"Hey did you see this neat little Windows Store App? It's so much better than the version on Android."

"Do you know how many Windows Store Apps I've bought? Tens!"

"Damn! This Windows Store App keeps crashing"

"Writing Windows Store Apps is a great career builder."

"Snap! Is that a Windows Store App?!??!?"

"Why did the Windows Store App cross the road?"

Genius marketing! When someone sees a W8 device running an app they like they'll know right where to get it!

Dude 1: "Hey what kind of app is that? It's pretty cool!"

Dude 2: "It's a Windows Store App called Frrrt"

............................................________
....................................,.-'"..................."~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?......................................................\,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:"........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>–=="
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&"................`

Currently 1058 in the UK

(Search the store from the search charm using an asterisk or space to get a count)

Number of apps that actually look like they're worth having: ehm... the Kindle app's kind of nice, although I never really read on my desktop or laptop. Microsoft's Mahjong and Solitaire. OneNote MX would be nice if it weren't for the huge drawback of being full screen and the fact that I also have the regular desktop OneNote.

In fact, that goes for all of them. With the exception of maybe Remote Desktop (which I usually run full screen anyway), I have seen exactly zero apps so far where the benefits outweigh the drawback of requiring full screen (on a desktop PC). This includes built-in as well as store apps. Calendar and Weather are nice for their start screen tiles, but the apps themselves I rarely use because they're full screen. I'd rather use desktop IE or (even better) Outlook to add things to my Live Calendar which I can then see on the start screen tile.

Media center could be run windowed, and that made more sense as a full screen application than most Metro apps. Hopefully windowed metro apps will be added in Windows 9. Until then they might be nice for a tablet, but utterly pointless on the desktop.

http://apps.microsoft.com/webpdp/app/scroll/ad43a72d-41f5-479c-8de6-c0614abbed59

BW I know the 'edit' UI is crap (circa DOS Desktop GUI 1984).  Next version will be better ...

"You should not use 'Metro Style', that was a beta name and is no longer current. You should use 'Windows Store App' instead... it's long so you can make a little tap-dance every time you say it. Oh, and could you please wear this Bing sticker on your forehead while you are at it?"

Luckily, this won't last long. People will just ignore the official lingo and call them "Apps".

36 minutes ago, Bas wrote

This complaint is just pathetic. As if "App Store App" or "Google Play App" are snappy.

Except that's not their official name. I don't build a "Google Play App". I build an "Android" app.

I haven't done it, but there is one MS paint and one 3rd party paint app. Both of them are looking very nice, especially the 3rs party one can produce professional results.

I am reluctent to do it because I dont want to setup the account, the same Win98/XP case where I dont want to login to Hotmail when I login to my machine. I have to try it again and see if I can login as local account and login to store manually and logout when I close the store.

Available on Windows Phone Store is a term I am more concerned with, when company said they have an app for the device. Windows Store is short, so, it is not bad.

2 hours ago, Bas wrote

Jesus Christ, this is clutching at straws.

Yeah I know; whoever is in charge of Microsoft branding certainly is clutching at straws. I thought they had something with "metro" but since that option was pulled they went back to the "old way" of naming product. Truly sad.

1 hour ago, cbae wrote

I like this one.

I like it too. Not because of the price but because it's not a fart app. Without the guarantee of side-loading I'm sure we'll see a lot more of these types of apps in the store.

To all non-developers though, they're just apps. They don't need a term to distinguish between them and desktop apps.

Dude 1: "Hey I can't find that cool app you showed me in the Windows Store."

Dude 2: "That's because its a [WTFYouCallit] app, not a Windows Store App. You can buy it on Amazon"

1 hour ago, Bas wrote

@DeathByVisualStudio: Mature!

Why thank you!

A more realistic conversation:

Dude 1: "I can't find that cool app you showed me in the Windows Store"

Dude 2: "You can get it on Amazon, that's where I got it"

26 minutes ago, AndyC wrote

@DeathByVisualStudio: It's not a product name though, is it? It's not even a particular set of technology either.

So if it's no a particular set of technologies then what is the MSDN page for that I linked to in the original post about? Describing vapor?

A Windows Store app is a new type of application that runs on Windows 8 devices.   Read on if you want to learn more about what makes  Windows Store apps different from traditional desktop apps.

Dude 1: "I really like that app. Do you know if there's a Windows Store App version out yet?"

Dude 2: "No there's just the [WTFYouCallit] version right now. They do have a great version for the iPad though."

I half mockingly say iPad in Dude 2's response but unlike a Windows tablet there is just a single type of app that will run on it which is an important distinction. You reverse the conversation and it all breaks down.

