If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
Hey,
I'm curious as to whether anyone else is actively replacing Win32 apps with lighter, simpler Universal apps from the Windows Store on their desktops. I couldn't help but notice that Foxit PDF reader has a Universal version there and I've already moved my e-mail over to Microsoft's simple e-mail / calendar solution. Hell, I even bought Paint.net there and installed the Universal version of HexChat as well. I love the idea of sandboxed applications and the knowledge that I can compensate the developers of open-source applications in exchange for the improved security and easier updating process. I know that the Windows Store is still pretty bad in its application offerings but I figure that if we all support them in this fashion, the content might improve. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
Doomsdrzej wrote:
I couldn't help but notice that Foxit PDF reader has a Universal version [at the Microsoft Store] and I've already moved my e-mail over to Microsoft's simple e-mail / calendar solution. Hell, I even bought Paint.net there https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/stor...t/9nbhcs1lx4r0 $8.99 ($5.99 sale ends 1/3/18) They're charging for an app-version of their program although the program-version is free (donationware). Monetization: that's the purpose of the Microsoft, Google, and other online stores. Microsoft can't get a slice of the transaction unless money is involved. I'd just go with the program-version for free instead of wasting money to get the same software (or often lesser software since apps are usually not as robust). No reason to prefer an app over a program on Windows 10. Instead of trialing the program and me deciding if the program is worth leaving on my computer and continue using it (and donate later) or discard it for something better, now it's an app that you have to pre-pay before you get to even use it. No thanks. Tis the reason I don't buy from Google's Store for apps on my Android phone: I don't get to test the app to know if it is something good or even minimally meets my criteria. The difference is going to the produce section of a grocery store to see what I'm buying versus buying canned goods with a picture professing the contents inside: until you get home and later open the can, you don't know what you got. "The first advantage is a really big one, in my opinion. Paint.NET already has a best-in-class update experience (´Install when I exitˇ, thankyouverymuch), but having updates be fully automatic and transparent is much better." (https://blog.getpaint.net/2017/09/29...windows-store/) That's why I'm still back on Windows 7 for my home PC where *I* have control over the state of *my* computer. My computer is not the software author's property. Covert change of state is why users report their setup stopped working as before. I will decide if and when there will updates to anything. Automatic/background updating is for boobs that often turn up here saying "It /suddenly/ stopped working". I don't need miniscule changes to a program for features that I may not be using. For Windows 10, yes, there are ways to disable its auto-updates. "The [Classic] Paint.NET installer and updater are based on Windows Installer (´MSI filesˇ)." Only if you don't know how to code the installer script to use MSI, and there are plenty of other choices for installers (no one is stuck using only MSI). and installed the Universal version of HexChat as well. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/stor...t/9nrrbgttm4j2 $7.49 Another waste of money to get a paid app over a free program, or a pre-paid app instead of donationware where you get to decide AFTER using the program if it is worth a donation. I love the idea of sandboxed applications Microsoft is late to that game. A "sandbox" that merely regulates permissions is not a secure sandbox. GesWall was around years ago to do the same type of permission regulation and even added more control than afforded through policies or SRPs in Windows, especially regarding interprocess communication. It died because it proved not a robust sandbox. Although not perfect but better than sandboxing, if you want to isolate an unknown or untested program then use a virtual machine. VirtualBox and VMWare Player are free. If you don't want the overhead and impact of a VM then use a free sandbox, like Shade Sandbox. Toolwiz Time Free isn't a sandbox but instead more like a system snaphot: after a reboot, the OS partition is back to the same state is was before. Tis much like Returnil's System Safe Free (which they abandoned to go to their QuietZone payware). Both use a kernel stack driver on file I/O to redirect writes to a virtual disk. Upon a reboot, the prior virtual disk got discarded and either a new one created (if you stayed in protection mode) or you returned to writing to the real disk. You didn't need Windows 10 and using apps to get the processes virtualized. and the knowledge that I can compensate the developers of open-source