Keep hearing about boxing 32 win apps and such. Why not Android OS?

10

Box Android OS then fold the thing to Android phone then unfold it to Microsoft OS tablet. Finally dock it and turn it into a Microsoft OS computer running 32 win app on big screen with keyboard and mouse. If this can finally be done on ARM then Microsoft will have mobile platform.

Comments (10)

10 responses to “Keep hearing about boxing 32 win apps and such. Why not Android OS?”

  1. jules_wombat

    Or just use the Android platform. Windows is a dying platform, it certainly does has not any future in Mobile.

    Microsoft should have supporting hosting Android Apps in 2014, when Windows Phone and Live Tiles was perhaps a more compelling offer.

    • hrlngrv

      In reply to Jules_Wombat:

      In 2014 MSFT still had dreams of US$ billions of revenues from its own web store. If Apple could bring in that sort of revenue, the not quite yet humbled MSFT of 2014 couldn't conceive of Windows users failing to shovel lots more money MSFT's way. Being able to run Android apps was fine, but if that meant users being able to install them from Google's web store, then UNACCEPTABLE DAMMIT!

      It does seem MSFT needed (1) to fire Ballmer, (2) get out of making phone hardware and OSes, and (3) eat LOTS of crow in 2015 in order to transform itself into its current successful iteration.

  2. ragingthunder

    Windows will soon be replaced by an Intel JavaScript engine.

  3. ianceicys

    Linux is the future. Microsoft's azure division knows that. The devices group will eventually have a Linux based OS.

    • hrlngrv

      In reply to ianceicys:

      Maybe. Maybe not.

      Disclaimer: I'm a Linux user for the most part at home. I use Windows at work, but the only software I use which needs to run under Windows is Excel, with a bunch of add-ins which aren't available for the Mac version. In theory it's possible to develop work-alike add-ins for LibreOffice Calc, but that's a wheel with no screaming need for reinvention.

      At the risk of gross oversimplification, Windows users could be split into the following groups: (1) at work, (2) at home doing work, (3) at home doing productive things other than work, (4) creative/artistic, (5) hobby/freelance software development, (6) serious gaming, (7) leisure computing comprising modest games and lots of web browsing.

      IMO, phones and Chrome OS devices are more than adequate for (7), so it's hard to see demand not declining for Windows among those users unless those users want to hedge against (2) and (3). OTOH, it's hard to see Linux (as in Linux desktop environments and package managers rather than Chrome OS's desktop environment and web store) as more appealing for those users.

      For (4), Macs are definitely an alternative, but the number of people willing to embrace Krita, InkScape or the Gimp to be more than a tiny fraction of those who've become familiar with Windows creative/artistic software. (5) would be more or less the same: most people would likely prefer to keep using the tools they've become familiar using, and that means most sticking with Windows (at least those over 40).

      IMO, (1) and (2) will follow whatever their employer's IT department chooses, and inertia means that's going to be Windows for a long time to come. (6) will follow game vendors, and at the moment that's overwhelmingly Windows, and Steam isn't likely to change that.

      That leaves (3) as the group which may have the most to gain from switching to Linux. However, again people don't like change, and they may have a few 10-year-old or older Win32 programs they keep using despite no recent updates. OTOH, wine has become quite good at running Win32 software from developers other than MSFT and Adobe.

      That said, I have my doubts whether Windows has a bright future on servers. Departmental/local file servers, sure because it's insanity to fix what ain't broken. Anything else? VMs may be the best answer, which leads to the question what's the best host OS for lots of VMs.

      • wright_is

        In reply to hrlngrv:

        Very well described. The biggest problem is the inertia in business. Companies use software costing millions of dollars, they are unlikely to throw all that money away just to switch to Linux on the desktop or Android or iOS - I'm not talking about Office and Adobe here, I'm talking about custom written software.

        They might use tablets or smartphone apps for small areas - although we are currently rolling out Windows tablets, which cost a small fortune, because the tablet software for the industrial scales being controlled only runs on Windows. (Although an Android tablet with similar industry hardening isn't much cheaper, you don't see much change out of $3,000 for either platform).

        My wife pretty much just uses a Fire tablet and her smartphone. But she only used her PC for an hour a month to complete her timesheet in Excel, which she still needs to do. She never really used a computer, at work she only needs to use one for ordering food once a week from an online wholesaler for delivery to the kitches at work.

        At the company where I work, a lot of the production staff don't use a computer at all and never have. Many still don't have smartphones, or have trouble using them, because the concept is still alien to them.

        Even the concept of saving a file doesn't make sense to some. I had one case, where the user created a document, saved it, deleted the text, wrote the next document, saved it, deleted the text, wrote the next document, saved it, deleted the text and wrote the next document. Then they couldn't find their first piece of text! I tried to explain that overwriting the original file with new contents would overwrite the old text, but that didn't get through to them, "but I saved it! It must be there!"

        • hrlngrv

          In reply to wright_is:

          I work in financial services. Everyone has PCs on their desks. That said, all the nonexempt employees (effectively those paid by the hour and eligible for overtime) could use thin clients connecting to the company's Citrix application server farm. They're the ones who mostly use in-house developed software (excluding Excel models). Add a browser for the company intranet and an e-mail client, and that'd cover 99.x% of their normal PC usage.

          Re the inexperienced user, FWLIW, some mainframe files were set up to save different versions by date-time stamp (generation data groups). I'm not saying your user could have had experience with those, but this is something IBM foresaw decades ago. Give that much credit to IBM: they were (may still be) outstanding at figuring out the stupider things some users would try to do and engineering around that.

      • longhorn

        In reply to hrlngrv:
        For (4), Macs are definitely an alternative, but the number of people willing to embrace Krita, InkScape or the Gimp to be more than a tiny fraction of those who've become familiar with Windows creative/artistic software.


        Adobe software is available for macOS and Mac has traditionally been a "creator" platform. What's holding back the macOS plaform is pricing. There are no affordable Macs and that's the way Apple wants it. I think Apple wants Mac in the 8 - 15 % range globally. They adjust pricing to meet that goal.


  4. wright_is

    Why would you? The whole point would be to go from Android to Android to Android or Windows to Windows to Windows. You keep you apps and data consistent.

Leave a Reply