Dude 1: "Nice iPad. I really like that app. Do you know if there's a Windows version out yet?"

Dude 2: "There is but its just a lame [WTFYouCallit] version. They haven't made a Windows Store version yet."

It's too bad just saying "Windows app" doesn't carry enough meaning. I'd be fine if the distinction was "Windows app" vs. "Windows desktop app" but the notion of what a "Windows app" has already been set in people's minds for a long, long time.

Point is the name doesn't really matter if the product is  success.  If we don't want to say Windows Store App" we will come up with an abbreviation or something else.that means "Windows Store App"

1 hour ago, Harlequin wrote

My most unfavorite Windows Store App is ironically enough the Windows Store app. Quite an unfun experience both in UI and UX.

Is it really considered a "Windows Store App"? How can you download the Windows Store app from the Windows Store, if you don't already have the Windows Store app?

31 minutes ago, Ian2 wrote

Point is the name doesn't really matter if the product is  success.  If we don't want to say Windows Store App" we will come up with an abbreviation or something else.that means "Windows Store App"

WSAPP. Wassapp. Waasssaaaap!

1 hour ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

So if it's no a particular set of technologies then what is the MSDN page for that I linked to in the original post about? Describing vapor?

It's something. I just don't quite think there is a word to describe quite what "it" is particularly well. It's like trying to differentiate between apps based on the fact one of them used VB XML literals. You can arguably do it, but it's meaningless at the end of the day.

And yet, at the same time, in developer conversations there is a need to differentiate and the more usual ways (like distinguishing between a "managed code" and "native app" or a Java and .Net app) don't really apply. Even WinRT doesn't quite fit, because bits of WinRT can be called from traditional desktop apps (and non-desktop app could be talking about a web/console/service app)

*snip*

Dude 1: "Nice iPad. I really like that app. Do you know if there's a Windows version out yet?"

Dude 2: "There is but its just a lame [WTFYouCallit] version. They haven't made a Windows Store version yet."

People only talk like that in bad (usually Microsoft) ads though. Geeks aside, the only question people ask is "Can I get it on my device?" - they don't care about the details (though, obviously how it actually runs may heavily, albeit subconsciously, affect their opinion of whether it really is a good app or not).

Its easy to forget that, for a lot of people, the only difference between apps and webpages is that the webpages stop working when "the internet" is broken. They know there is probably some reason why, but if they're honest they don't really care what that is.

3 hours ago, DCMonkey wrote

*snip*

WSAPP. Wassapp. Waasssaaaap!

 

LOL. Nice.

2 hours ago, AndyC wrote

*snip*

It's something. I just don't quite think there is a word to describe quite what "it" is particularly well. It's like trying to differentiate between apps based on the fact one of them used VB XML literals. You can arguably do it, but it's meaningless at the end of the day.

And yet, at the same time, in developer conversations there is a need to differentiate and the more usual ways (like distinguishing between a "managed code" and "native app" or a Java and .Net app) don't really apply. Even WinRT doesn't quite fit, because bits of WinRT can be called from traditional desktop apps (and non-desktop app could be talking about a web/console/service app)

*snip*

People only talk like that in bad (usually Microsoft) ads though. Geeks aside, the only question people ask is "Can I get it on my device?" - they don't care about the details (though, obviously how it actually runs may heavily, albeit subconsciously, affect their opinion of whether it really is a good app or not).

There is a distinct deference in style and operation between a Windows Store app and a traditional desktop app. It's not as obscure to Joe Schmo as you infer. If Joe has a tablet he'll probably want a Windows Store app (or maybe what he'd consider a "touch screen app"). If a crusty desktop version is the only thing available he wouldn't be interested. If Joe has a WinRT tablet he'd be precluded from even running the desktop app so he'd need to know what kind of app it was. There is context there than needs some vernacular for non-devs and "Windows Store App" just doesn't cut it IMO.

Its easy to forget that, for a lot of people, the only difference between apps and webpages is that the webpages stop working when "the internet" is broken. They know there is probably some reason why, but if they're honest they don't really care what that is.

That's not my take from this thread. If there were no difference people wouldn't prefer native apps over web.

6 hours ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

LOL. Nice.

*snip*

There is a distinct deference in style and operation between a Windows Store app and a traditional desktop app. It's not as obscure to Joe Schmo as you infer. If Joe has a tablet he'll probably want a Windows Store app (or maybe what he'd consider a "touch screen app"). If a crusty desktop version is the only thing available he wouldn't be interested. If Joe has a WinRT tablet he'd be precluded from even running the desktop app so he'd need to know what kind of app it was. There is context there than needs some vernacular for non-devs and "Windows Store App" just doesn't cut it IMO.

