Coffeehouse Thread

41 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

RDP for iOS and Android: To what end does this serve?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , cbae wrote

    *snip*

    The money to be made from selling software to consumers is chump change, and to be quite frank, so is the money made from selling services to them, because it's almost a requirement to base the monetization of services on a freemium model. Until Microsoft develops an ad network as successful as Google's, Microsoft won't be able to make any money off the cheap bastards, which describes 90% of consumers. Until then, the real money has to come from selling hardware. Services merely serve as a way to keep people tied to an ecosystem and the hardware that can access those services.

    IMO Microsoft is too late to the hardware party. iOS and Android devices dominate and are trusted by the masses. Windows devices are not taking off with the masses. So what do you do? Hobble your other revenue streams until the Windows & Devices divisions actually build something that the masses want?

    *snip*

    Ironically, Microsoft more than ever needs Windows to succeed. The OS is what ties users to a specific brand of device. Before, when Microsoft was truly a software company and people were actually willing to pay for software, they could have created .NET for Linux and .NET for OSX and sold software to run on top of those frameworks. People are no longer willing to pay any real money for software--especially not on Android or iOS. 99 cents for an app? Hell yeah! $1.99 for an app? Why not? $49.99 for an app? Hell, effing no!

    IMO the Windows brand is a tainted mess. They would have been better off going earlier to the market with Courier or something like it. The Microsoft brand is still great in many areas such as productivity software (Office), cloud computing and services (Azure), and gaming (XBox). In the case of Office I believe people are willing to pay a premium for and Office branded product that provides the same content creating power (though simplified for devices) that they know and trust. And maybe that's the differentiation here: consumption apps vs content creation -- the latter can charge a premium so long as it does more that recolor a photo. 

    *snip*

    Now that Microsoft's decided to be "device and services" company, they'd be slitting their own throats if they want to be software arms dealer. The only software that they should be producing for other platforms are titles that directly tie users into their services and HOPE that when it's time for a hardware upgrade, these users will consider a device that Microsoft themselves manufacture.

    Why not build a better device/OS rather than lose sales and loyalty on your other products by locking those products into Windows?

    *snip*

    A crutch for what? The copy of Office installed on a Windows machine sitting at home is already paid for. Providing RDP access from iOS or Android generates zero revenue for Microsoft and provides a disincentive for purchasing a new Windows RT-based tablet and/or replacing that machine with a new Windows 8/8.1 hybrid device that could serve double duty as both a tablet and desktop.

    It maintains loyalty. Those that have iOS and Android tablets will have less of a reason to drop Office and find something that works with their hardware. The days of using Office as the leverage for keeping folks on Windows is over. Just look what the inclusion of Office did for Surface RT. [crickets]

    *snip*

    Windows RT tablets don't run any desktop applications other than Office and tools that are part of the OS. RDP on Windows RT essentially allows you to use applications like Visual Studio, Photoshop, and [insert any Windows-based LOB application here] from a tablet.

    And that's where the crutch comment comes in; The experience won't be nearly as good as the same app on a native Windows device. It's just to keep them loyal until native versions of Office for iOS and Android are release, Windows division be damned.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    elmer

    I seem to recall reading something about Windows-as-a-Service being available already. Widespread use would require better WAN speed than is commonly available, but I guess this could be the future of 'Windows' ? Certainly, one of the enhancements to the latest version of RDP is to improve its performance over WAN connections.

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    There have been implementations of RDP clients on iOS and Android for years.

    Microsoft isn't bringing anything new to the table, but they are placing Microsoft-branded software on those devices.  And at the same time, that software will probably be better integrated and run smoother.

    This makes Microsoft software look good compared to others.  (This is the exact opposite of how Apple's QuickTime looked for years.  On Windows it was about the crappiest app that was ever produced, which made me and friends and coworkers cringe at the thought of using anything provided by Apple.)

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @jinx101: Who would have thought that Microsoft would end up being better at cross platform development than the other big vendors.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    Microsoft is not the only company who has ever written an RDP client. Thanks to the EU anti-trust lawsuit against Microsoft, RDP has been made into an open specification. Even before the specification was published, RDP was reverse engineered nearly completely since the 90s. Hell, a fairly capable RDP client has been part of the standard installs in most Linux distributions for years (decades?), where is remains a common way to run Windows applications side by side with Linux applications.

