Casually browsing through the Windows 8 Metro documentation, I can get a feel of how much of a rush this whole Metro is. More than that, is the sheer amount of money thrown into it. And even then, this feels like the first iOS API that was released: not fully documented, having only the bare-bones functionality, and a little bit buggy here and there.
This is my main gripe about this rush to make an app platform out of everything: Yes, it may sound really nice to have a fat 30% cut of all sales on a closed platform, but making an API for that from scratch is difficult. This is the equivalent of making an new OS, and the massive investment needed to build up the API, test it and document it. And guess what? Even if you push your platform with all the money you have, the market might still decide it's not worth it compared to well-established platforms, and yours will fade away.
The only platforms that were able to organically grow over the years almost independently of the market swings are the open-source ones, for example BSD and many Linux distributions like Debian GNU/Linux. But then, they are usually years behind the rest of the commercial market and still struggle to grow at the same pace. Yet, I prefer the stability they present, compared to the breakneck pace at which Apple and now Microsoft are willing to cut ties with the past and break compatibility to push their new closed platforms.
I wonder that even if Windows 8's Metro platform fails, Microsoft might be at this point "too big to fail"...
Published on June 16, 2012 at 21:16 EDT
Older post: Locking Down Laptops
Newer post: Barry Lyndon