I know what you mean, but that's largely based on the way desktop apps are traditionally made (which is why I said it might affect their overall opinion on whether it's a good app or not). The simple fact is there is absolutely nothing stopping you from writing a touch-first, full-screen app that looks and feels almost exactly like a "Windows Store App" but in fact actually isn't and in most cases (Windows RT tablets aside) it doesn't matter. You could even sell it via the Windows Store and then you'd have an app in the Windows Store that gives that same sort of full-screen immersive experience and yet isn't, for vague technical reasons, actually a Windows Store App.

The Windows RT tablet thing is more like the difference between a PC and Mac, I've lost count of the times people have asked me if they can install the version of Office (for Windows) they have on their new Mac. And when you say "No, you need a Mac version", there's always that slightly un-believing but ultimately reluctant acceptance they're going to be spending yet more money look that goes over their face, usually summed up with an "Oh. OK" response. Quite how Microsoft are going to make this difference clear to end users is beyond me though, I'm expecting a lot of confusion around RT devices.

*snip*

That's not my take from this thread. If there were no difference people wouldn't prefer native apps over web.

But there is a difference. It's that the web ones aren't as good. They break when your internet goes down, they often have these annoying "loading" pauses when you go into another section. Everything is always just that little bit more clunky than native apps, for example you can drag/drop pretty much everything into Word but trying that with a web based wordprocessor is more often going to do things you didn't expect.

The implementation of any system always make a big difference to how end users feel about it, however that doesn't translate into them caring about what that implementation is. Their opinion, good or bad, is based entirely on the overall experience.

22 minutes ago, Harlequin wrote

I don't understand built in apps like the Music(Xbox Music) application either. You can't seem to add files from your computer to it's library, you can just play them. It seems like an app just to sell you music, no?

Hmm, you sure? My win8 laptop plays files off a network share - I just added them to the My Music library, and you can edit the library to include anywhere really.

1 hour ago, Harlequin wrote

I don't understand built in apps like the Music(Xbox Music) application either. You can't seem to add files from your computer to it's library, you can just play them. It seems like an app just to sell you music, no?

It will look at your Music Library for local content (which of course, you have to set up on the desktop).

It's still a crummy app that opens to a "buy this stuff now" screen instead of showing your library.

Frankly, I'm disappointed in all of the bundled apps. MS could have done a lot better.

14 hours ago, Charles wrote

More nonsense from the peanut gallery... Come on, man.
C

And there's that "winning" Microsoft attitude...

@AndyC:

You can blur the discussion all you want but it doesn't take away from the facts that:

1. Most people know when they are using a web site vs. running a native app (why else do they elicit a preference?) We're not talking about how they feel about MVC, Telerik controls, or any other aspect of development.
2. Your point about faux full screen "Windows Store App" - like apps on the desktop is fiction. There are few if any apps like this.
3. Especially around WinRT Microsoft needs to add vernacular so you can have those conversation with users where you tell them "you need a Windows Store App" version of the app. That just sounds lame.

1 hour ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

Hmm, you sure? My win8 laptop plays files off a network share - I just added them to the My Music library, and you can edit the library to include anywhere really.

Anywhere? It doesn't seems to work for my removable media nor network drive. What am I doing wrong?

@spivonious: +1000

25 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

Anywhere? It doesn't seems to work for my removable media nor network drive. What am I doing wrong?

*shrug* Network share works for me, but this is a domain environment. Removable? No. I wish they would though.

6 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

@blowdart: I'm on a domain too. No "Add To Library" context menu item appears on any folder on my network. That doesn't surprise me since it may not be there all of the time. Is your network share set to be "always available offline"?

Nope. It must just be because I am more excellent

2 minutes ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

Nope. It must just be because I am more excellent

 

Or you're cheating by using symbolic links.

28 seconds ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

Or you're cheating by using symbolic links.

I only do that for SkyDrive

This problem's been around since at least Windows 7. You have to jump through quite a few hoops to get it to work.

1 minute ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

I only do that for SkyDrive

What's this about symbolic links and SkyDrive? Can you use symbolic links to synchronize a network share with SkyDrive?

6 minutes ago, Sven Groot wrote

Can't you add it from the library's properties?

Nope. It complains that the network location is not indexed. Going to the indexing settings you can't add a network location.

1 minute ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

Nope. It complains that the network location is not indexed. Going to the indexing settings you can't add a network location.

