Windows Phone

Microsoft's critical missteps with Windows Phone 7 development

Developers' lack of interest in Windows Phone 7 boils down to four major problems, according to Justin James. Find out what they are.
This is a guest post by Justin James, the host of TechRepublic's Programming and Development blog.

Microsoft is in deep, deep trouble with Windows Phone 7, and it is the company's fault. After the initial surge in interest amongst developers when Microsoft first showed off the platform, the company has consistently failed to engage and motivate the development community, and it will pay a heavy price when they struggle to get this thing moving.

Let's look past the business challenges (such as wasting so much time that iOS and Android took over the marketplace) and the technical shortcomings of Windows Phone 7 (no removable storage, no tethering, no CDMA until 2011) because those points are well covered elsewhere. Instead, we need to look at how Microsoft has done a slipshod job at motivating developers to look at this new platform.

Microsoft has chosen a consumer-centric strategy, which is heavily dependent on having applications. Some of the best advertising for a mobile platform is when people are in the same room, and one person shows off their shiny new toy, and their favorite apps are part of that ad-hoc demo. (That silly Paper Toss game on the iPhone probably moved as many units as any Apple television ad.) Even if Microsoft was focused on the enterprise, there would still be big issues there too; as I've written previously on TechRepublic, the story for enterprise developers is not what it needs to be.

Mobile development survey results

Appcelerator has started conducting quarterly surveys of mobile developers. I like reading the results because the surveys tap a group of people who are really on the cutting edge, and they give a good idea of where things are going. Appcelerator's Q3 2010 survey results were recently released, and they are absolutely fascinating. According to the report, a mere 28% of mobile developers are very interested in developing for Windows Phone 7. This doesn't sound so bad, until you consider that 62% are just as interested in developing for Android tablets (another device on the edge of launch), and 34% are just as interested in developing for BlackBerry phones (a market that seems to have a limited long-term future).

The ultimate insult to Windows Phone 7 is that the developers who said they were very interested in developing for the iPad was nearly 60% in January 2010, months before the device was on the market. Twice as many people were very interested in developing for a device that little was known about more than for a platform that had public tools for months, plenty of press, lots of evangelism, and more. The only mobile platform with less interest than Windows Phone 7 right now is WebOS, which is effectively dead for the moment, since it has been bought by a company (HP) that doesn't make phones (at least not yet).

Windows Phone 7 apps

Emblematic of the problem is the CNET News.com gallery of "cool" Windows Phone 7 apps; not only are the apps boring (restaurant recommendations are so 2008), but from what I can tell, the cookie-cutter, me-to apps do not take advantage of the platform. And to make things worse, I count only five apps in the lineup. If Windows Phone 7 is such a development hotbed, why could News.com only dig up five applications worth discussing, one of them being the Twitter application? (More Windows Phone 7 apps galleries: 3 music apps for Windows Phone 7 and A look at some Windows Phone 7 apps.)

Windows Phone 7 app from Motolingo

Where did Microsoft go wrong?

As someone who has been very excited about Windows Phone 7 until the last month or two, I've observed that Microsoft has made these four major mistakes:

  1. Microsoft has based the development on Silverlight.
  2. The development tools have been tardy and lacking.
  3. Microsoft has done an uncharacteristically lousy job at engaging anyone other than "the base" (to borrow a phrase from politics).
  4. Microsoft has not proven that it can deliver enough customers to motivate developers to spend time learning the platform. (Do you plan to purchase a Windows Phone 7 device? Take the TechRepublic poll.)

Let's go through each of these points one by one.

Silverlight

Silverlight is a cool platform; unfortunately, Silverlight's adoption rate among developers is still rather low. While Silverlight development is quite visible, and there seems to be a ton of demand for experienced Silverlight developers, there are not many of them and for good reason. Silverlight has had too many revisions in too short a period of time. For the most part, only developers who are truly passionate about Silverlight have the time and the emotional wherewithal to keep their skillset up-to-date, let alone invest in it in the first place. To make matters worse, too many Silverlight articles are hung up on the kind of pedantic details that drive most "in the trenches" developers insane; for instance, drawn out discussions around the MVVM pattern (which no one explains well and few people truly understand).

The biggest problem with Silverlight is that the stack is just too deep. Silverlight by itself can't do a lot of things; you need to know a pile of service-side technologies to get anything out of it. Want to access a database? You need WCF Data Services. If you want parallel processing, you'll need to do it as a Web service. The list of things that Silverlight (or Silverlight on Windows Phone 7) can't do on its own is staggering, forcing you to engage all sorts of server-side technologies.

