Ask Paul: September 30 (Premium)

Happy Friday! And welcome to the longest Ask Paul in recent memory, thanks to a great set of thought-provoking reader questions.

Let’s dive in.

Google, Stadia, the future

rob_segal asks:

Related to Google’s cancellation of Stadia, what kind of effect do you think this will have on consumer perception of future Google services? Rightly or wrongly, some people have the perception that Google cancels or changes apps and services all the time and this will just add to that perception, especially coming off the Pixelbook cancellation. At this point, do you think Google needs to adjust their expectations for consumer traction to rebuild lost confidence?

I look forward to Ask Paul every Friday and while this may seem weird, I usually—not always, but usually—do not read through all the questions in advance. This week, for whatever reason, I did scan through the questions, and I was struck by how many of them reflected things that I’ve been semi-obsessing over this week. This happens from time to time, and it’s always interesting to me how often we’re all thinking about the same things. Anyway, this is the first example of that this week.

I wrote a bit yesterday about some of the more interesting takeaways from Amazon’s devices and services event this week. But that was very specifically related to improvements to existing products and services, and this notion that people who adopt the Amazon smart home ecosystem just continue to see new benefits, even when they’re not spending more money on new stuff. There are two other bits I was/am still considering writing about, however: Amazon’s notion of “ambient intelligence,” which I feel is the next logical step in what I and many others call ambient computing, and is clearly the next wave of technology, and some of the numbers Amazon provided that demonstrate the scope of its dominance in smart home technology.

By this point, you’re probably wondering: OK, fine, but what does that have to do with Stadia and Google? And the answer, obliquely, is … everything. And there’s a broader discussion here that ties into things we’ve discussed broadly over the years and more specifically in recent days. Put another way, whenever one makes a decision, in this case, to adopt a tech product or service, it’s not just about which direction you went and why. It’s about which direction you didn’t go and why.

Broadly, that discussion is my whole “ecosystems matter” thing. And the more specific and recent example, for me, is my adoption of the Apple Watch, which should also be seen as a rejection of Fitbit and, perhaps, of the entire Google ecosystem, which includes Pixel and Nest hardware as well as Google software and services. By choosing Apple Watch, I am implicitly—perhaps explicitly—rejecting other things. And there’s a lot that goes into that.

So, to Google. A couple of points.

First, we should acknowledge that Google does in some cases provide the same types of free enhancements over time to some products and services as does Amazon. For example, its Pixel handsets get quarterly “feature drops” that add new features, and Android more generally also gets irregular and free feature updates that span most supported Android versions. Google Fi has been improved over the years, most recently with an update that added support for Wi-Fi calling to iPhone and some international features. And so on.

But Google also shows a curious ambivalence about many of its products and services over time. And for people looking to adopt parts of this ecosystem, this is troubling. The company infamously cancels project after project, of course, but what we should be concerned about here is why. Why did Google kill Stadia really? And the answer, I think, is that the company was not all-in on this project despite the fact that it is one of only a handful of companies (Google and Microsoft, maybe Apple being the others) that have the AI chops, financial and technical resources, and willpower/need to succeed in this market. And this ambivalence was obvious to both users and developers. And it’s something we see across the Google ecosystem. As Amazon races forward, Google … mostly sits still. It’s bizarre, given how central these things are to its business.

If you compare any parts of the Amazon and Google ecosystems, you will see the same trends again and again. Smart speakers. Mesh Wi-Fi systems. First-party smart home products in general. Amazon does a lot, and Google does very little, and slowly. Seriously, look them up. (Yes, there are always exceptions. Amazon infamously failed in smartphones, for example. But then again, Amazon probably outsells Google in tablets by an order of magnitude.)

And then there’s Stadia. This is the game streaming service with the best tech, and it’s failing because Google immediately showed it was not all-in on this product. Amazon Luna is pretty darn close from a technology standpoint, but it’s relatively unknown, I bet. And yet I bet it survives and even thrives. In part because of ecosystem network effects—integration with Prime is always huge, and means Luna can succeed by being just one of many Prime perks—and in part because you just don’t hear stories about Amazon killing things as much as you do with Google. (Its Halo health products are like this. It’s widely-mocked first-gen screen-less strap has since been augmented by several additional products, including that sleep-tracking device they just announced. That’s what all-in looks like.) Look up Luna, seriously: Amazon has five different subscriptions for different audiences at different price points, and Prime members get free games.