Ohh. My share is on Win7. Which of course has indexing. You have to run search on the machine the share is on.

16 seconds ago, cbae wrote

*snip*

What's this about symbolic links and SkyDrive? Can you use symbolic links to synchronize a network share with SkyDrive?

I dunno about network shares but it works for removable media -- at least for a time for me. I used Disk Management to map the removable media as a path. Since I reformatted the media from FAT to NTFS I haven't been able to get it to work again (even reformatting it back to FAT). Disk Management complains "invalid parameter" when I try and map the path.

15 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

@blowdart: That makes sense. The Music Windows Store App needs all the help it can get in the performance department.

More likely it uses the search service to pull the meta data out so it doesn't have to scan the entire share (which is, err >100Gb for me).

2 hours ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

More likely it uses the search service to pull the meta data out so it doesn't have to scan the entire share (which is, err >100Gb for me).

 

So how are you gonna fit that awesome collection on your Nokia 920 with no sd card slot?

19 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

So how are you gonna fit that awesome collection on your Nokia 920 with no sd card slot?

Yea don't get me started.

1 hour ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

Yea don't get me started.

LOL! In all honesty you are my favorite Microsoft employee. When you have a sec could you head over to MSR and hop in their cloning machine? They could use more like you. Have a great weekend.

1 hour ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

LOL! In all honesty you are my favorite Microsoft employee.

Really? I thought it was Steven Sinofsky. You just can't stop praising him about his uncompromising devotion to improving the Windows experience.

2 hours ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

LOL! In all honesty you are my favorite Microsoft employee. When you have a sec could you head over to MSR and hop in their cloning machine? They could use more like you. Have a great weekend.

MSR won't build me the army of robotic flying monkeys I keep asking them for. They won't let me use their cloning machine either

12 minutes ago, ZippyV wrote

One problem I have with the store is all these asian apps. If a developer wants his app to be available somewhere he needs to have an English version and/or at least 1 translation in the country's official language.

Either that or some sort of user-set "these are all the languages I know so only show me apps in these languages" filter.

Anyway, I have not been paying detailed attention to the whole "Metro" fiasco, but wasn't there at least an option to license the "Metro" trademark from Metro AG? Who doesn't love money? I'm sure MS would have been better off using "Metro" instead of the lame name we have now. Or maybe Metro AG refused altogether or was just asking for too much?

1 hour ago, BitFlipper wrote

Seriously? $6.99 to scroll text across the screen?

Anyway, I have not been paying detailed attention to the whole "Metro" fiasco, but wasn't there at least an option to license the "Metro" trademark from Metro AG? Who doesn't love money? I'm sure MS would have been better off using "Metro" instead of the lame name we have now. Or maybe Metro AG refused altogether or was just asking for too much?

http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/SCROLL

Obviously if it does turn out useful, then there is a lot of scope for someone else to come along and do it better/cheaper. Isn't this really just a sign of the early days of a marketplace where competition is rather limited?

48 minutes ago, AndyC wrote

@BitFlipper: As devil's advocate though: is it really? I mean if you have some massively pressing need for it (and I can't imagine why) but have no app development experience or desire to learn it, then it's not exactly a bank-breaking solution.

Obviously if it does turn out useful, then there is a lot of scope for someone else to come along and do it better/cheaper. Isn't this really just a sign of the early days of a marketplace where competition is rather limited?

Andy's absolutely right and based on that premise I'm going to write a fart app and sell it for $6.99 because people will pay for it because it's too hard to make the app themselves or are they are too lazy to go out and buy a burrito from Taco Bell and do it naturally.

C

55 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

 they are too lazy to go out and buy a burrito from Taco Bell and do it naturally.

There's nothing natural about Taco Bell

47 minutes ago, Charles wrote

My favorite app is Fresh Paint. Excellent use of DX and XAML. Mix different colors of oil paint, zoom in and watch the magic happen. I love this app!!

C

My favorite app too. I wish I had a giant touchscreen monitor...then it'd be like I was actually painting, albeit..finger painting.

That's the app I have in mind, except I dont have touch screen yet.

That's the app I have in mind, except I dont have touch screen yet.

42 minutes ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

There's nothing natural about Taco Bell

LOL. Funniest thing I read all day. So true.

22 hours ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

Andy's absolutely right and based on that premise I'm going to write a fart app and sell it for $6.99 because people will pay for it because it's too hard to make the app themselves or are they are too lazy to go out and buy a burrito from Taco Bell and do it naturally.

If people want to pay that and you can make money from it, why not? Supply and Demand. Economics 101.