04-05-2002, 10:37 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
The third party software puzzle
This issue has been skirted lately, so I wanted to bring it to the forefront. It's very complex, and there are no easy answers, but I want find out what you think of it. Where does the Microsoft software development begin and end? Where should 3rd party developers step in?
Imagine you're a Microsoft Product Manager for the Pocket PC. You've been tasked with putting together the list of software to include on the device. The product has to ship in six months, and you have a limited number of development days to have your team create the software. Do you develop two feature-rich applications, ones that would satisfy 99% of the market with some hard-core features, or do you develop eight feature-light applications that will make 80% of the market happy. What will give your device the best shot in the market? What would YOU do?
Now imagine you're a developer of Pocket PC software. You know that you can make a more functional version of Pocket "Whatever" - but you're leery of putting a lot of time and effort into an application that Microsoft may end up releasing later on, thus killing your market. You don't want to become the WordPerfect of the Pocket PC world. What would YOU do?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-05-2002, 10:43 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22
|
|
I *am* a software product manager, and I'd...
Well, it's unfortunate. As the MS product manager, I'd have to go with the 8 different apps. Very few people need to be able to use their portable spreadsheet to do more than view some numbers, so I go with the basics. Same with Word. But if MS can say "and it also has thus-and-such" for the other apps, that satisfies a LOT more users. The idea would then be that people who really want the POWER features will get the third party apps.
The problem is, if I were working for a PPC software company, I would highly, highly recommend against making an app that competes against what MS has built in. It's been a problem for companies under Windows, and it is on the PPC as well. MS just has every ability to come along and snatch away all your customers. Because they're evil? No, of course not. They're just in business, and if they think they can beat you and sell more of what they're making, they will. They also happen to have the resources to do it.
Unfortunately, this means that we will probably be stuck, for the most part, with what MS gives us in terms of office apps on the PPC, unless some company is brave (or foolhardy?) enough to compete there.
Then again, that's just my thought. I whipped this off, so maybe I missed something in my quick-and-dirty analysis. Anyone else have thoughts?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-05-2002, 11:06 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,468
|
|
Some very good spreadsheet apps have flourished and survived. What is their secret when we get no 'WP' progs?
One thing that puzzles me - if people can produce softwre that integrates into Pocket IE and Outlook - why not Pocket Word? What, I wonder, stops someone from 'adding-in' missing elements from Pocket Word (Tables etc.)?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-05-2002, 11:07 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 209
|
|
Why not run Pocket PC software like PC software? Most PC's that don't come with Office come with some version of MS Works. What is Works? It is Office light (extremely light). MS sells the Office product to those that can use it.
The PPC parallel is the current Word Processor, Spreadsheet, E-Mail, Contact suite. Call it PPC Works. I know that MS calls it Pocket Word, etc. but the apps are light and that is being generous. Don't be suprised is MS comes out with a Pocket Office Professional suite. It may not be with PPC2002, but from all indications, this may be a possibility on CE.Net.
My $.02.
__________________
And there you are.
I was just thinking, "What could take this headache I have over that edge to a full blown migrane?"
And there you are.
- Dr. Cox, Scrubs
|
| |
|
|
|
04-05-2002, 11:07 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,768
|
|
I have this problem
I have experienced this dilemna several times in the PC/Windows world.
In fact, the recent lawsuit to force MS to include certain applications made me think... "how am I different" ?
You see, I develop fax and voice mail software for desktop computers and server environments and did this long before MS ever put these into the OS. So far, MS has done a poor job of it, so we have been successful making a better product... but I don't have the resources to compete with MS if they ever got serious about it. In the end, I am taking the risk and although this business may not be viable if MS did a better job... it is MY responsibility to 'make a better mousetrap' instead of wasting time suing that MS has a mousetrap at all.
While I might whine, I prefer to allow MS the ability to improve it's own product portfolio.
Anyway, that is my .02
|
| |
|
|
|
04-05-2002, 11:27 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 144
|
|
I have been on the receiving end of good and bad from Microsoft's PPC team. The good was that they paid me to develop the Arcade PocketPak. The bad was that they released the free PowerToy which competes with my Virtual CE product.