Put another way, Google dabbled with a high-profile product, Stadia, and then gave up. Amazon is all-in on a low-profile product, Luna, and it is still there. Anything could happen, of course, but this is all too common with Google. All too common.

Which finally gets to the heart of your question: have Google’s regular product deaths had any impact on consumers, or will they ever?

And … I don’t think so, because it has so many crucial, high-profile, and successful products and services that most people probably don’t notice these things. Gmail, Google Calendar, Search, Maps, etc. All huge. Microsoft killing Microsoft Band, Zune, and even Windows Phone likewise had no real impact on the core billions of customers who use Windows and Office every single day. These things never gave them pause either.

But there is a lesson here, and it applies to Microsoft too. When these companies, which are wildly successful in certain areas, announce small new products and services, maybe take a step back and remember history. These companies dabble in things and then give up on them regularly. And they cannot be trusted to continue forward with things, even if they are innovative and unique, if they are not immediately billion-dollar businesses. And most of what they do is not. So yes, please keep using Windows and Office, and Google Search and Maps. But tread lightly with the side projects. Chances are, they won’t last very long. And that’s especially true this year with the economic downturn and related uncertainties.

I was never going to drop Xbox for Stadia. But I am ready to upgrade my old Google Wifi system, I’m ready for some smart home tech like smart door locks and so on, and I have spent the past three years or so wondering why Google has not responded to Amazon’s incredibly aggressive smart home pushes. I think I’ve reached the tipping point. And between all that my shift from Pixel to iPhone and from Fitbit to Apple Watch in the past year, I’ve kind of come to an unexpected place where Google makes sense in theory but not in reality. And this is not where I expected to be.

Sorry that was so long. My brain has been on fire this past week.

Related to this, helix2301 asks:

Do you think this [the Stadia cancelation] is a sign of things to come for gforce now or xcloud?

No. Unlike Google, Microsoft is all-in on gaming and has demonstrated that again and again in the Satya Nadella era, not just with words but with actions. Microsoft isn’t buying Activision Blizzard so they can have Call of Duty exclusives on a console. They’re doing this because the future of gaming is everywhere, and they have the resources and, most importantly, the desire to lead in this major market shift. Gaming streaming is absolutely the future. It’s just a matter of which companies invest, stick it out, and come up with the right mix of solutions.

Do you think Logitiech might have known this why they did not include stadia?

It’s more likely that they reached out to Google to get Stadia on there and were rebuffed with no reason given. What we’re learning now is that third-party developers and even those internally at Stadia had no idea this was coming and that it was a nasty surprise for everyone.

Ignite expectations

will  asks:

Curious what news you might expect to see out of Ignite?  There is a prerecorded Surface event on the same day, but was not sure what else might be announced.  Still waiting on some Loop news/apps, so many be at Ignite?

There is only one thing I care about with this show, Loop. (Well, Surface, too, but that event isn’t technically part of Ignite and was in fact rescheduled for unrelated reasons.) And when I look at the Ignite 2022 session list, I see a particularly high-profile Panos Panay session. My only worry is that this will turn into a “coming soon” announcement and not an actual release. It’s surprising how long this has taken. But that’s where my attention is this year.

Sustainability

vernonlvincent asks:

What are you thoughts on the sustainability of how much it costs to be involved in technology for the typical user. The median US household income for 2021 was $70,784, and that is a drop from 2020. The government assumes 25% of your income is disposable, with the remainder going toward things like housing, utilities, etc, which works out to $17,687.

When I look at house much it costs to remain reasonably current in technology, I often wonder how a typical person can do it. Flagship phones are now mid-$1500 to $2000. Laptops are equally expensive. I have trouble seeing how a family of 4 can keep up.

I know you’re not an economist, and I’m not necessarily looking for a defense of current pricing policy. But as someone who often reviews for the more ‘normal’ person – I wondered if you had noticed how expensive it is to just have modern tech and if you had any thoughts on it.

So I was thinking about a few things related to this recently, go figure.

