Ask YC: why doesn't Microsoft have a Windows App Store?
You could sell your apps through it. Or does that not make sense? And if not, why does the iPhone appstore make sense?
And before Microsoft could get their head around the opps on the internet, Tucows, CNET, et al. had the leg up in online application distribution - though they left monetization up to the end developer.
Digital River used to be a digital download online marketplace, but they cut their "app store" out and now focus solely on e-commerce.
Then, there's a host of liability concerns ("Microsoft said it was okay").
That said, I think there is, and has been, plenty of room for improving application management in the Windows space.
One of the things that I appreciate about Ubuntu/CentOS is that I don't have to look for apps, nor even worry if I'm getting the correct version (usually :) ) I just select it, wait, and then start using it.
Windows really needs this kind of simplicity. It's too big a chunk of work for me to pull off (negotiating with Redmond would be an effort, all by itself), but coming up with a Windows "distribution" would be really cool. Something reasonably well-tested, with a means of easily selecting and installing apps which have also been tested.
(Edited to fix an incomplete sentence)
Microsoft already owns the majority of the desktop space. Why would it need an App store? The returns on investment would be insufficient to justify any investment.
Edit: It no longer sells non-Microsoft software was what I meant.
Well, Windows Marketplace failed. (I think there's still an icon for it in Windows Start menu?)
The idea of a central update place for all your apps still sounds appealing(like Ubuntu) though.
Apple's iPhone store only makes sense in the sense that it is simple for users to get software. In the long term I think it's anti-competitive and stupid, since there should be a Amazon store and various other stores that compete with each other. Currently applications on the iPhone are fairly small and low value - if they move the platform to big devices like a 10inch tablet, Apple TV with more sophisticated applications, then it will have to open up.
Microsoft included Digital Locker with Vista allowing you to purchase applications from 3rd parties via Windows Marketplace, but it has since shutdown, presumably due to lack of popularity.
This site says they will have one:
http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/news/show/91276/steve-ballme...
- quality control for end-users. Like when Nintendo started with the NES.
- cutting the middle-man out of app marketing - good for third-party developers.
Microsoft does not care for neither party. Microsofts strategy with DOS/Windows was always about tight-knit contracts with OEMs.
The fact is that me (and many thousand other) still prefer the reason (1) to the reason (2) and this is the success of AppStore.
Returning to "why Microsoft don't have it": because they don't need the indie developer and they will not upset the bigger brands to help a new market develops. The competitor of Apple in the mobile space are trying to start their store (Nokia, RIM)... if Apple can start the AppStore for OS X (and it have the same success, things I don't know if possible), we will, probably, see the Microsoft Store for Windows... otherwise I don't think so...
I guess this is why Google maps got a "go" despite using undocumented APIs the regular developers of the AppStore are not allowed to use?
It's not a as level playing field as you think.
And, Apple's strategy is also about a tight-knit contract with an OEM--itself. That's about as tightly-knit as it gets.
While the Apple AppStore no doubt is successful, Apple has most definitely proven just how bad that idea works out in practice, and how trying to control it effectively leads to inconsistent censorship leading developers to either hold back on ideas or spend programming effort which could have been spent making their applications better, to make sure it complies with the store-policies. I can just picture updates & security updates lagging behind 2 months because the application needs reapproval.
No thanks. I'll just google, download a setup.exe and run the app thank you very much.
Now you might argue "How would you know that this download is safe and properly QAed?". That could be a fair point. But given how badly Apple has handled the AppStore with its rather limited set of applications, imagine if Microsoft were all of a sudden tasked to deal with the entire back-catalog of Windows software out there.
Do you honestly believe that could be reasonably QAed without Microsoft spending millions, millions and more millions in the process? And if they didn't people wouldn't bother using the store, since "I find all the software I need with google, and nothing with this AppStore thing".
Microsoft is making a pretty good move doing nothing here.
* Yes I know about package-management, repositories, etc etc. That still doesn't cut the need to custom compile applications from various non-official sources every now and then.
I agree with your other points.
It would also be very difficult to set up the deals with enough other vendors for it to be worthwhile. I can imagine many of them not being happy relying on a single channel.
Also, the presence of software on CDs in shops is good marketing for MS - a major objection to MacOS and Linux is "I cannot buy software for it in the shops around here".
If they excluded open source, it would reduce what is available. If they include it, they would give a message that they do not want to about free (in both senses) software.
Greed? or plain stupidity?