IT Management » Windows 8 May Have Devs Reaching for Painkillers

Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system will arrive on both tablets and traditional PCs when it debuts, and when it does, developers may have a lot of work ahead of them if they want their apps to run on both kinds of systems. Different kinds of processors and different types of user interfaces may make for a complicated learning curve.

Over half a million copies of the developer preview of Windows 8 have been downloaded, according to Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT), giving app makers around the world a sample of the software maker's upcoming operating system.

Those developers, though, may have to go through a learning curve if they want to build Windows 8 tablet apps.

The tablet versions of Windows 8 apps will be built for the OS's Metro user interface, and the Metro version of the Internet Explorer browser will not include Flash or other plug-ins. Further, they will run on devices powered by ARM (Nasdaq: ARMHY) processors, while the desktop version of Windows 8 will run on x86 PCs.

That means developers will have to create two versions of Windows 8 apps if they want them to run across the two different platforms.

"Developers will have to choose whether their apps need to be touch-enabled, in which case they should choose Metro, or whether the app requires a mouse interface for precision tasks such as computer-aided design and pixel manipulation, in which case they should choose the desktop version of Windows 8," Al Hilwa, a program director at IDC, told TechNewsWorld.

However, the lack of Flash support in Metro will not be a problem because "Windows apps today do not use Flash; they're written in native languages on Windows," Hilwa said.

Microsoft spokesperson Annie Truong declined TechNewsWorld's request for further comment.

The Perils of Win 8 App Development

Appdevs will have to go through a learning curve in order to create mobile Win 8 apps, IDC's Hilwa said.

"Apps targeting a touch interface require special style guidelines and rules that are different from those for desktop apps," Hilwa explained.

For example, Windows 8's Metro UI does not support overlapping windows, and it doesn't have all the interfaces for supporting these, Hilwa pointed out. "This means there are different ways of doing things that will require Windows UI developers to learn new tricks," he added.

The additional learning curve weighed on the minds of Windows devs, who raised their concerns after Microsoft previewed Windows 8 at the D9 conference in June.

Their fear was that they'd have to abandon Visual Basic, .NET, Silverlight and other languages with which they'd learned to create apps in for Windows.

Further, they were concerned that they'd have to compete with Web-based developers rushing into the market.

Failure to Communicate?

The question of whether or not applications created for the x86 platform can run on ARM devices led to a row between Microsoft and Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) back in May.

Renee James, head of Intel's software business, had suggested that Microsoft might create multiple versions of Windows 8, four of which would work on ARM processors and wouldn't run legacy applications.

Microsoft blasted that comment as inaccurate and misleading, and Intel said that the number four was arbitrary.

Microsoft's statements at the BUILD conference Tuesday may not have done much to clarify the matter.

Announcing Windows 8 Tuesday, Steven Sinofsky, president of Microsoft's Windows Division, had stated that apps developed for Windows 8 would run on both x86 and ARM platforms, and demonstrated that it was easy to convert desktop apps to Metro apps.

Microsoft's subsequent press release further strengthened that impression. It stated that the Metro style user interface is equally at home on touchscreens and with a mouse and keyboard and that Windows 8 would support ARM-based and x86 devices.

Sinofsky also stated that Microsoft app devs can leverage their existing skills in C# and other development languages they already know to create Windows 8 apps.

However, he told financial analysts Wednesday that x86 apps will not run on ARM devices and that cross-compatibility for Win 8 apps will not be practical, Information Week reported.

Internet » Flash's World Gets a Little Lonelier

When Microsoft's upcoming Windows 8 appears on tablet devices, the Metro version of its browser won't be doing so in the company of plug-ins -- not even Flash, one of the most popular browser plug-ins ever. While Flash will still have a home in other parts of the OS, Metro IE's shunning follows moves from companies like Apple, which has also banished Flash from its mobile platform.

