Coffeehouse Thread

9 posts

Great article about Ray Ozzie

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • DeathBy​VisualStudio

    I missed this earlier this week but Paul Thurrott wrote an exceptional piece on Ray Ozzie.

    I was really excited when Microsoft made Ray their Chief Software Architect as he has a great mind for technology and the future. Sadly IMO it seems he was either pushed out or left because he could see Microsoft wasn't willing to break away from a Windows-centric world. Now with all of the trouble with being late to the game on devices & services and Ballmer & Sinofsky leaving in part due to the related failures therein it seems that the wrong person "left" Microsoft. I wonder what Microsoft would have been like today if Ray's vision was given precedence over those of Sinofsky's and others like him.

  • magicalclick

    Obviously he doesn't have enough telemetry that he can abuse and shove his idea into others throat. The problem of MS is its culture. A culture in favor of a leader who is more creative on abusing telemetry data than creating a vision that reacts the coming changes in industry and keep a responsible attitude to bring innovation without crippling existing experience. Aka, make a hybrid car instead of burning electric car that takes a long time to recharge. Also yes, the ridiculous culture of relying on Windows in their brand name everywhere. Windows Live Search, fail. Windows Phone is not a great name either. I am glad Xbox isn't called, Windows DirectX Box. It would totally fail.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • JoshRoss

    It takes years to roll out such a nebulous strategy, I don't see what all the hubbub is about bub.

    -Josh

  • jamie

    ray who?   Tongue Out

  • Charles

    Ozzie was also right about the future of end user application execution: Navigate. Download. Run. Cache. The pattern holds for both web apps and client apps.

    C

  • JoshRoss

    @Charles: App-V is amazing. Equally amazing is how the technology was effectly mothballed. It really should have been the center of the Windows App Store.

    -Josh

  • Charles

    @JoshRoss: Mothballed? It's the de facto install/execution model of Office 2013 (meaning, when you install Office 2013 from the Internet, for example, you don't download a 3GB package and wait to run setup.exe... - you stream the installer and then the individual Office applications you run...). App-V (the client app streaming technology) is very much alive and well.

    For Windows Store Apps, you don't need this level of complexity since the underlying runtime environment just requires a cab package (with manifest) to expand and open... Remember, the new Windows app model employs a new installation process (the installer is a PS script) that is lightweight compared to the desktop installation model. You don't need to stream a modern Windows app, you can just navigate, download, run, and cache it... When you remove a modern app, you delete the package and all associated app data (there are no registry entries, complex binary dependencies, etc...).

    C

  • DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , Charles wrote

    *snip*

    For Windows Store Apps, you don't need this level of complexity since the underlying runtime environment just requires a cab package (with manifest) to expand and open... Remember, the new Windows app model employs a new installation process (the installer is a PS script) that is lightweight compared to the desktop installation model. You don't need to stream a modern Windows app, you can just navigate, download, run, and cache it... When you remove a modern app, you delete the package and all associated app data (there are no registry entries, complex binary dependencies, etc...).

    C

    So why isn't there a need for streaming Windows Store Apps? I understand WinRT's installation environment is simplified but that doesn't necessarily speak for the application itself. Are the restrictions in WinRT such that large applications with complex binary dependencies are impossible to build and thus would serve no purpose to support a streamed installation? Is WinRT providing more than Win32s in terms of reducing these dependencies by providing interfaces for things that'd you'd normally get via complex binary dependencies? Does Microsoft assume that the size of WinRT apps are going to be inherently small (i.e. no one will build a gigantic LOB app)?

    Just curious...

  • Charles

    @DeathByVisualStudio: Yes, WinRT employs a very different app model than Win32/Desktop. Size isn't the issue, really. Some WinRT games, for example, are quite large (due mostly to graphical assets).Complexity is also not the issue. Look at the NOOK app or FreshPaint. These are very complex apps. By "complex binary dependencies", I was referring to things like cross-application shared dlls and registry entries and the versioning issues that can arise. I wasn't saying you can't build complex apps for WinRT...

    C

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.