Jump to content

Talk:Universal Windows Platform: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Codename Lisa (talk | contribs)
Compatibility with Mac and Linux: First, talk page etiquette!
Codename Lisa (talk | contribs)
Line 27: Line 27:
::In my opinion, these are good enough to make the statement, and in the unlikely event the statement is nevertheless wrong, someone will quickly notice and correct this page.
::In my opinion, these are good enough to make the statement, and in the unlikely event the statement is nevertheless wrong, someone will quickly notice and correct this page.
::[[User:Tcotco|Tcotco]] ([[User talk:Tcotco|talk]]) 04:26, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
::[[User:Tcotco|Tcotco]] ([[User talk:Tcotco|talk]]) 04:26, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

:::Hello again, {{u|Tcotco}}

:::Let's start with this: "{{tq|[...]they are designed for running Android and iOS apps on Windows 10, not the reverse case[...]}}". But you exactly asked for the reverse case; i.e. you hinted that you have existing Mac and Linux customers. So, when you write "UWP apps will not run on Mac's, Linux [...] Microsoft have not indicated any intention to develop emulator/compatibility software for these platforms", you are saying ''UWP does not work on Mac and Linux, and there is no cross-platform equivalent''. Now you are changing it to ''UWP does not work on Mac and Linux and never will''. In case of the former, you care for developing apps for existing customers and in case of the latter, you are an exclusive UWP developer and want to extend your market to Mac and Linux without learning anything other than UWP.

:::As for the sources that you gave, ignoring the [[WP:SPS]] issue, they have the negative assumption issue again: They don't say it does not exist; they just say what the article says: It is for Windows 10 and later. (I couldn't read the Business Insider; I receive error 503.) This argument from absence is faulty.

:::Best regards,
:::[[User:Codename Lisa|Codename Lisa]] ([[User talk:Codename Lisa|talk]]) 15:11, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:11, 23 January 2016

Compatibility with Mac and Linux

I'm trying to insert the text "Since UWP was introduced in Windows 10, UWP apps will not run on Mac's, Linux Desktop or Windows 8 and below. Microsoft have not indicated any intention to develop emulator/compatibility software for these platforms." to the start of the Compatibility section.

As a developer, my most pressing question about UWP is "will my company be able to use it to sell software to our existing customers?". The text "first introduced in Windows 10" doesn't really answer that question at all - if emulator software existed then UWP apps _would_ run on these other platforms. Or it is conceivable that a software upgrade to Windows 7 & 8, _subsequent_ to Windows 10, would introduce the necessary components. Furthermore I think some redundancy is called for here, given that the section is titled "Compatibility" and the platform name is titled "_Universal_ Windows..." - the section on 'Compatibility' is where I would go straight to, to answer this question or clarify the meaning of "first introduced". Tcotco (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tcotco
First and most important: This page is community message board; if you want to write anything to it, please consider adding a proper title heading and adhering to its etiquette. (Please see WP:TALK.) If you want to say anything to me only, you can contact on my user talk page. But here, you talk to everyone.
Second, in Wikipedia, every claim that is challenged needs a source. You claim an emulator does not exist and these app don't work in Linux and Mac. Can I please see your source? A solution is to avoid saying things that you don't know and stick to things that you know, e.g., you don't know of any emulator, so you assume it does not exist. Don't! You don't know about Microsoft projects to bring Metro-style apps to iOS and Android, so you assume Microsoft has never even hinted. Again, don't! (Hint: You are wrong on both accounts. Project Islandwood and Astoria are mentioned in the article!)
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 17:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've read about Project Islandwood and Astoria and they are designed for running Android and iOS apps on Windows 10, not the reverse case of running Windows 10 UWP apps on other operating systems. So they don't suggest I'm wrong with my statement. If you initially misread my statement, can you suggest a wording which makes it clearer to both audiences: (a) developers trying to decide if it's worth creating UWP apps, and (b) end users trying to decide if it's worth upgrading to Windows 10?
Here are some references to support my claim. I can't find any authoritative announcement by Microsoft on this but based on these secondary sources and the fact Microsoft is not denying them, it seems safe to say that "Microsoft have not announced any intention...":
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34059267/can-uwp-apps-be-ported-to-windows-7
http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/293722/how-can-i-target-both-windows-10-uwp-and-windows-phone-8-1-in-the-same-app
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/microsoft-universal-windows-app-in-windows-10-are-deeply-flawed-2015-8?r=US&IR=T
http://vowe.net/archives/015113.html
In my opinion, these are good enough to make the statement, and in the unlikely event the statement is nevertheless wrong, someone will quickly notice and correct this page.
Tcotco (talk) 04:26, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, Tcotco
Let's start with this: "[...]they are designed for running Android and iOS apps on Windows 10, not the reverse case[...]". But you exactly asked for the reverse case; i.e. you hinted that you have existing Mac and Linux customers. So, when you write "UWP apps will not run on Mac's, Linux [...] Microsoft have not indicated any intention to develop emulator/compatibility software for these platforms", you are saying UWP does not work on Mac and Linux, and there is no cross-platform equivalent. Now you are changing it to UWP does not work on Mac and Linux and never will. In case of the former, you care for developing apps for existing customers and in case of the latter, you are an exclusive UWP developer and want to extend your market to Mac and Linux without learning anything other than UWP.
As for the sources that you gave, ignoring the WP:SPS issue, they have the negative assumption issue again: They don't say it does not exist; they just say what the article says: It is for Windows 10 and later. (I couldn't read the Business Insider; I receive error 503.) This argument from absence is faulty.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 15:11, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]