I have a neighbor who is in his late 70s and he’s been using a Windows 8.1 PC since I’ve known him, and he will ask me for help with things from time to time. He’s been fretting about the end-of-life date for some reason, but with that January 2023 date coming up, he got a bit frantic and … decided to buy a MacBook Air without consulting me or any of the other neighbors (one of whom is an Apple guy). We all had this conversation about the grass being greener and how he would need to go to this other guy for support now, but my basic message was that he would still have problems, just different problems. Anyway, the point of this story is, this guy used a freaking Windows 8.1 PC for almost TEN years (!).

That’s crazy. But it’s only a slightly extreme version of a common story where many people just use things until they can’t. I’m in the Boston area right now for a family thing, and I had dinner with a friend last night who coincidentally gets an iPhone from work that he only uses for work. He told me that he’s asked if he wants to replace it every two years, but he always says no and just uses it until it’s no longer supported. So he’s only upgraded once or twice over the years. He just doesn’t care.

The other related thing I happened to see this morning in my feed was an article about which personal technology you shouldn’t skimp on. (Spoiler alert: it’s power adapters, surge protectors and power banks, graphics cards, a “daily driver” notebook computer, PC power supplies, game controllers, and headphones and headsets.) I would have constructed a different list, but whatever. There are things we all need to use, computers and smartphones among them, and I too would argue that you shouldn’t skimp on these items because cheaper devices have lower-end components and won’t be viable for as long (aren’t future-proof).

Computers and smartphones are expensive, yes. But because they last for several years, you can spread out that cost over a long period of time. You can do this literally in some cases, with (hopefully 0 percent) financing. Or you can space out your expensive tech purchases and plan to make these upgrades on some schedule. Anyone with a family has done the hand-me-down thing where a father (in my case) gets a new device and then hands it down to a spouse or child after a few years. And I know with smartphones that we’ve either paid for the kids’ devices as gifts outright or financed them over time as part of a multi-person wireless carrier subscription.

Anyway, it’s hard to keep a family of four in new technology unless you’re rich, for sure. But I do think that you can be pragmatic about it if you can just avoid the desire to upgrade all the time. Which is easy for me to say, and advise, not that I ever do it myself. But I’m in a unique place and often get to borrow computer and phone hardware.

But my overreaching thought here is that buying expensive, quality products less often is generally better than buying inexpensive products and replacing them more often. There are exceptions to everything, and there are of course people who see great value in products (like most Amazon Fire tablets) that I think are crap. That’s why resources like The Wirecutter (which, yes, is not free) or tech reviews on the web or YouTube can be so valuable, and can help people figure out where the real value is.

Xbox everywhere

OldITPro2000 asks:

Regarding the Logitech Cloud gaming handheld device as well as other similar devices (perhaps not including Steam Deck), any idea why Microsoft wasn’t first to market with an Xbox-branded equivalent to these? It seems like it would be a no-brainer for them.

I agree, and this one kills me. I have no idea why Microsoft hasn’t released an Xbox-branded portable gaming device similar to the Logitech G Cloud Gaming Handheld. That said, I suspect that they will in time.

And I said elsewhere (Windows Weekly and/or First Ring Daily) that Microsoft technically does sell a terrific portable cloud gaming device: it’s called Surface Go 3, starts at just $399, and has a roomy 10.5-inch touchscreen display that will work out of the box with touchscreen control-enabled Xbox Cloud Gaming titles. You can add an Xbox Wireless Controller for $60, and while it’s not as elegant and mobile as the Logitech device, it has advantages too.

Likewise, whatever happened to the Xbox Cloud Gaming streaming stick? Last I heard they went back to the drawing board on it but it seems to have evaporated since then.

That is the last I heard as well. I feel like the goal with Xbox Game Pass/Cloud Gaming has to be “Xbox everywhere,” and that means there has to be a way to add Xbox to any display, whether it’s built-in or via an add-on device. And that this needs to come from Microsoft. It will.

Windows app development

TheJoeFin asks:

I develop a few different Windows apps and as such follow the dotnet news closely. I think it is incredible what the devdiv team at Microsoft has done by transforming dotnet (core) from tech locked into Windows into an open source and performant option. This many years investment has reinvigorated attention and attitudes around Microsoft from a dev tech standpoint. The devdiv team still seems to struggle to make a compelling UI framework story, but we’ll see if MAUI is the solution.

