Bring Windows 10 Universal Apps to Android and iOS
Create something like what Xamarin is doing in order to help developers to code once and run EVERYWHERE (Wndows 10, windows 10 mobile, android and ios).
If Microsoft could not buy Xamarin, at least do what they are doing by your own. Make something that enable us to archive real NATIVE cross platform development. It could dramatically increase the numbers of developers using .net to create mobile applications as well as increasing the number of apps created to wp too, since app could be compiled to ios, android AND WINDOWS PHONE. Hibrid apps like apache Cordova has a lot of potential but right now it is limited to offer a bad user experience when compared to the native apps you could build native with native objective-c on iOS, java on Android or C# (on Xamarin.Forms o WP and Windows 8). Porting .net to others platforms is good, but go further MS, create something that help us to "code once and run everywhere. And by EVERYWHERE I mean, not just windows, I mean: Native apps on Android, iOS, Windows PC, Windows Mobile, Xbox, HoloLens and to on. Bring us a tool that enable us to make Visual Studio Universal Apps REALLY UNIVERSAL (running as well on android and iOS).
We want a Framework that enable us to build NATIVE.
By the way Xamarin Starter edition has a very limited package size so is almost impossible to create even small apps with an organised architecture (multi layers) and its licences fees is very expensive too.
Hey M$ look to the opportunity a tool like Xamarin could bring to the windows ecosystem. It could help you to resolve the app gap Windows Phone suffers so far. With a tool that can help developers to build native applications to windows as well as to android and iOS could bring the apple and android developers interest to use it and since it will be able to compile to windows phone then they will not have why to do not do so. It will also bring mobile developers form other platforms (android and iOS) to Visual Studio and .NET.
VB6 Programming commented
No longer required. You'll soon be able to use Windows ARM devices.
With Microsoft and Qualcomm bringing full Windows 10 desktop to ARM processors, users will be able to install any x86 Win32 app, unmodified, from any source. No repackaging as UWP or delivery via the Windows Store will be required. The apps are not sandboxed and they will have full access to the OS.
And what better than the VB6 programming language to do this with ? The lightweight, fast VB6 IDE is ideal for developing on a notebook.
I started delving into Xamarin development and I have to say I'm disappointed, though I guess it is understandable. What I'm expecting is to be able to have Xamarin at least support a subset of UWP rather than have to a similar yet totally different set of UI classes as it does now. Make UWP truly universal and not only would that support Windows growth, but it would be a browser-based-software killer as well. Not even the most ardent anti-Microsoft zealots would be able to justify absurdly complex yet primitive web development just so they can say their stuff is cross-platform.
Kevin Smith commented
I agree, best way for Microsoft moving forward in mobile applications is to develop tools that allow for 1 code base for iOS, Android, and just happens to also make a windows mobile version. They have the tools, just need to get them to work together well.
It has been a great and exciting week! With the acquisition of Xamarin it is a certainty that this vote will be actualized, much to our delight and celebration. In fact, at this point it will be a disappointment if there is not an announcement at //build or Evolve that declares this very ask as under development in some fashion.
With that said, everything is in place for a dominant, successful MSFT .NET developer force in the marketplace again. Rightfully so! Happy days are on their way! The ONLY element/component that is now missing and accounted for is a web/browser-hosted .NET client model. Please vote for this here:
Thank you all for your past and continued support!
Good news, MS acquired Xamarin.
Aaron Huang commented
I'm a developer since 2010 and also the manager of a district Dev-Center of our company.
Currently most of our projects have 3 sub dev teams: a C# team for web/background business, an Android team for Android App and an iOS team for develop iOS app.
If MS can create a new cross-platform framework for develop native mobile apps, our company (and many others since they are also suffered from manage multi C#/Java/Object-C developers as I know) will shift to the new Framework soon.
MS's Windows Phone as a very low market share, the OS it self is MUCH BETTER than Android, and is as good as iOS, people do not buy Windows Phone just because there's no (high quality) apps for it. From the dev's point of view, they are hard to develop 3 version of an Application that support WP, Android and iOS (due to team size and cost), since iOS and Android has high market share than WP, so they only dev apps for them.
HOPE MS do it immediately, thx.
In my opinion MSFT goes down the wrong path: Not a single one of my customers cares if the same app is running on desktops and phones/tablets. But that's what "universal" in UWP means. Most of them do not care about desktop apps at all. What they really care about is if the app runs with a "native UX" on as many phones/tablets as possible. So currently UWP is a solution for a non exiting problem.
I gave my vote although any multi platform framework/runtime i have seen so far produces apps not being equal in terms of UX compared to true native apps. This is even the case with existing UWP apps: Not a single one of them, not even the ones by MSFT, is providing a decent UX on desktop and mobile. One of both is always compromised, depending on the main target of the developers.
Congrats on 2,000 votes, Eder! As of the latest vote report yesterday, this along with 6 other votes comprise 22,775 votes towards the notion/idea of a cross-platform, ubiquitous .NET client application development model:
When we get to 25,000 we should throw a party or something. :P
Also, I've promoted (haha UserVoice does not like "p1mped" out) your 2,000 vote accomplishment on Twitter. Please feel free to like/retweet:
Joshua Ryan Clark commented
This would significantly help the UWP app story from my point of View as single developer. I'm often getting pushed for both iOS and Android Apps by my boss, and I can't use Xamarin due to licensing cost. It would be extremely helpful.
