Windows 8 and HTML5 will not go well

[George P Global Moderator]

Maybe not evil, but they're making it less enticing for developers to look into writing Windows software. I'd argue that development tools by the platform vendor are a relatively special case compared to other software and should be free. After all, developers are what makes the platform really worthwhile in the first place. And look at the competition: Xcode is free, Eclipse is free.

That's why MS does the express versions and also gives out the pro versions free to students through dreamspark etc. Honestly, VS is a big program and a lot goes into it, I honestly don't see why Adobe can charge up the wazzoo for it's creative apps and MS has to give everything out free? It once again sounds to me like people think they're entitled to stuff when they're not, something I blame the internet in general for. I'd say WinRT and being able to target ARM and x86-64 hardware without any extra effort is very enticing for developers to look into writing. Mobile devices and tablets are the new and fast growing market, and WinRT is targeting that specifically, Win32 is old and I really don't see it being updated more than what, if any, changes they added in Win8 for it. It's time to look ahead and even though Win32 will be around, and Windows will still support it, WinRT is going to take over.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

I honestly don't see why Adobe can charge up the wazzoo for it's creative apps and MS has to give everything out free?

Not everything. And they obviously don't have to. Look at it this way though: Adobe users aren't making Adobe's own platform more valuable with their creations. In fact, Adobe would be just as well off if people stopped creating stuff using Adobe apps, as long as the same number of licenses were sold. Now imagine what would happen if Microsoft sold the same number of licenses for their development tools but users would stop creating stuff with them... And there you see the difference. Microsoft profits from the creations that users get done using the development tools. Adobe doesn't.

[George P Global Moderator]

Not everything. And they obviously don't have to. Look at it this way though: Adobe users aren't making Adobe's own platform more valuable with their creations. In fact, Adobe would be just as well off if people stopped creating stuff using Adobe apps, as long as the same number of licenses were sold. Now imagine what would happen if Microsoft sold the same number of licenses for their development tools but users would stop creating stuff with them... And there you see the difference. Microsoft profits from the creations that users get done using the development tools. Adobe doesn't.

But you forget that VS didn't always have a free express version. It's something MS started doing later, The first Express version of VS didn't show up till 2005, before then you paid for VS like everyone else, or got it through some program for cheap or free from your school. Long story short, the issue here in my mind is that a select few think they should keep getting something free that they have at some point when it's in MS's right to give out whatever free version of whatever app they make. Win32 is done, it's development, as far as MS upgrading the APIs and adding to it etc is done with. WinRT is here to stay and take over, it's the new platform going forward and you'll see free tools for it before you see anything for the old and aged Win32 that, let's be frank here, would be best for all of us to start to get off of for various reasons.

[ACTIONpack]

Why is this thread about VS and not HTML5 and Windows8?

[mollick2]

Why is this thread about VS and not HTML5 and Windows8?

Because your fears of HTML5 and Windows 8 are in vain.

If anything your fear should be that they update IE 10 too often in Windows 8 breaking older apps. It doesn't do anything anyways, it's just used for the UI.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

I doubt there will be any breakage from updating IE in Win8 and "HTML5" apps, since they use barely any actual parts of HTML5, most stuff is done through Javascript (Controls are just <div> tags that have JS code hooked up to them).

The only part of HTML5 they seem to be using is the parsing algorithm and some tags.

[Noir Angel]

Standards compliance in IE is improving pretty rapidly. If anything Microsoft's only current problem is that out of the top 3 browsers on Windows they still have by far the slowest development cycle, I'd like to see them adopt a more rapid development cycle with IE

[George P Global Moderator]

Standards compliance in IE is improving pretty rapidly. If anything Microsoft's only current problem is that out of the top 3 browsers on Windows they still have by far the slowest development cycle, I'd like to see them adopt a more rapid development cycle with IE

If they really wanted to play the speed game they could release the platform previews as x.1 updates to IE but it'd never happen. At best you'll see a new IE once a year and that's about it. Besides HTML5 doesn't look like it'll be final anytime soon, I don't see a need to rush like the others only to have specs change a year from now and that break older sites/apps etc.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

IE already implements the most important parts of HTML5 (the parsing algorithm and such), and a fair portion of HTML5 is to standardize things browsers already do (Either where there's no prior standard, or where the browser differed from a standard, like IE)

The new things (like microdata) are being implemented slowly in other browsers, and the more implementation weight behind them, the less likely they are to change.

[BajiRav]

Standards compliance in IE is improving pretty rapidly. If anything Microsoft's only current problem is that out of the top 3 browsers on Windows they still have by far the slowest development cycle, I'd like to see them adopt a more rapid development cycle with IE

I think their current 12-18months release cycle is good enough. :/ They should keep it under 12 months but anything shorter is just pointless.