The display model (WPF) is unfamiliar to most .NET developers, who are either using ASP.NET or WinForms. Getting the best use out of WPF requires that you learn Expression Blend (which is no small feat), or you work with someone who knows it well (and those developers cost a pretty penny to hire).

Silverlight is not a bad technology, but anyone considering Windows Phone 7 development who does not already know Silverlight will have to tackle a daunting mountain of books, videos, and tutorials on the subject. I'm not the only one who feels this way, either; according to a recent TechRepublic poll (at the time of this writing), about 60% of readers think that Silverlight is too complex.

Development tools

The Windows Phone 7 development tools came out of beta several weeks ago, and the Windows Phone 7 launch occurred today -- that's not a lot of time if you were waiting for the tools to be final to get working. More importantly, the emulator that shipped with the tools seems to be fairly useless. I've read too many comments from developers saying that they simply cannot test their application without a test handset; unfortunately, test handsets have been limited to very few people. If Microsoft wants to prevent people from developing for their platform, forcing developers to buy a handset (possibly one they can't even use, thanks to the lack of CDMA support until next year) before they can test many common features is a great way to do it.

Community engagement

Microsoft's engagement with the developer community is usually quite good, but that is not the case with Windows Phone 7. For the most part, the only people talking about Windows Phone 7 development are Microsoft employees and MVPs, and it's because Microsoft has been so lackluster at reaching out.

For instance, I contacted my Microsoft PR contacts asking for details on Windows Phone 7 and preferably a demo handset to work with, and I got nothing useful; I felt a little better about my response when I found out that Dr. Dobbs could not procure a Windows Phone 7 handset either. However, CNET's Ina Fried and ZDNet blogger Mark Miller, neither of whom are developers, have had demo units to write stories about their experiences using it, even though the demo units were supposedly for developers only. I'm not knocking Ina Fried or Mark Miller -- both have great reach, and they should have a demo unit -- but don't tell me that the demo units are only for developers, give demos to non-development press, and deny one to me or Dr. Dobbs. If you want to alienate the potentially favorable press, that's a great way to do it!

I haven't had much luck getting information through other avenues either. At my local user group, an MVP gave a good presentation about the platform, but there was no real hands-on interaction. I got in touch with my local developer evangelist to get Windows Phone 7 development details, and he referred me to someone else who never called me back. My local user group can't seem to get anyone from Microsoft to do a presentation on the topic. It wasn't until mid-September that Microsoft sent folks around to do the Firestarter events, and they were typically limited to a mere 50 people (I signed up, but I could not attend due to work getting very busy that week). And outside of the developer evangelists and MVPs, there really are no blogs or articles being written on a consistent basis about Windows Phone 7 development. Jeff Blankenburg, a Microsoft Developer Evangelist, is the only person I've seen one who writes to an audience other than the hardcore Silverlight development crowd.

In the past, Microsoft saturated even the relative backwater of Columbia, SC (where I live) with presentations about ASP.NET MVC, WCF Data Services, Azure, and Parallel Extensions Library from developer evangelists and such. Getting information was easy, and CTPs were available long in advance and were quite complete. These technologies require a much shorter learning curve than Windows Phone 7 and were mostly add-ons to things most .NET developers were already doing. The fact that Microsoft seems to not be putting as much effort into Windows Phone 7 is a critical mistake.

Motivation to develop

The first three issues all add up to being a very high barrier to entry for the prospective Windows Phone 7 developer. In and of itself, that can be overcome. Developing for the iPhone originally required owning a Mac, learning Objective C, and buying a handset only available on one carrier, and yet its development base exploded very quickly. Clearly, barriers to entry are less of a problem if developers are motivated.

When the iPhone debuted in 2007, the world was a different place. In the United States, the smartphone market was practically dead; the phones were ugly, hard to use, expensive, and no one wanted them. The iPhone was the only smartphone worth buying, and the demand for quality smartphones was so high that the devices sold really quickly. People were making a year's salary in a few weeks by writing iPhone apps in their spare time. When Android hit its stride with the release of the Motorola Droid, it met the needs of potential smartphone customers who wouldn't or couldn't get an iPhone for whatever reason. As a result, it got market share and developer mindshare.