It could be great, Microsoft should make something similar this all by themselves with what they already have and should NEVER use or buy Xamarin, that thing is ugly and not great at all. It just need to be free and that'll be awesome.
Anonymous Coward commented
Klaus Löffelmann: "Microsoft took Windows 7 and backported WinRt. The result they called Windows 10"
Ha! If only it were true. What I want is the kernel from Win10 and Win32 from Win7. Then throw in the ability to run Metro craplets in a window for the rare times when I need to do that.
I absolutely HATE the Win8/Win10 UI. IMHO, for a desktop/laptop user, the changes since Win7 are at best neutral, and at worst a regression is usability. IDGAF about tablets and phones. Note: It isn't just a matter of being "different". I used Win 8 for a few years, and am now on Win 10. It hasn't grown on me. If anything, my dislike has increased.
Raimund Popp, Germany commented
actually i am changing to android studio to develop android apps. Although i have been .net programmer for 20 years.
this is terrible for me. and as you wrote: xamarin is not around 50 or 100 euros, it is somewhere a ridiculous amount yearly
If anyone is interested, we are keeping track of this vote and others like it that aim for a ubiquitous .NET client application model. The first report can be found here:
Future weekly reports will be found here:
As of today, the ubiquitous .NET client category (where this vote is tracked) has just over 3000 combined votes at 3013. Not bad. :) Please continue sharing this idea and make sure that our voices are heard!
peter horwood commented
From my perspective, if Windows 7 and 8.x aren't supported, it isn't universal. While I have upgraded to Windows 10 and have no problem with it ... too many of my customers (corporate) will not - and I don't blame them - the continuous updates is a headache to support. But regardless of whether the REASONS to not upgrade are correct - most of my MONEY comes from sales to customers using Windows 7 and 8, so if my apps don't run there, I don't make money. So ... I'm looking forward to starting development in Universal apps on January 1st 2026.
Ana Paula commented
the main goal here is not to support Android or iOS Developers, but expand the .net applications reachness and take away a frequent excuse many companies (and .net developers teams) have to deal with when asked by bussiness areas if they could create a mobile app that can run on the top 3 platforms (android, ios and WP) using only their existing .net skylls. The inability to be able to create a mobile app that runs on Android an iOS usually force the decision company to adopt other technologies that in most of the cases excludes the Windows Phone platform with the usual the same excuse: "WP doesn't have enought market share that justify to support it".
But if the .net developers teams wold be able to code once and run everywhere (android, ios and WP) we doubth WP will be left appart and it will gain more tracktion to evolve along the time.
Usually the bussiness area don't care if the developers whants or not to support WP they only see the OS marketshare and if developers says they had to code an app for each platform, be sure if they have to cut on the first will be WP. On the other hand if MS offers us what is proposed above, developers will be able to deliver the same app to the 3 platforms at once, with no extra cost what I barely doubt companies will refuse and WP will continually fill its app gap.
Gavin Williams commented
I feel like Android developers completely ignored Windows Phone and still drag their feet when it comes to bringing their apps to Windows. Why should Microsoft support the Android platform beyond making it easier to move to Windows or use Windows for development. My last two phones were Windows Phones, not only did i experience it for myself but it's well known that the windows store has taken a long time to get moving. It's just starting to pick up now. No thanks to Google or the Android community.
Seems like MS would be helping a platform that overtly ignored Microsoft's mobile platform and who's community members publicly denounced Windows and wished it to ****. And I'm not joking about that, there are many people that bear HATRED towards Windows, and most of them work with Linux and Android. It might not be representative of the entire community but the public face of the Linux/Android crowd is an angry mob, who show no respect for other operating systems, who think they are working with God's own tools and would wish Windows to be destroyed and everyone at Microsoft burnt at the stake.
The only way I would think this is a good idea, is if Microsoft released their own Linux based mobile platform and implanted the store and tools in there.
Obviously, native is important. However, web-hosted is equally as important if not more, as it is truly ubiquitous and runs on every modern device. For some perspective, consider the following chart that demonstrates what 1 billion Windows 10 installs (blue) would look like when compared to iOS/Droid, and then the ubiquity of HTML5 and the web (orange):
(all figures guesstimated, obviously, as are MSFT's for 1B by 2018)
If interested, the chart above is used as part of a bigger series for a ubiquitous .NET client application development model offering, which would satisfy these scenarios (and obviously this vote): http://blog.developers.win/2015/10/the-ubiquitous-bridge/
>> The fact that MS is now making the Community version of VisualStudio is GREAT.
Because of the registration constraints it is not truly Open Source or full fledged CE. This can easily be fixed if MS simply adopt the industry's "de facto" Open Source standards rather than force users to conform to the MS vision of Open Source\CE.
This is a positive request though. It may nudge MS to be a true Open Source contributor. :-)