    So this is meaningless. You could find RDP clients for iOS and Android within weeks of their respective app stores opening. Anyone who has needed to RDP into a Windows  machine has been able to for awhile, which the article you linked to even alludes to (or a Linux/OSX machine, which btw already has RDP servers too, making your suggestion also kind of pointless - who gives a crap if they aren't made by Microsoft). Microsoft isn't enabling any new magical functionality. Maybe pissing off some small software companies that make most of their living selling RDP clients, but that sort of thing is par for the course.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    @DeathByVisualStudio:

    It maintains loyalty. Those that have iOS and Android tablets will have less of a reason to drop Office and find something that works with their hardware. The days of using Office as the leverage for keeping folks on Windows is over. Just look what the inclusion of Office did for Surface RT. [crickets]

    In addition, Apple made iWork free fairly recently.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    , cbae wrote

    *snip*

    The money to be made from selling software to consumers is chump change, and to be quite frank, so is the money made from selling services to them, because it's almost a requirement to base the monetization of services on a freemium model.

    I find it hilarious that you constantly trumpet this despite the fact that the software and technology industry is amongst the wealthiest, as well as the least effected by the economic recession. Maybe your economic situation is different, but that's your own damn problem. I don't feel like there is some critical need to constantly find ways to suck increasing amount of money out of consumers when we are already raping them for much of what they are worth. It fact, if you want to obsesses over something I wish you (and technologists in general) would spend even a tiny bit of effort addressing the serious damage we inflict to salaries in non-tech fields by continuing to code entire careers out of existence.

    http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9243038/As_the_digital_revolution_kills_jobs_social_unrest_will_rise

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    , Bass wrote

    It fact, if you want to obsesses over something I wish you (and technologists in general) would spend even a tiny bit of effort addressing the damage they are doing to the overall economy by continuing to code entire business models out of existence.

    While I agree with the sentiment of your post in general, I don't know about this.  Making an industry more efficient isn't a bad thing.  Business models rarely last for centuries, for this very reason, and I think most can agree that the world is a better place than it was a few centuries ago.

    Postal services screwed over the business model of private messengers.  Consumers owning their own vehicles screwed over the business model of the milkman.  The printing press screwed over the business model of scribes.  It hurts those people, but just like in the industry of software development, those who get hurt the most are the ones who fall behind the times.  Moral of the story:  Keep up.

    Software will open doors to easier and far more productive jobs to come about.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    , bondsbw wrote

    *snip*

    While I agree with the sentiment of your post in general, I don't know about this.  Making an industry more efficient isn't a bad thing.  Business models rarely last for centuries, for this very reason, and I think most can agree that the world is a better place than it was a few centuries ago.

    Postal services screwed over the business model of private messengers.  Consumers owning their own vehicles screwed over the business model of the milkman.  The printing press screwed over the business model of scribes.  It hurts those people, but just like in the industry of software development, those who get hurt the most are the ones who fall behind the times.

    Software will open doors to easier and far more productive jobs to come about.

    It is a bad thing when you take away people's jobs and livelihood and they can't buy stuff like food or heating for their families because the career they trained for years for is suddenly useless. It's not as easy to learn a new professional skill like it is to upgrade a computer system. They have to start over like they just came out of high school.

    I've witnessed this personally, any time there is a layoff or other BS, it's always the non-tech people are affected. Tech people and their special pay and benefits are typically unaffected, even the incompetent ones who probably should be getting laid off.

    Computer scientists out of college are pretty much guaranteed a job at above the average per capita. Try doing that as a journalist major, you have to practically be a rock star to get a coveted journalist position paying $20-25k a year. And still worry about getting laid off next month.

    It's just I'm sick of techies acting entitled when there are actual people suffering right now, directly because the work the techies are doing..

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , kettch wrote

    @jinx101: Who would have thought that Microsoft would end up being better at cross platform development than the other big vendors.

    I wouldn't go as far as that. Office on the Mac is easily as bad as iTunes on Windows: resource-hungry, slow, and a UI not in keeping with the home OS. 