But what does Windows Phone 7 offer to a potential developer to justify trying to work with it? The Kin debacle proved to us that Microsoft can't advertise its way to sales; it also showed us that a half-baked product might have been a success in 2007, but not in 2010. And we already know that Windows Phone 7's features are not comparable to the typical Android phone (which include tethering, removable storage, copy/paste, multitasking).

Based on the newly released photos, the Windows Phone 7 handsets are uninspiring to say the least. The specs are not impressive, the designs are lackluster, and the most interesting of the bunch features slide-out speakers. Yawn. The Palm Pre with the new WebOS was considered a good device with some flaws by analysts, and like Windows Phone 7, it was coming from the trailing position. Even though folks liked WebOS, the Palm Pre and the Pixi were marketplace disappointments. In other words, developers have zero reason to believe that Microsoft can achieve any kind of momentum with Windows Phone 7.

The HTC Surround, a Windows Phone 7 device

Conclusion

I want to see Windows Phone 7 succeed (I think Android and iOS need some real competition, and I do like what I see in Windows Phone 7), but from the developer's viewpoint, the Windows Phone 7 story comes up short. It's a shame Microsoft made so many mistakes in the run up to Windows Phone 7; these missteps will very likely cost the company millions of dollars that they've dumped into this project.

J.Ja

Disclosure of Justin's industry affiliations: Justin James has a contract with Spiceworks to write product buying guides; he has a contract with OpenAmplify, which is owned by Hapax, to write a series of blogs, tutorials, and articles; and he has a contract with OutSystems to write articles, sample code, etc.

About

Mary Weilage is a Senior Editor for CBS Interactive. She has worked for TechRepublic since 1999.

26 comments
EJKurtock
EJKurtock

I have posted on every board I can find about a problem I am having with Outlook on my WP7 phone (Dell Venue Pro). Apparently it is a boo-boo on the part of Microsoft, from what others have replied. My user name on my company email is my full first name and last name, with the space between. I am unable to set up my Outlook, because in set up mode, I can not space when entering my user name. As an altrenative, I was going to temporarily use Wemail until I can find some resolve, but I can not read email in Webmail. I can see the emails and who they are from, etc., but when I click on the message it does not open. I love the phone, but this is a HUGE problem for me. Has anyone else experienced this sort of problem or found a way to work around it? I have tried using my email address as the user ID, etc., but it does not work. Thank you! Any advice would be appreciated. ~ Evelyn

Dbenterprise
Dbenterprise

I don't see folks asking about device or data encryption which leads me to belive MIcrsoft had done U turn on encryption for the enterprise, anyone know more?

knudson
knudson

It's a shame, MicroSoft could (probably should) own the smartphone market. While crude the early Windows phones did work, but they were never advertised. If they'd have worked on them then, and pushed them out to the masses, Apple and Google would never have had the chance to get a foothold. Ahh, but Msft was busy attacking competitors, with new products unrelated to it's core business rather than refining the products it has (or maybe I should say HAD).

lostcarpark
lostcarpark

Your points are spot on here. Why would anyone write apps for a phone with no user base? Why would anyone buy a smartphone which has hardly any apps? MS needed to make the platform seriously attractive to break in, but instead they've made the entry bar far too high. I think that aiming at the consumer market is their biggest mistake. If they pitched at the corporate end, with centralised management, AD integration, and an easy way to push out standardised corporate apps to all handsets in an organisation, they would have a smartphone that IT managers would love, and it would be curtains for the Blackberry (who I suspect are breathing a huge sigh of relief). Once the corporate market is conquered, the app catalogue would have built up, so they could then point their sights at the consumer market. I'll be sticking with Android for the forseeable future (and personally I don't fancy MS controlling my phone as well as everything else).