Adobe (Nasdaq: ADBE) is putting on a brave face in the wake of Microsoft's (Nasdaq: MSFT) announcement Tuesday that the Metro version of Internet Explorer in Windows 8 -- the one intended for tablets -- will eschew plug-ins like Flash and instead use HTML 5.

"We are excited about the innovation and opportunities that are available to our customers and Adobe as the Web and platforms evolve across devices, including Windows 8 and Metro," Adobe's Danny Winokur, vice president and general manager for platform, told TechNewsWorld.

"We expect Windows desktop to continue to be extremely popular for years to come and that it will support Flash just fine, including rich Web-based games and premium videos that require Flash," Winokur said.

"In addition, we expect Flash-based apps will come to Metro via Adobe AIR, much the way they are on Android, iOS and BlackBerry Tablet OS today," Winokur added.

However, "with mobile form factors now exceeding sales of desktops and laptops and Flash not being widely embraced within mobile, it certainly doesn't paint a rosy picture for the future of Flash," remarked Mike Ricci, vice president of mobile at Webtrends.

"I just don't see a viable scenario whereby Flash survives in the long run," Ricci told TechNewsWorld.

"Flash is trending out," Rob Enderle, principal analyst at the Enderle Group, said. "Apple doesn't like it, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) doesn't like it, and now Microsoft doesn't like it."

The problem with Flash, as Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) has discovered, is that it makes too many demands on both processor power and battery power to work well on mobile devices, said Carl Howe, a research director at the Yankee Group.

"Using Flash on a mobile device is a bit like putting a snowplow on your Prius. It's good in theory, but without a more powerful platform, you spend all your time spinning your wheels," Howe told TechNewsWorld.

So what will happen to existing websites and Web apps? Will their developers have to scramble to make changes?

The Race Goes to the Swift

"Standards-based Web developers have for years been telling commercial sites using Flash that they were breaking the Internet," the Yankee Group's Howe pointed out.

"Flash violates many of the fundamental principles of today's open Web, including searchability, structuring of content, and the ability to bookmark where you are," Howe added.

In other words, the move toward Web 2.0 is at least partly to blame for Flash's troubles.

Developers, at least in the mobile area, have apparently heeded the warning signs.

"Mobile developers have largely stayed away from Flash, so they are likely feeling validated by what's happened recently," Webtrends' Ricci said.

Microsoft's move away from Flash toward HTML 5 in Windows 8 should not have surprised Windows devs either.

Back in August, Microsoft indicated it would move away from browser plug-ins and toward HTML 5, and it named Adobe Flash as one of the most common plug-ins.

The Impact on Flash Fans

Companies that adopted Flash "will have to rebuild their sites in different ways or buy Adobe tools that convert them to a more Web-friendly environment," Howe remarked.

There's "a pretty good installed base of websites out there that use Flash, and they're going to move to HTML 5," William Stofega, a program director at IDC, told TechNewsWorld. "They're not going to switch overnight, but they will switch."

Adobe has introduced tools that provide a workaround to this problem.

For example, last week, Adobe announced Flash Media Server 4.5, which lets publishers create HTTP content with Flash Media Server 4.5 and push it to iDevices.

Flash Media Server 4.5 renders the stream instead of relying on a device's processor to do this work, reducing demands on battery and processor power.

Back in July, Adobe released Adobe Edge in preview. Edge is a Web motion and interaction design tool that lets designers bring animated content to websites using HTML 5, JavaScript and CSS3.

Further, the company is working closely with Microsoft, Google, Apple and others to drive innovation in HTML 5, Adobe's Winokur said.

Keeping the Hope Alive

That cooperation is essential if Adobe is to remain a player.

"Flash is looking like a legacy technology, and unless it gets support from Google, Apple and Microsoft, it's hard to see how they'll hold the line," Enderle told TechNewsWorld.

"Adobe's premise is based on the fact that they own and control Flash, but they don't own and control HTML 5," Enderle added.

Computing » Apple Could Deliver a September Surprise With New MBPs

It was only last February that Apple rolled out its current line of MacBook Pros, but a recent report suggests it's getting ready for another refresh as soon as this month. The notebook bump would allegedly be relatively minor, adding slightly faster processors and not much else. But it could be just enough to give Apple yet another blowout holiday sales season.

Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) MacBook Pro laptop was upgraded with new Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) processors a little more than six months ago, but another refresh may be in the works that will bring revamped models to the shelves within the next two weeks.

The move is believed to be necessary to keep Apple's laptop up to date with Intel's latest Sandy Bridge quad-core processors.

Citing anonymous sources, AppleInsider reported Tuesday that the refresh will deliver marginal speed bumps to the laptop's performance. Other than that, no material changes over existing models will be ushered in with the update, according to the report.

The existing lineup of Intel processors in the MacBook Pro, which run at 2.0, 2.2 and 2.3 GHz, will be replaced with new Core i7 chips running at 2.4, 2.5 and 2.7 GHz, it stated.

Apple did not respond to a request for comment by MacNewsWorld on the rumored introduction.

Avoiding Consumer Regret

Hours after the AppleInsider report appeared, Decide.com -- a price-watching service that uses a number of data-mining and predictive technologies to make recommendations to consumers so they can make better purchasing decisions -- posted a "wait" warning for the MacBook Pro.

To arrive at a purchasing recommendation, Decide gathers news and rumors from thousands of sources across the Web and analyzes them with proprietary algorithms, explained the company's CEO Mike Fridgen.

"As those rumors for a particular product hit a critical mass, our editors will see that and change our recommendations from buys to waits," he told MacNewsWorld. "In the case of the MacBook Pro, we've just hit that point. It's gotten to a point where we believe now that a consumer would have regrets if they purchased a current version of the product."

Predictable Introductions

How much regret, however, may be debatable.

For most consumers, the difference between 2.2 and 2.4 GHz isn't going to be noticeable, asserted Carl Howe, research director for the Yankee Group in Boston. "It just makes people feel like they're not buying last year's technology," he told MacNewsWorld.

Although a jump from 2.0 to 2.4 gigahertz is significant, he conceded, "most people won't really pay very much attention to it."

"These machines are fast enough that most consumers don't tax them," he added.

Howe, who has studied Apple's introduction patterns over time, wouldn't be surprised if the company did a late-fall refresh of the line. "Apple introductions are remarkably predictable because of the sheer pacing of the market," he argued. "So, for instance, they very rarely do a Pro refresh in Q4 because they're refreshing all their consumer products just before Q4."

However, "Every now again they break the rule," he conceded, "and this sounds like it might be one of those. Although if they're going to break the rule, they usually do it as a minor update.

"Faster processor, yes," he added. "New case and design, no."

Blowout Holiday Numbers

The speed at which this latest refresh may be taking place could reflect Apple feeling market heat to push out new products faster. While six months between refreshes may seem fast in the Apple world, it isn't in the PC world, where the average refresh is three times a year, observed Stephen Baker, an analyst for the NPD Group.

"Apple hasn't had that fast a cadence, but clearly there's demand from the markeplace to turn over products faster than Apple has traditionally done," he told MacNewsWorld.

He contended that now is good time as any for a MacBook Pro refresh. "You're after back-to-school and you're ahead of the holiday season," he said.

In addition, because Apple had such outstanding fourth quarter sales last year, it will be difficult to surpass that performance this year, he continued. A refresh, even a small one, of a major product line may be just what it needs to keep pace with last year's numbers.

"They'd like to have some blowout holiday numbers this season, and upgrading and refreshing on the Mac, because it doesn't happen all that often, tends to be a great driver of volume for them," he said.

Tech News » How NOT to Push a New Open Source License, Part 2

To those who whine "I don't want Google/Microsoft/Apple/whoever to use my code!" -- why not? Really, if you think they're evil because they close off code, how are you any better by doing the same to them? (plus, whining is for kids). "But it conflicts with our anti-copyright anti-business agenda." Put down the bong, grab a bar of soap, and stop acting like a freetard. You're giving the rest of us a bad name.

