Unified Windows Store Coming Spring 2014

15

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Parrish
Contributor

Kevin Parrish has over a decade of experience as a writer, editor, and product tester. His work focused on computer hardware, networking equipment, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, and other internet-connected devices. His work has appeared in Tom's Hardware, Tom's Guide, Maximum PC, Digital Trends, Android Authority, How-To Geek, Lifewire, and others.

  • house70
    Good move on MS's part. They still need to start stimulating developers to port popular apps to WP, given that the scarcity of professional apps for this platform is what's keeping me (and presumably others) from giving WP a serious chance.
    Reply
  • phatboe
    Hmmm I must be getting confused I thought Windows 8.1 was Windows "blue". Can someone tell me what will be new in Windows "blue"?
    Reply
  • _Bruce_
    Windows Blue is a code name for a project for continuous Windows development. Windows 8.1 is the first release from this project.
    Reply
  • JD88
    This is exactly what I've been saying they should do since the launch of the first Surface RT.

    Windows Phone OS (ARM) for Tablets under 9" and full x86 for everything bigger with an on/off switch for the Metro interface based on whether or not a touch screen is present.

    It's really not rocket science. It just took MS a year and $900 million to figure it out.

    Reply
  • hagjohn
    Should have done that from the start.
    Reply
  • Tangerine123
    "Microsoft will release Windows 8.1 in Spring 2014"

    " Windows 8.1 is slated for an October 18 release"

    You should reread your articles, guys.
    Reply
  • dimar
    Windows 8.2 should bring Windows Normal back, and make the apps the way gadgets used to be, with full screen ability, all of that on the desktop.
    Reply
  • alextheblue
    11624825 said:
    This is exactly what I've been saying they should do since the launch of the first Surface RT.

    No it isn't. THIS is what you've been saying.

    11624825 said:
    Windows Phone OS (ARM) for Tablets under 9" and full x86 for everything bigger

    Artificial device size restrictions have NOTHING to do with a unified store, a merged ARM OS, or unified APIs. What if I want an 8" ULP x86 device? What if in the future ARM devices run all the apps I want (realistically they're almost there now if you don't need legacy support)? You could get a 10"+ ARM-based tablet for cheaper and with better better life, for instance.

    With a unified store, and soon unified APIs, more and more apps will be available on both ARM and x86 through the new store. They're trying to UNITE the architectures, so everything runs on both. What you're suggesting they do is divide them, and put artificial limitations on which runs on what.
    Reply
  • JD88
    11625865 said:
    11624825 said:
    This is exactly what I've been saying they should do since the launch of the first Surface RT.

    No it isn't. THIS is what you've been saying.

    11624825 said:
    Windows Phone OS (ARM) for Tablets under 9" and full x86 for everything bigger

    Artificial device size restrictions have NOTHING to do with a unified store, a merged ARM OS, or unified APIs. What if I want an 8" ULP x86 device? What if in the future ARM devices run all the apps I want (realistically they're almost there now if you don't need legacy support)? You could get a 10"+ ARM-based tablet for cheaper and with better better life, for instance.

    With a unified store, and soon unified APIs, more and more apps will be available on both ARM and x86 through the new store. They're trying to UNITE the architectures, so everything runs on both. What you're suggesting they do is divide them, and put artificial limitations on which runs on what.

    I've seen no evidence that ARM chips are superior to the current crop of Intel and AMD chips in anything other than the smallest of form factors (smartphones). All of the benchmarks I've looked at are showing Bay Trail and Temash destroying anything with A15 cores (Tegra 4 for example) in performance and matching it for power consumption. Why would you want to be limited by an ARM chip if there is no tangible benefit? Cost? Maybe in the absolute low end, but Window's tablets haven't been playing there due to the RAM and disk space requirements.

    As for RT devices being "up there" I think the market has proven you and Microsoft wrong. Not a single other OEM is offering an RT device. Why? Because RT is garbage in its current incarnation.

    Use ARM where it's best for now (phones) using a more optimized OS like Windows Phone 8 instead of trying to cram full RT onto small tablets where the desktop can't even be utilized properly. That's my point in size restrictions. No desktop part on sub 9" tablets and phones, put the desktop on the 10" plus where it can still be used for productivity. Where the desktop is included, keep it to x86 for desktop apps.

    As much as Microsoft doesn't want to admit it, the desktop isn't going anywhere soon. People doing actual productivity want re-sizable windows and multitasking capability. Even Android manufacturers like Samsung are seeing this and are developing multi-windowed modes.
    Reply
  • back_by_demand
    46 of the top 50 apps already appear on Windows store, it isn't that bad
    Reply