CodeJockey
CodeJockey

I'm a .Net developer who grew up on Windows. I tend to like their products but on the consumer goods side went with iPod over Zune, PS3 over Xbox, and opted to buy an Android now rather than wait for WP7 even though my last smart phone was a WinMobile 6.1 and WP7 has an appealing, fresh UI. When I associate MS with another company I think of IBM, not Google or Apple. MS has smart kids coding and at a project management level but is run by an older crowd that's too many steps behind the youth consumer market. By the time Balmer saw his grandkids using an iPhone he had too much catching up to do. WP7 should have focused on the enterprise where MS has products to link to, a large subscriber base that never has really jumped on Apple's bandwagon, and where the competition is the very competent but vulnerable (IMHO) Blackberry. Spread out to the consumers later. If what you say is true, it's truly sad since the MS development tools and .Net framework are one of their few advantages over Google and Apple. Apple's developer's toolset especially is crap. I have a friend who's thinking of getting an iPhone over an Android. Why? It has more apps. Yet, the 150,000 figure for Apple apps quoted often is so staggering it's a turn off for me. Android has a mere half the apps yet their marketplace is organized so you can only browse a fraction of that number and most are useless crap or me-too let's code another tip calculator stuff. MS is missing an opportunity because while my Android is pretty stable, fairly solid feature-wise, and has pretty nice UI (HTC Sense), it amazes me how much better the apps in my WinMobile 6.1 were. As a business tool Android is weak. Syncing with Outlook is lame. The appointment calendar is poorly designed and far worse than my long-discarded Palm. Apps like for AP, Reuters, SkyFire browser, etc. all have far better WinMobile 6.x versions than Android. I'll hope my next phone 2 years from now is a WP7 but I wouldn't bank on it.

wistful
wistful

Android has these, but Windows Phone 7 does not? My old Windows Mobile 6 device has removable storage. Of course it has copy and paste - it couldn't be Windows otherwise. You can certainly have multiple apps open, and my stopwatch continues even if it's lost focus, so I guess it mutitasks. I know Phone 7 is different; surely not that much? I wonder whether the author has skimmed and misread the TechRepublic article that hoped WP7 wouldn't follow the early iPhone in some of these respects (http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/smartphones/?p=400&tag=leftCol;post-430).

rbuyaky
rbuyaky

Interesting take on the Dev. Survey results. Any idea what the survey reported in Sept of '08, one month before Android launched?

TechRepublic
TechRepublic

Justin, you hit all of the right points here, but I think there is some superadditive effects of these failures that you should consider: When you combine a steep learning curve with a checkered past and a lackluster rollout, you don't aren't just stacking up the problems for developers, you are expanding them geometrically. I really wanted to get excited about WP7 the same way I want to get excited about John Cusack movies, but the more you find out about them before they are released, the less excited you become. Think of the VS IDE, robust languages, server integration as the things that should make you fall in love with a platform - kinda like John Cusack's performances in 'Say Anything' or 'Being John Malkovich'. But then the details start coming out: no tethering (romantic comedy), the recent Kin disaster ('2012' anyone), and weak app deployment structure turns your hopes of 'High Fidelity' into 'Must Love Dogs'. If you have a device worth coding to, developers will develop the skillset to do it. iPhones started out a real pain to develop to, but the handset rocks, so developers got over the learning curve. Android's steeply rising market share makes it attractive despite pending litigation uncertianty. So what about WP7 - Let's face it - MS has never gotten mobile right: Not any of their phone platforms, not CE, nothing. They have all been dogs. Weak devices, weak SDK, no killer app. BB has business users as their killer app. iPhone has the 'just works' magic aura as theirs. Android has a free - robust OS that gets out of the way as theirs. Where is WP7's - at least it isn't a Kin? Not going to get it. If MS wan't to ignite their developer base, they have to prove that this is more than a me-too device with me-too apps and me-too platform. They have to develop and market their own killer app. Otherwise, it will just be another dog. And who wants to dedicate the time, effort, and money to learn to develop on a dog of a platform. The market will determine who are the winners, and who are the dogs. I might be a dog person, but I don't love dogs that much. Chris

Rob C
Rob C

MS no longer knows what KISS means

kronox
kronox

your article is a mixed bag of good points and misconceptions things like: ?To make matters worse, too many Silverlight articles are hung up on the kind of pedantic details that drive most ?in the trenches? developers insane; for instance, drawn out discussions around the MVVM pattern (which no one explains well and few people truly understand)? The last expression ?(which no one explains well and few people truly understand)? gives the idea that you are talking about things beyond your understanding.

AhmadAlsayegh
AhmadAlsayegh

I agree with you at some point, but don't you think that by Microsoft standardizing performance requirements will enhance their market-since we still see some new mobile phone like the x10 from SE running android 1.6 due to hardware lack of performance to go higher version OS. so in windows mobile it will be a matter for phone looks most probably, not performance wise, and for the average user, windows mobile UI looks more appealing than the android, so I guess microsoft are not target the geek community specifically by this device, they are also target average people who are not that deep into smart phone... Ahmad Alsayegh

The 'G-Man.'
The 'G-Man.'

