I was actually excited about Edge switching to Blink because I assumed Edge would remain a UWP app but it would get updated via the Store for once, it was going to be awesome. But it appears they’re just scrapping Edge altogether. The new Edge is a Win32 app with a blink engine. I think this is just as big a story as EdgeHTML being scrapped. UWP really does seem to be dead. If Edge is now a win32 app that uses blink, this is painful gut punch to Windows
shameermulji
<p>Like yourself, to me this signals that UWP is eventually dead. Long-term, the app story on the Windows platform will be PWA's (ie: Electron) & containerized Win32 (ie: Centennial) apps.</p>
shameermulji
<blockquote><em><a href="#379000">In reply to FalseAgent:</a></em></blockquote><p>"developers don't want native"</p><p><br></p><p>Depends on the app. If an app is just an extension of a cloud service then you may be right but if it's a tool for higher-end needs (ie: Office, Photoshop, AutoCad, etc.) then nothing beats native, be it native on mobile or desktop.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#379095">In reply to lvthunder:</a></em></blockquote><p>I doubt that many professionals are going to use a web-based version of AutoCAD. It would be slower and wouldn't offer any compensating advantages.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#379281">In reply to robincapper:</a></em></blockquote><p>Autodesk categorizes Fusion 360 differently than AutoCad. They say the former is primarily an engineering tool for mechanical design while the latter is a general purpose drafting tool. Since they are entirely different products it's impossible to compare their performance although it's hard to imagine that a web based tool could outperform a native one given the extra round-trip delay over the Internet. </p><p><br></p><p>These days companies seem to prefer the steadiness of income that comes from a subscription model over the higher performance of a downloadable native app. It's not a technology-driven strategy.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#380011">In reply to behindmyscreen:</a></em></blockquote><p>There's a lot of considerations that vary from one enterprise to another. Running on a local server would certainly decrease the round-trip time but it might be decreasing the performance by requiring the computing to take place on a single server rather than taking advantage of the considerable processing power of each Windows workstation. Vendors switch to a subscription model precisely because they think it will provide them with more money, not less which means the customer pays more. Support costs don't necessarily drop significantly if you place an application on a server. It depends on the application in question and specific aspects of the operation. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#379885">In reply to ghostrider:</a></em></blockquote><p>Starting with Windows 8/RT, Windows was designed to accommodate mobile, but it's not as if running on the desktop was just luck. It was planned to have that dual operation from the start.</p><p><br></p><p>But it's true that UWP only provided value on Windows mobile because on the desktop it at best would offer redundant capabilities and in fact only provides a subset of legacy Windows functionality.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#379683">In reply to rob_segal:</a></em></blockquote><p>I don't think you can really claim that Win32 application development is "in a coma" based on your own idiosyncratic needs and preferences. You say you can't find what you consider to be a "decent" email and calendar app, but that personal determination of quality doesn't have anything to do with how much development activity is occurring in the category of such apps. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#379847">In reply to jimchamplin:</a></em></blockquote><p>Name four major new applications on <em>any </em>platform in the past two years that aren't mobile related.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#379883">In reply to ghostrider:</a></em></blockquote><p>Developers are just as "locked in" to iOS or Android if they develop for those platforms as Windows devs are into Windows. Using cross-platform tools result in less optimal apps on each platform, but nothing is stopping developers from including Windows as one of the platforms should they choose to take that approach. </p>