated. There have even been calls for supplying metro only for tablets, and desktop view only for traditional laptops and desktops, a bit like Apple shipping iOS for tablets and full on Mac OS for Mac Books. Well to these people I simply say “you don’t get it”…

Flexibility, choice and function is what people want. If I own an iPad and I want to edit some pictures by using Photoshop, I can’t. That means switching over to my laptop, Mac book, PC whatever to do that work, not great if I am at the mother in-laws for example. So why not deliver a tablet that can allow me to do that work if I want? What’s wrong with having the flexibility and option there? Nothing…After all, I don’t have to go into the standard desktop if I don’t need to…

Native Desktop

The native desktop is still there, essentially it looks and feels like Windows 7, and there is nothing wrong with that. The native desktop is used to support more complex applications, applications such as Photoshop or Visual Studio, applications that need lots of tool bars, need to show lots of actions and functions to the user. There is nothing wrong with these types of applications, and not all applications could be designed the “metro” way (nor should they).

The native desktop is just that, it’s everything Windows 7 is right now, so all your legacy / business applications that have gone before will run fine on Windows 8.

 

Tablets, Laptops, Netbooks, PC’s, Phones…ARM, the lot…

One of the big things with Windows 8, and something Microsoft kept on pushing at BUILD, was that Windows 8 is for all devices, and that means all forms of hardware. So Windows 8 runs well on my fully blown development beast of a PC, yet it works just as well on a small wafer thin tablet running an ARM processor. This is actually great, it means I have a single experience across all my devices, while Microsoft needs only support a single platform.

Now, throw into the mix Microsoft’s investment into the cloud and Windows Live, and you start to see added benefits of this kind of thinking. You can have all your devices understand “state” between them, so understanding where I am in an xbox live game for example, or where I am in terms of a business process. That makes life a lot easier and flexible. Simple things such as changing my “Avatar” on my PC is replicated across all my devices, which is a great touch…

For quite sometime I have wanted a tablet that allows me to install everything I may ever need on it, so that includes development studios, it includes database administration suites, it includes photo editing software etc etc and I simply cannot do that with a tablet. So that means I lug around a great laptop just in case I need these things, yet I mainly use that to search the web, run some power point presentations, check email etc etc. With Windows 8, I can get my PC on a tablet, and use it as a tablet, until I need to use it properly, and in such an event, I can…

 

WinRT, .NET, WPF and Silverlight

Ok, now this is where many bloggers etc really annoyed me, especially those saying “Microsoft has killed .NET and Silverlight”. The essential truth is that many “components” that make up the .NET framework (and therefore the Silverlight framework) have been incorporated into WinRT (which is the metro side of Windows 8 libraries – if you like). Metro apps run either XAML or HTML 5 (note that if you are familiar with WPF and Silverlight that XAML is the front end of those technologies) but don’t run what we could term “native WPF or native Silverlight” applications. Metro apps “managed code” environment is either C++, VB, or C# (oh that’s just the same as WPF and Silverlight), and pretty much everything is the same. If you have an old Silverlight or WPF app,
you do need to make a few, and I do mean few changes, before it runs in the metro environment. I personally don’t see the big problem with this. Sure if you have a business application running on Silverlight, you now need to change it if you want to run it in the Metro world, however, you can always run it in the desktop environment…If you want to migrate, make the few changes and away you
go, and you now have a Metro application. Those changes are essentially a few include changes, and that’s it…

When you look at “Metro”, you see that it really is just an update to Silverlight / WPF, actually the whole of Windows 8 looks and feels like a Silverlight / WPF.

 

HTML 5 and scripting languages

HTML 5 is now supported along with Javascript in Visual Studio 2011, now I don’t think this shows any movement away from Microsoft technologies (such as XAML), rather it shows Microsoft’s aim of allowing as many developers as possible to develop great applications for Windows 8.

From some of the videos I have watched, I would suspect that using XAML is better for Metro applications (well delivering some of them), however, HTML 5 is going to do more than adequate job.

 

Windows Azure

There was a lot on Windows Azure, especially when we start looking at how Windows 8 synchronises between all your devices. Now I am not one who has shouted about the cloud from day 1, I have often spoken of some of the issues regarding compliance and many issues with the cloud. However, that being said, Microsoft uses Azure very very well with Windows 8. They have also gone through a lot of work of exposing may Azure interfaces to developers, allowing them to take advantage of the power of Azure across all devices. Great thinking…

I also liked a lot of things being done with Azure, and how Microsoft have really addressed compliance issues that do raise their head when we think of cloud computing. If I am honest, I think the stuff I have seen on Azure of late has me praising the concept of the cloud so much more. Though I feel that’s more aimed at “Azure” than cloud computing in general. I still have issues with IaaS and concepts of cloud applications running in my browser (I hate that, I want a real user experience, a real application, and guess what, with Metro or the desktop and Azure, I can get that very easily).

 

Developers, developers, developers

BUILD was all about developers, and that means putting them at the forefront of Windows 8, giving them the tools they choose to develop with and allowing them “sell” to potentially millions of customers. On that note, there was a lot made about the sheer number of devices out there that will be running Windows 8, and just how big that audience is for developers. I know that Apple has gained traction here; I know that Android has gained traction too, but at the end of the day, if you develop for Windows you have the biggest audience out there. And that is a fact…Throw into the mix Windows 8 capabilities on tablets and the deal with Nokia, and I think you see that Microsoft is working hard to get even more devices running their software.

 

Much more I have missed…

There was simply so much at BUILD that I can’t possibly start talking about all the things I am aware of, nor did I fancy writing multiple blogs on essentially a platform that is only at developer preview stage.  I didn’t touch on Windows Server 8, nor other features such as NFC enablement, but there you go. Go visit Channel 9 and watch the hundreds of hours on BUILD.

Essentially, Microsoft has been working very hard, it has taken on board the need for touch, and the fact that mobile and tablets are becoming must have devices, and as such, Microsoft should have Windows running on them.

I personally think Microsoft has done a great job with Windows 8 and Azure, and I can really see them taking Apple on head to head in markets where Apple currently dominates. Is this Microsoft getting back to their best? I think so…