Doubt it. Microsoft has based the development on Silverlight - why is that problem? The development tools have been tardy and lacking. I thought Silverlight tools were around. Microsoft has done an uncharacteristically lousy job at engaging anyone other than ?the base? (to borrow a phrase from politics). - OK you can have that one Microsoft has not proven that it can deliver enough customers. Really - err, Windows? I'm not saying it will be great (I don't know having not seen a release phone) but at least I will give it a chance rather than shoot it down before it has even launched. At the very least it should have good mobile reception and will not shatter when I slide on my case. The hardware looks better quality than the i(lol)Phone 4

Justin James
Justin James

About 8 years ago, I was handed an early model iPAQ to evaluate for our department's use for a week or two. I loved it. Really great device, and very handy. It's big flaws were mostly solvable via Moore's Law, like it had Windows Media Player on it, but not nearly enough storage space to make it a suitable MP3 player. It was much more of a "miniature computer" experience than I have with my Motorola Droid now. If it had cell phone capabilities, I probably would have bought one for personal use. What did strike me as interesting, was that so many of the apps needed the stylus (anyone remember that UI model?), but it had a hard time with my handwriting (which is admittedly quite poor). To this day, I crave a similar device, like the various palmtop PCs I've seen (which are all too expensive), the "Origami" stuff Microsoft was showing off a few years before iPad, etc. J.Ja

Justin James
Justin James

I don't recall seeing a survey that early. It is possible that they were not doing them then. J.Ja

ryanvs
ryanvs

codinghorror liked the ad (according to his twitter feed) and I thought it was humorous, although it doesn't answer anything about the phone itself. I think the iPhone/iPad ads should be the target though - show how simple it is to solve multiple every day tasks with the new phone. Until they produce that type of ad, they are just hand-waving. It probably was the same ad agency.

Justin James
Justin James

They are very difficult to understand. Even the Wikipedia article requires multiple readings for the typical person to make heads or tails of. In fact, if you look at the Wikipedia article, it says that one of the criticisms against MVVM is that it is not standardized: "The first is that MVVM currently lacks standardization from Microsoft both in implementation and toolsets." That makes it hard to learn. J.Ja

Justin James
Justin James

You are right that the lack of diversity on device capabilities is a good thing for developers. Having dipped my toes into Android development, I can say that it is critically wounded by the differences in handsets. All too often, you see a great app on your friend's phone and it isn't available for your own phone, or you find out that the app does not work well on your phone. It makes testing apps a nightmare too! J.Ja

robalexclark
robalexclark

I for one, even though I am a .net developer and also a good way up the Silverlight learning curve won't be developing for WP7 anytime soon for the following reasons: 1) Already have a really decent android phone and can't justify the layout/risk on buying another phone just to develop on. 2) Seems like MS is going the same direction as Apple where even though you might have "bought" the phone you never really "own" it. i.e. they only will allow you to do things that they think are "right" even though the hardware/software might be capable. 3) Similar to 2, I want a phone that will allow me to plug it into any pc as usb device and drag drop anything I please on it, not have to go through some iTunes app. 4) No client side database (wtf!). So that pretty much rules out a heap load of apps unless your storage requirements are very simple. Yeah I know you are supposed to use "the cloud" but that also costs money (and is not cheap for lone developers). 5) App certification requirements - again it seems that MS are going down the apple route and may only allow apps that they deem suitable.

Justin James
Justin James

But if you read the article, you will see that my criticisms are NOT about the handset itself. In fact, the very first paragraph says that I am not critiquing the devices. "Microsoft has based the development on Silverlight - why is that problem?" 1. Because relatively few developers know Silverlight. 2. Because Silverlight is very complex. 3. Coming from the trailing position trying to go head to head with iOS and Android, Microsoft needed to make it as easy as possible to develop for this, not as complicated as possible, using a stack and few developers are familiar with. "The development tools have been tardy and lacking. I thought Silverlight tools were around." Yes, and it takes more than Silverlight knowledge and tools to develop for WP7. You need to know the WP7 API, and (most importantly), have a WP7 emulator so you can TEST you applications. And the emulator is not able to do many of the important things that the phone can, which forces developers to wait until AFTER launch to test their apps. "Microsoft has not proven that it can deliver enough customers. Really - err, Windows?" Irrelevant. They captured that market 15 - 20 years ago and they've been riding base ever since. Ditto for Office. Name one product in the last 5 years where they came from nothing and became a serious player. The most recent one that comes to my mind is XBox, and that was a long, long time ago. "I'm not saying it will be great (I don't know having not seen a release phone) but at least I will give it a chance rather than shoot it down before it has even launched." If you read what I wrote, you'll see that I'm looking forwards to it. Indeed, I had been planning to ditch my Motorola Droid for a WP7 phone as soon as possible... nothing could be worse than this Droid! But from the standpoint of DEVELOPERS, they've made a lot of mistakes. J.Ja