applications in exchange for the improved security and easier updating process. So why pre-pay for an untested app when you can trial a program whereupon you can decide AFTERWARD if it is worth the money to donate? I know that the Windows Store is still pretty bad in its application offerings but I figure that if we all support them in this fashion, the content might improve. I'm not really interested in giving Microsoft a slice (30%) of every app purchased at their online store. Yeah, Microsoft gets 30%. See: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/jen...s-google-play/ Just like eBay that gets a slice of every transaction (but a meager 3%), Microsoft generates revenue from app sales from their store. Microsoft's hefty transaction fee is what presses developers to charge higher prices. Another example of Microsoft's superior greed: gift cards from Microsoft add a 2.4% surcharge onto the 3% transaction fee, plus the buyer pays sales tax on the gift card and then pay sales tax again on anything purchased with the gift card. After deducting for the transaction fee per sale on an app, how long before the developer gets an ROI on their repetitive annual subscription ($49/year individual, $99/year for a company) to participate at Microsoft's Store versus participating at Google's store ($25 ONE-TIME fee)? $9 apps (even for a short-term $6 sale) are considered overpriced at Google's store for Android apps. I get to test trial and donationware BEFORE paying. If I keep donationware and later donate after successful testing, the author gets ALL of my donation, not just some portion of it. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 14:54:29 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
Doomsdrzej wrote: I couldn't help but notice that Foxit PDF reader has a Universal version [at the Microsoft Store] and I've already moved my e-mail over to Microsoft's simple e-mail / calendar solution. Hell, I even bought Paint.net there https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/stor...t/9nbhcs1lx4r0 $8.99 ($5.99 sale ends 1/3/18) They're charging for an app-version of their program although the program-version is free (donationware). Monetization: that's the purpose of the Microsoft, Google, and other online stores. Microsoft can't get a slice of the transaction unless money is involved. I'd just go with the program-version for free instead of wasting money to get the same software (or often lesser software since apps are usually not as robust). No reason to prefer an app over a program on Windows 10. I didn't mind paying because I've used Paint.NET in the past and thought of donating but never bothered to. When I got it, it was on special and figured that the $3 or $4 I spent was a reasonable donation considering how little I used it. Obviously, getting something for free is great but I prefer to help the developers get some coffee if I can afford it. Instead of trialing the program and me deciding if the program is worth leaving on my computer and continue using it (and donate later) or discard it for something better, now it's an app that you have to pre-pay before you get to even use it. No thanks. Tis the reason I don't buy from Google's Store for apps on my Android phone: I don't get to test the app to know if it is something good or even minimally meets my criteria. The difference is going to the produce section of a grocery store to see what I'm buying versus buying canned goods with a picture professing the contents inside: until you get home and later open the can, you don't know what you got. "The first advantage is a really big one, in my opinion. Paint.NET already has a best-in-class update experience (“Install when I exit”, thankyouverymuch), but having updates be fully automatic and transparent is much better." (https://blog.getpaint.net/2017/09/29...windows-store/) That's why I'm still back on Windows 7 for my home PC where *I* have control over the state of *my* computer. My computer is not the software author's property. Covert change of state is why users report their setup stopped working as before. I will decide if and when there will updates to anything. Automatic/background updating is for boobs that often turn up here saying "It /suddenly/ stopped working". I don't need miniscule changes to a program for features that I may not be using. For Windows 10, yes, there are ways to disable its auto-updates. "The [Classic] Paint.NET installer and updater are based on Windows Installer (“MSI files”)." Only if you don't know how to code the installer script to use MSI, and there are plenty of other choices for installers (no one is stuck using only MSI). and installed the Universal version of HexChat as well. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/stor...t/9nrrbgttm4j2 $7.49 Another waste of money to get a paid app over a free program, or a pre-paid app instead of donationware where you get to decide AFTER using the program if it is worth a donation. In the case of HexChat, like Paint.NET, I've used the application sufficiently to know that I like it and thought that a donation was worth it. However, HexChat, despite the price, does not need to be paid for to download as far as I recall. If anything, I think it was written in the description that it was free to continue using even if you select the trial. I love the idea of sandboxed applications Microsoft is late to that game. A "sandbox" that merely regulates permissions is not a secure sandbox. GesWall was around years ago to do the same type of permission regulation and even added more control than afforded through policies or SRPs in Windows, especially regarding interprocess communication. It died because it proved not a robust sandbox. Although not perfect but better than sandboxing, if you want to isolate an unknown or untested program then use a virtual machine. VirtualBox and VMWare Player are free. If you don't want the overhead and impact of a VM then use a free sandbox, like Shade Sandbox. Toolwiz Time Free isn't a sandbox but instead more like a system snaphot: after a reboot, the OS partition is back to the same state is was before. Tis much like Returnil's System Safe Free (which they abandoned to go to their QuietZone payware). Both use a kernel stack driver on file I/O to redirect writes to a virtual disk. Upon a reboot, the prior virtual disk got discarded and either a new one created (if you stayed in protection mode) or you returned to writing to the real disk. You didn't need Windows 10 and using apps to get the processes virtualized. I had no idea and it's good to know. Still, what Microsoft offers in its sandboxing is better than nothing and I'll take it even if it only really offers a "feeling" of security rather than the real thing. and the knowledge that I can compensate the developers of open-source applications in exchange for the improved security and easier updating process. So why pre-pay for an untested app when you can trial a program whereupon you can decide AFTERWARD if it is worth the money to donate? Nobody is stopping an interested party from downloading the app directly from the author's site and trying it out in its Win32 form. I know that the Windows Store is still pretty bad in its application offerings but I figure that if we all support them in this fashion, the content might improve. I'm not really interested in giving Microsoft a slice (30%) of every app purchased at their online store. Yeah, Microsoft gets 30%. See: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/jen...s-google-play/ Just like eBay that gets a slice of every transaction (but a meager 3%), Microsoft generates revenue from app sales from their store. Microsoft's hefty transaction fee is what presses developers to charge higher prices. Another example of Microsoft's superior greed: gift cards from Microsoft add a 2.4% surcharge onto the 3% transaction fee, plus the buyer pays sales tax on the gift card and then pay sales tax again on anything purchased with the gift card. After deducting for the transaction fee per sale on an app, how long before the developer gets an ROI on their repetitive annual subscription ($49/year individual, $99/year for a company) to participate at Microsoft's Store versus participating at Google's store ($25 ONE-TIME fee)? $9 apps (even for a short-term $6 sale) are considered overpriced at Google's store for Android apps. I get to test trial and donationware BEFORE paying. If I keep donationware and later donate after successful testing, the author gets ALL of my donation, not just some portion of it. You're right but a little is better than nothing at all. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
"Wolf K" wrote
| "Universal apps"? In my lexicon, that would be an app that will run on | any platform. Just download it and go. | That's what they are, in Microsoft's world. Universal apps run on all versions of Windows 10, including, but not limited to, the non-existent Win10 phone. They were really meant to be phone apps that could sync with desktops. But now there's no phone. There's no Windows tablet to speak of. And sandboxed trinket apps on a desktop miss the point. The advantage of a desktop is that one can install and use full-powered software on an ergonomically optimized device. Apps are limited- functionality software for limited-functionality devices. And as VanguardLH noted, WinStore apps require cooperating with MS, distributing through their store, and giving them a 30% cut. Hardly a good way to try to support software developers when one could just as easily donate directly to the Paint.Net people, or any other software author, and eliminate the Microsoft shakedown. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:03:40 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:
Hell, I even bought Paint.net there and installed the Universal version of HexChat as well. I love [...] the knowledge that I can compensate the developers of open-source applications [...] How much of your payment goes to the developers and how much goes to Microsoft? -- Kind regards Ralph |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