.NET’s evolution from a proprietary Windows-only technology to an open-source, cross-platform solution is a story for the ages, and I wish Richard Campbell would finish his book about the history of .NET because this, I think, is the crowning achievement of that history. That said, it wasn’t planned, and had Miguel de Icaza not had the incredible idea to port .NET to Linux and open source over 20 years ago, later developed Xamarin, and then brought that to Microsoft, it would never have happened.

I did speak recently with Richard about this history and was surprised to discover that .NET was always controversial and divisive within Microsoft, and that the reason Sinofsky and the Windows 8 team went with the COM-based predecessor to what is now called UWP/Windows App SDK is that they hated .NET so much. I still see the Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) as the apex of Microsoft’s app frameworks, but it wasn’t seen that way by many inside of Microsoft, especially at first, and it was never broadly used internally. We’re still dealing with the aftereffects of those politics today, of course.

As to whether .NET MAUI is “the” solution, yes and no. It can be a solution as much as, say, Windows App SDK is today, meaning that it’s one of many solutions for people who wish to create modern apps that run on Windows. But it suffers from the same mobile focus and will never truly be a native desktop app framework. We’ll never see one of those again, of course.

I’ve said this before, but the future of Windows app development is cross-platform and there are very few reasons for developers to write apps that only run on Windows. That could be web-based (React Native, perhaps, and others), Flutter, or .NET MAUI. It will likely just be some mix of all that.

Unfortunately, I don’t feel like the same can be said about Windows. I was hoping with Windows 10X maybe Microsoft was trying a similar long term investment approach, but it seems the strategy today has not changed. The Windows insider program is stale, features are boring, improvements occur at a chaotic yet anemic pace, and there does not seem to be any acknowledgement of these realities.

Every once in a while, Microsoft will do something that I feel is an attempt to advance Windows similarly (but at a much smaller scale) to what NT did in the 1990s. Windows RT was like that. Windows 10 S, sort of. Windows on Arm. And, yes, Windows 10X. Each of these had potential, some kernel of a good idea. And each failed for various reasons. (Windows on Arm could still succeed of course, but for now, it’s just Windows as we know it on a different hardware platform.) But traditional Windows has just sort of soldiered on and weathered these attempts at change.

Do you get a sense that Windows is just going to slowly plod along like this forever?

Yes. Windows is a mature platform with established use cases that haven’t really changed in decades. Technology improves, but the basics are still the same.

Do you think Windows in 20 years be mostly the same as Windows today? Have we already seen the changes Panos has brought to Windows or is there more to come on his vision and strategy for Windows?

There is no “vision” for Windows beyond keeping this cash cow going. That’s not a dig at Panos, just a recognition of reality. Just as Terry Myerson was brought in to modernize Windows for a new mobile era, Panay was brought in to do the same, but this time for a mobile era in which Microsoft plays no direct role. The goal is basically to convince people to stick with Windows when they’re using non-Microsoft technologies everywhere else in their lives.

And that’s because every attempt to bring Windows to new form factors (mobile, IoT, whatever) has failed, and every attempt to stretch Windows beyond its core strengths has failed. Windows lacks the broader ecosystem tie-ins that make the Mac somewhat interesting (to iPad, iPhone, Apple Watch, and Apple services customers), but if you strip all that away and look at what’s happening there, you see the same thing: Legacy, mature platform with small, evolutionary changes over time. Hell, Apple even resisted multitouch on the Mac. Microsoft went to town on that one.

But yes, I think Windows is the same in 20 years, just as it was the same 20 years ago: the PCs are thinner, lighter, and better. But the basic interactions are unchanged. And the reason is that the PC just isn’t the center of most people’s lives. Most spend a lot more time on phones and that breeds a whole successful ecosystem of other products and services in which Microsoft and Windows play no role.

Using tech to correct physical issues

Allen_Maloy asks:

Some future tech discussion here: Was visiting with relatives/friends recently and they were recounting their horror stories with their various corrective eye surgergies. As someone who has worn contacts now 40 years, i’ve been very reluctant to get any corrective surgery that could not only create additional/future problems or worse yet, irreversible damage.I recall you saying that you wear contacts as well and wonder if you’ve ever considered corrective surgery?