Justin James
Justin James

... was that the message I thought it conveyed was 180 degrees from its actual message until the very end. I thought the implication was that WP7 was so immersive that you would get sucked into you phone and ignore the outside world. And then at the end they "reveal" was that the ad depicted *other* phones, and how they take over your life. Not "getting" an ad for a minute isn't good. Another friend of mine had a similar reaction, he thought that they were promoting that kind of phone usage, which he detests, and by the time the actual message was made clear, he was so turned off that he didn't care. I agree with you about the right way to do it. They need to show how much easier it is to get stuff done. They are reporting something like 20% less work to do common tasks, I say, show it! My Android phone is a major hassle to do stuff, I'd switch just to reduce those headaches. J.Ja

kronox
kronox

I use MVVM in a daily basis. Wikipedia is a reference, general understanding knowledge library (AKA encyclopedia), but you just can't expect to read an article there and master things like mvvm right after.

gak
gak

I decided to reply here even though the Silverlight posts may also be a good place. An MVVM article should be read by those who already have hands-on experience with the MVC pattern, and that includes at least MFC Windows and Internet developers. There is virtually no Silverlight learning curve for C# developers. Silverlight is the only technology that allows, at least theoretically, to run a downloaded application safely on a flavor of Windows. The WPF aspects, be they found complex, are optional. All that can be done in WPF can also be done in pure code. So, there must be other reasons why developers are indifferent, beyond Silverlight. More so, the main Silverlight competitor is Android which is Java - not any fun coding, especially compared to C#. The Microdoft long history of tricks, manipulation, lies, and betrayal may be much more relevant than Silverlight.

ryanvs
ryanvs

"1. Because relatively few developers know Silverlight." How many developers where actively learning and programming Objective-C and Xcode before the iPhone and iPad. Perhaps WP7 will really kick off Silverlight. Or perhaps not. One interesting development is using .NET/Silverlight you could develop for WP7, iPhone (Monotouch), and Droid (Monodroid) using the same (mostly) code base. That might be an incentive for developers. "2. Because Silverlight is very complex." There are complexities, but please define "very" complex. Of course it is going to be more complex than something you already know, but please compare it to other mobile frameworks, e.g. iPhone/ObjC and Droid, rather than an unsubstantiated opinion. I think you ought to go through some basic WP7 tutorials when you get a phone and see if you were correct in your complexity claim. "3. Coming from the trailing position trying to go head to head with iOS and Android, Microsoft needed to make it as easy as possible to develop for this, not as complicated as possible, using a stack and few developers are familiar with." There is some truth to this, however this sounds like you crashed and burned on Silverlight and MVVM and you are lashing out. Seriously - "as complicated as possible" - do you really think Silverlight is that? I haven't looked, but I'd be surprised if MS mentioned anything about MVVM in any WP7 blogs or articles. MVPs and others will argue about MVVM, but I don't think the official MS tutorials will discuss it in detail. You can use MVVM if you want to but you are required to use it. You forget one of the things drawing developers to mobile development is that the size of the apps is typically small. You can develop apps fairly quickly and there is satisfaction in finishing apps. Silverlight for small apps is not bad or necessarily complex. You can create complex apps, but it is not inherent in the platform.

Justin James
Justin James

One of the age-old truths in development is that complicated, hard to understand architectures make applications worse, not better. The developers I encounter "in the real world" just have no desire or resources to devote to learning patterns like MVVM in depth. So when someone checks out Silverlight and sees all of this gobbledygook on MVVM, it drives them away. Is MVVM needed for Silverlight? Nope. No one was talking about it with SL 1 or 2, so it seems like it's a recent thing. But to the average developer who is already working a 50 hour work week, being confronted with something like MVVM is too much. J.Ja