I think MS has to take the lead and produce good software for their platform; leaving it all up to 3rd party developers is not good enough to ensure that all of the basic apps needed will get developed.
I am always balancing the risks of doing different types of PPC software because I don't want my nose cut off again. The strategy I use now is to create apps which have unique technology which MS does not feel like creating/buying. Arcade game emulators is a good example.
Larry B.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-05-2002, 11:47 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 740
|
|
I have this problem
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JonnoB
In the end, I am taking the risk and although this business may not be viable if MS did a better job... it is MY responsibility to 'make a better mousetrap' instead of wasting time suing that MS has a mousetrap at all.
|
and this is what drives true innovation. I'd really like to see someone develop a Pocket Office alternative.
A while ago, I contacted Woody Leonard of Woody's Office Watch Fame and suggested that he and Mike Craven (the author of the Office Add-In, WOPR: http://www.wopr.com) and suggested they create a WOPR-CE. This Pocket Word and Pocket Excel Add-In would and could push all sorts of extra functionality to Pocket Office, I said.
"Great Idea!!" Woody said. "We'll look into it."
Many moons later, he got back to me and said that there are NO hooks into Pocket Word or Excel for them to grab on to. There's no way for anyone to enhance the (then) current versions of PWord/Excel. Its effectively, a closed system.
Now that was about a year ago... and since then, Pocket PC 2002 has been released; but my guess is that the apps are still plugged. I talk with both Woody and Mike every now and again. I'll try contacting them and see if they have had the opportunity to look into it since the OS upgrade.
This would really be the most preferred way of handling this, from my perspective. I'd rather spend my Storage RAM with a Pocket Office Add-In than a whole new office suite.
Kind Regards,
Christopher Spera
pocketnow Contributing Editor & Columnist
pocketnow.com -- it's all about portability...
http://www.pocketnow.com
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2002, 12:21 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 157
|
|
This is such an important issue for Pocket PC. If Microsoft is unable to improve the creaky Office apps on Pocket PC they sould sub it out to someone who can. Take Conduits' Pocket Slides, license it and call it Pocket Powerpoint. Just like Microsoft licensed Calligrapher and called it Transcriber.
I think what we are really talking about here is Pocket Word. The absolutely crappiest excuse for a word processor that exists! I have asked Woody (I don't know his last name) of the company Softwood who wrote a great word processor called Final Writer and Final Copy back in the late 90's to work on a verison for Pocket PC. It would be great if he could write it, sell it to Microsoft and then let them call it Pocket Word 2.0. It would get around all the competition issues and we would get a much better product. If you want to contact Woody, let me know and I'll send you his e-mail address.
Charles
__________________
Charles Pickrell
Sacramento Mobiole Computing SIG
A chapter of the NorCal Mobile Computing SIG
www.mobilecomputingsig.com |
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2002, 12:25 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Charles Pickrell
It would be great if he could write it, sell it to Microsoft and then let them call it Pocket Word 2.0. It would get around all the competition issues and we would get a much better product. If you want to contact Woody, let me know and I'll send you his e-mail address.
|
It would be great, but don't count on it. Microsoft got BADLY burned with Pocket Money 1.0 - it was contracted out to a third party, and look how badly that app turned out. I don't know if it was the app, the ActiveSync conduit, or what, but it was very embarrassing for Microsoft and I doubt they'll contract out their apps again for the Pocket PC.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2002, 12:27 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
I have this problem
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ChrisSpera
Many moons later, he got back to me and said that there are NO hooks into Pocket Word or Excel for them to grab on to. There's no way for anyone to enhance the (then) current versions of PWord/Excel. Its effectively, a closed system.
|
Unfortunately, this is still the case - while Pocket Outlook has hooks for developers to tie into, Pocket Office apps are closed tight. I've said that exposing the code should be a top priority for the Pocket PC team at every MVP Summit I've been to, but... :cry:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