Ralph Fox wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:03:40 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote: Hell, I even bought Paint.net there and installed the Universal version of HexChat as well. I love [...] the knowledge that I can compensate the developers of open-source applications [...] How much of your payment goes to the developers and how much goes to Microsoft? MS gets 30% cut, developer gets 70% cut. According to an article a few years ago, the majority of store developers, are starving to death. They don't get enough from Store sales to buy Kraft dinner. The "high volume" developers, who move quite a few units, can probably continue to work on Store versions. But the little guys (and many of the scum bags), it's a losing proposition. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
"Paul" wrote
| According to an article a few years ago, the majority | of store developers, are starving to death. They don't | get enough from Store sales to buy Kraft dinner. The | "high volume" developers, who move quite a few units, | can probably continue to work on Store versions. But | the little guys (and many of the scum bags), it's | a losing proposition. | That's always been true of shareware in general. Even Mac developers, catering to an audience that clamors to pay full retail, have trouble. There are typically a handful that hit it big. The rest are a labor of love. And that's with productivity software. Apps, whether for phone or Win10, are small trinket programs. Even fewer of those have any rational profit model. The rare hits are things like Angry Birds. The top 10 phone apps are generally commercial apps for websites https://www.topwindata.com/windowsapps.html Skype, youtube, facebook, weather, instagram... Similarly, ratings for "best" apps tend to list trinkets like games, restaurant reccomendations, etc https://betanews.com/2017/11/17/best...-this-week-50/ Phone apps is what we're talking about here. Microsoft didn't just streamline software. They're trying to eliminate software and sell people on sandboxed trinket apps and services. They're aiming to eventually have something like interactive cable TV, where you order entertainment, games, whatever, through the WinStore. It so happens that their phone is kaput. But that's not stopping them. Apps are services for limited service devices. They're not generally productivity software. Some provide software functionality or even add to the functionality of the device. (Like iPhone flashlight apps.) But they're not really meant to be highly functional. A graphic artist will pay for Photoshop. A lawyer will pay for MS Office. There's not much market for trinket games and even less for something like a Facebook app. That's why the big, up-and- coming privacy/security fiasco is with apps. Most small apps depend on selling datamined info or showing ads. Some of those have turned out to be malware, even on iPhones. The big commercial apps, like Facebook, are done as an investment. They want people to use it for free. There's an interesting trinket app example he https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/stor...o/9p22nzc2qp45 PDF Assistant Pro. $3. It was one of the few useful things I found in a quick search. It sounds impressive for $3. But read the comments. Can't print the PDF. Document changes are limited. No ability to add pages. Reading down it increasingly sounds like this is an app to read PDFs and maybe add a note, for use on your own device. Pro? It's a Pro version of an app to help you read a PDF. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Universal apps
On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 22:40:23 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote: "Wolf K" wrote | "Universal apps"? In my lexicon, that would be an app that will run on | any platform. Just download it and go. | That's what they are, in Microsoft's world. Universal apps run on all versions of Windows 10, including, but not limited to, the non-existent Win10 phone. It's a shame that it failed, to be honest. I still found Cortana to be better than what both Apple and Google are offering and the system was responsive in addition to very customizable and pretty. They were really meant to be phone apps that could sync with desktops. But now there's no phone. There's no Windows tablet to speak of. And sandboxed trinket apps on a desktop miss the point. The advantage of a desktop is that one can install and use full-powered software on an ergonomically optimized device. Apps are limited- functionality software for limited-functionality devices. And as VanguardLH noted, WinStore apps require cooperating with MS, distributing through their store, and giving them a 30% cut. Hardly a good way to try to support software developers when one could just as easily donate directly to the Paint.Net people, or any other software author, and eliminate the Microsoft shakedown. Good points. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|