Yes. But I have pretty severe myopia, which means I’d likely end up with better vision but would still need to correct it. And … these are my eyes. I don’t think I’d risk it, personally, though I’ve certainly considered it.

My “future tech” that I’ve been wondering/wishing for is “smart” contact lenses to get here. I check in every 5 years and seems it’s still 10 years away. Imagine Google Glass type of info, AR, recording/streaming, health monitoring, revealing aliens masquerading as humans, etc. And none of that dorky headgear like GG or Hololens!

I was just thinking about this in regards to the Apple Watch, which provides an incredible range of functionality via a mountain of sensors that are all aimed at the least usable part of your body for such things, your wrist. I was theorizing with Brad the other day that the only way that Apple can truly innovate in the years ahead is via embeddable sensors and that the logical endgame to this shift will be that Apple Watch will basically just turn into a front-end screen and interaction point for the data collection from those sensors.

I mean, think about it. Wearables started off measuring steps, poorly, and then evolved to be a lot more sophisticated. But the most obvious need in this space, I think, is blood pressure monitoring, and that will always be impossible with a wrist device. You can buy connected and old-school blood pressure devices for the home easily now, but embedded sensors would be the easiest/most seamless approach for this and other monitoring needs that a band/watch can never do.

Instead of lines at an Apple Store, we’ll see lines at medical clinics to get these sensors implanted. You know it’s coming.

Ongoing site issues

bleeman asks:

My questions are all related to the site. Will we ever get an option for dark mode? Will the intermittent login issue ever be resolved. I get so frustrated that 90% of the time when I follow a link from one of your E-mails, I find I have to login again even though I’ve checked the Remember Me option. To add insult to injury, every time I come in I have to close the stupid, “We use cookies to improve your browsing experience” message. To make matters worse about every third or fourth time I follow a link from one of the emails, once I login I don’t get taken to the article in question, instead I end up on my profile page and then have to go hunt for the article.

Yes, these things will be fixed. I don’t have a schedule per se, but we will have a more formal post on what we’re planning next soon.

For whatever it’s worth, I do experience the frequent need to re-sign in as well, and can’t stand that. And I use a web browser plug-in called Dark Reader to get Dark mode support, if that helps (on desktop).

Sorry for the rant, it’s just extremely frustrating that this has been going on for so long and I have reported it several times to the help account over the past year or so.

Not at all. We’re racing to improve the site as much as we can, and while I’m super happy with the comments system update we made recently in particular, there’s much more to do.

Regardless of all of the above I still enjoy your writings and just renewed my subscription.

Thanks!

Photoshop Elements vs. Affinity Photo

bwookey asks:

With the updated Photoshop Elements 2023 coming out, what’s your opinion on the better program – Affinity Photo or Photoshop Elements?

Both are excellent, but I switched to Affinity Photo a year or two ago because it is less expensive, is a one-time purchase, and is updated via the Microsoft Store meaning I can use it on any number of PCs and not just one or two. (Photoshop Elements can also be purchased this way, but only on a version-by-version basis. You have to pay for annual upgrades.)

And that would have been the end of the story except for one thing: Starting sometime in the past year, Affinity started introducing errors into my images in the form of empty blocks. So I would open an image, crop and resize it for the site, and then export it, only to discover that the resulting image is corrupted. This happens all the time, on different PCs and with different export formats, and it has never been fixed. It doesn’t happen with every single export. But it does happen every day if I use it enough. No idea what’s up.

So, OK, fine, I could get by just using Photoshop Elements, and there’s no need to upgrade every year. My 2020 version works just fine. And it does, mostly: I can export without fear, it’s always rock solid. But some things are easier for me in Affinity, and, worse, Elements is not compatible with some modern image formats (WEBP is one, I think), so I can’t even work with those files. My workaround is to use Image Glass (which is my preferred image viewer) to convert to a more common format like PNG and then use Elements. But that’s an extra step.

In other words, both have issues and I’ve been switching between both lately. Which is not something I can recommend to others, obviously. So I guess it depends on your needs. Mine are simple enough, and if the export bug was fixed, I’d just use Affinity. It’s cheaper and better, even, for some of the things I do. But Photoshop Elements is rock solid reliable and has a lot of wizard-based functionality for photo creations and so on (that I don’t use).

And that’s a long of saying that I’m not sure how to answer this one, sorry. It’s complicated.