     

  • User profile image
    bondsbw

    , Bass wrote

    *snip*

    It is a bad thing when you take away people's jobs and livelihood and they can't buy stuff like food or heating for their families because the career they trained for years for is suddenly useless. It's not as easy to learn a new professional skill like it is to upgrade a computer system. They have to start over like they just came out of high school.

    I've witnessed this personally, any time there is a layoff or other BS, it's always the non-tech people are affected. Tech people and their special pay and benefits are typically unaffected, even the incompetent ones who probably should be getting laid off.

    Computer scientists out of college are pretty much guaranteed a job at above the average per capita. Try doing that as a journalist major, you have to practically be a rock star to get a coveted journalist position paying $20-25k a year. And still worry about getting laid off next month.

    It's just I'm sick of techies acting entitled when there are actual people suffering right now, directly because the work the techies are doing..

    If you train for years at a career choice that has heavy competition and is on the verge of being pushed out by technology, why are you giving up when you face heavy competition and technology begins pushing your career out?

    Why should I be worried about poor choices you made?

    I made my choices.  I easily could have held a number of other majors.  I could easily have not tried to learn, not attempted to push myself.  But I resisted those temptations, on purpose, and my choices have earned me a career that shows much promise.

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , Bass wrote

    *snip*

    It is a bad thing when you take away people's jobs and livelihood and they can't buy stuff like food or heating for their families because the career they trained for years for is suddenly useless.

    I think that's called progress, and I don't think it should be slowed down to artificially maintain jobs.  Should we stop research into electric vehicles because it might put petrol station workers out of a job? Do you think that we should  have stopped the development of word processors to protect typewriter manufacturers?

    In many cases, jobs are lost, but many more opportunities are created. 

    It's not as easy to learn a new professional skill like it is to upgrade a computer system. They have to start over like they just came out of high school.

    But it can be done. I know a florist who retrained as an Oracle specialist. I know a secretary who retrained as a Java developer. In fact, I'd say that a lot of the stuff you're complaining about doesn't even apply to IT:

    • Unlike many professions, you are not legally required to have a formal qualification to practise it.  From what I've seen recently, the only things needed to make a name for yourself in this industry is a 'can do' attitude and a cool tattoo. 
    • There is a wealth of free training and learning resources available. All you need is access to a computer.  
    • This is the one of the few industries that doesn't have a barrier for entry or a glass ceiling for the disabled. How many disabled people do you see working in manufacturing, or working in shops (apart from Apple stores)?
  • User profile image
    cbae

    7 hours ago, Bass wrote

    *snip*

    I find it hilarious that you constantly trumpet this despite the fact that the software and technology industry is amongst the wealthiest, as well as the least effected by the economic recession.

    What I'm trumpeting is a trend that I'm observing. Nowhere did I make statement about what I think should be.

    Yes, I know that there are still companies making buttloads of money in enterprise and professional software, but the traditional consumer software business is all but dead.

    Maybe your economic situation is different, but that's your own damn problem. I don't feel like there is some critical need to constantly find ways to suck increasing amount of money out of consumers when we are already raping them for much of what they are worth.

    Good for you. Tell me where I'm advocating the increased sucking of money out of consumers. Consumers are choosing to get money sucked out of them well enough on their own, so get over yourself.

    It fact, if you want to obsesses over something I wish you (and technologists in general) would spend even a tiny bit of effort addressing the serious damage we inflict to salaries in non-tech fields by continuing to code entire careers out of existence.

    http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9243038/As_the_digital_revolution_kills_jobs_social_unrest_will_rise

    If you recall...Check that. I know you don't recall it, considering what you posted above. But I've posted several times in the past about the alarming trend in the devaluation of human capital as a result of technology.

    But talk about being hypocritical. You rail against Microsoft all the time, but you can't hold back your admiration for companies like Apple and Google. Yet, Microsoft employs more people than either of those companies. On top of that, how much money has been diverted from the book and music publishing businesses, from movie theaters, from local restaurants, etc. because people are putting every penny of their disposal income buying overpriced gadgets with a fruit logo on it? How many magazines and newspapers have gone BK because Google is sucking up all of the available advertising dollars?