How NOT to Push a New Open Source License, Part 1

Maybe it's time for yet another open source license -- but Bruce Perens' covenant isn't it. Instead, consider this:

The Respect The Programmer License (RPL) Version 0.3

This file copyright (c) [year] [your name] [your email address]

All rights reserved.

1. You may use, create verbatim copies, and/or distribute this file, but you are not required to. You shall not modify this file or any copies.

2. If the file is written in a scripting language that runs in an interpreter, you may use this file, unmodified, in your program, and distribute it with your program.

3. If the file is a source code file that is normally used to generate a compiled program, you may use this file, unmodified, as part of the source for your program. You may distribute the compiled program with or without this file.

4. This file is provided "as is" and without any express or implied warranties, including, without limitation, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.

5. The RPL is copyright (c) 2011 Barbara Hudson. Permission is granted to use the unmodified RPL to license your software. The canonical copy of this license, the release notes, FAQ, etc., can be consulted at http://milsecure.org.

End of license

For further information, contact Barbara Hudson at barbara.hudson@milsecure.org.

Interpretation/Deployment Notes

A. The RPL addresses one problem prevalent in most licenses, including the BSD, MIT, and GPL -- it's easier to just edit the file in front of you to fix a bug or add a feature than it is to contact the author and make sure everyone benefits. The RPL should eventually result in less duplication of effort and more, not less, sharing.

B. In the case of namespace conflicts (such as java or c++), please check to see if a similar file with namespaces is available from the author. The author will probably be happy to provide one, since you may not be the only person asking.

C. In the case of line ending conflicts, please check the author's website to see if there are Apple/Mac, DOS/Windows, or Linux/*NIX versions available. The author will probably be happy to provide one, since you may not be the only person asking.

D. If you need a modified version of the file, please ask the author. She or he may already be working on a new version with the changes you want. Alternatively, the author may be willing to write a custom version for you. Licensing terms for any such custom version are entirely at the author's discretion, and are not governed by this license.

E. This is an open source license -- you are free to view the code in this file and use it, intact, in any program you wish. This is not a copyleft license -- you are not required to distribute this source file with your program. This license grants you the freedom NOT to redistribute the source if you so choose.

F. You may charge any price you wish to distribute this file, and/or any program you create using it.

Remarks on the RPL

If code is written properly, it should be easy enough to integrate source files without changes. Worst-case scenario, those who use code licensed like this may have to create a "wedge" or "shim" file to interface between their code and the licensed code -- but that's good practice because it means that when an update is issued, the shim should mean that the new source won't have to be modified.

Not being copyleft means that it's more likely your code gets used. Some people will distribute it (in the case of run-time scripts, they really don't have a choice, right? :-) and this way you get credit for your work -- maybe not from the general public, but at least from your peers, which is what counts. People also know whom to contact for fixes and enhancements, leading to less waste and duplication of effort.

To those who whine "I don't want Google/Microsoft/Apple/whoever to use my code!" -- why not? Really, if you think they're evil because they close off code, how are you any better by doing the same to them? (plus, whining is for kids).

"But it conflicts with our anti-copyright anti-business agenda." Put down the bong, grab a bar of soap, and stop acting like a freetard. You're giving the rest of us a bad name.

Not being able to modify the source -- I can hear some of you going OMG THAT IS AWFUL! Hey, this is about respecting the programmer's copyrights, same as you can't modify that last book you bought. Since you can't modify or fork the file, maybe you'll collaborate with the author for a change, hmmm? Make sure bug fixes and enhancements get upstream. Or maybe even *gasp* pay them for some custom code -- or send a gift certificate for chocolate or a bottle of booze or something.

This isn't inspired by Borland's "Just Like a Book" license for its compilers (you could order the source libraries to examine, but not modify or share), but it has similarities. It's an improvement in that you can distribute the source if you want, and you can have multiple copies. But like Borland's license, you are not free to modify the code itself. Most projects should be able to accommodate that sort of limitation.