    Say what you want about how technology, in general, is wiping out entire industries. I agree. Go ahead and b1tch about how many software companies have been put out of business by Microsoft. Yes, it happened many times, and it sucks for those companies. But at least recognize that Microsoft (and Windows) is at least partly responsible for creating many, many jobs as well. Microsoft is an obscenely profitable company, but the nature of its business model is such that it does a pretty good job of spreading the wealth. Hewlett-Packard and Dell are the two largest PC vendors in the US, and they employ 300,000+ and 100,000+, respectively. Intel also employs over 100,000 people. How big would Intel be today, if not for Microsoft? Would companies like nVidia and ATI (now AMD) even exist if not for the push to increase graphics performance on Windows? Think about all the companies that make PC peripherals and accessories. Would they even exist, if not for the success of Windows?

    I'm not going to sit here and say that Microsoft is solely responsible for making the PC ecosystem as big as it is, but whatever the case, Microsoft is a huge contributor to this ecosystem. This ecosystem generates a LOT of revenues, yet Microsoft's share of those revenues is actually just a small fraction of the total.

    Still, could the revenues be spread even more equitably? You bet. And given that I'm recognizing Microsoft (and its prior business model) as being partly responsible for creating many jobs, I loathe the idea that Microsoft's trying to become another Apple.

    But this thread is not about what I would like Microsoft to do. That's irrelevant. It's about whether or not it makes sense for Microsoft to do what it's doing given it's new business model. I personally don't give a flip one way or another if they succeed or fail in this endeavor to become a "devices and services" company. As long as Microsoft continues to provide the tools I like to use, even if they become an ancillary part of their business, I'll continue to use them.

  • User profile image
    cbae

    , Ray7 wrote

    *snip*

    I wouldn't go as far as that. Office on the Mac is easily as bad as iTunes on Windows: resource-hungry, slow, and a UI not in keeping with the home OS. 

    The last time I installed iTunes, which was done accidentally when I had to install QuickTime for some reason, it was an absolute nightmare to uninstall. It was like trying to clean a computer of a virus. Based on my experience, iTunes on Windows is easily as bad as malware.

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , cbae wrote

    *snip*

    The last time I installed iTunes, which was done accidentally when I had to install QuickTime for some reason, it was an absolute nightmare to uninstall. It was like trying to clean a computer of a virus. Based on my experience, iTunes on Windows is easily as bad as malware.

    That was some accident ... Hmmmmm

    And that's precisely what you get with Office on the Mac. It reckons it needs admin access to install (always a bad sign) and then dumps itself all over the system. Fortunately, there is lots of help available in tracking down the Office 'helpers' and shutting them down. Office/Mac does share another trait with iTunes on Windows: no one wants it on their system but in the bad old days you had to have it there for compatibility reasons, and it's kind of just stuck.

     

     

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , Bass wrote

    *snip*

    I've witnessed this personally, any time there is a layoff or other BS, it's always the non-tech people are affected. Tech people and their special pay and benefits are typically unaffected, even the incompetent ones who probably should be getting laid off.


    Computer scientists out of college are pretty much guaranteed a job at above the average per capita. Try doing that as a journalist major, you have to practically be a rock star to get a coveted journalist position paying $20-25k a year. And still worry about getting laid off next month.

    You make it sound as if IT is some elitist field that is very difficult to break into. That is not the case.

     

  • User profile image
    Ray7

    , cbae wrote

    But this thread is not about what I would like Microsoft to do. That's irrelevant. It's about whether or not it makes sense for Microsoft to do what it's doing given it's new business model. I personally don't give a flip one way or another if they succeed or fail in this endeavor to become a "devices and services" company. As long as Microsoft continues to provide the tools I like to use, even if they become an ancillary part of their business, I'll continue to use them.

    I don't think there is any danger of Microsoft abandoning development tools, if that's what you mean. 

    The RDP thing? As DeathByVisualStudio explained, they have little choice:

    It maintains loyalty. Those that have iOS and Android tablets will have less of a reason to drop Office and find something that works with their hardware. The days of using Office as the leverage for keeping folks on Windows is over. Just look what the inclusion of Office did for Surface RT. [crickets]

     

     

     

     

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.