WM Marketplace app store, now with remote delete

[Guest philly-d]

Windows Marketplace for Mobile is due to launch soon and there had been some rumours that Microsoft will have the ability to remotely delete apps from handsets.

During Microsoft's presentation at the recent Tech-Ed New Zealand conference, it was confirmed that "In the event an application is approved but later pulled, Microsoft can automatically wipe the app from any phone that downloaded the app." :)

A spokesperson later clarified that the command is only intended to cope with apps exhibiting "harmful behavior" or "unforeseen effects.", and that in most cases, an app pulled from the Marketplace will still remain active on a person's phone. Refunds should be available if deletion becomes necessary.

In the presentation, Microsoft also reaffirmed its ban against certain applications including those that replace "core functionality" (e.g apps that replace/modify the default dialer or SMS interface) as well as rejecting all "mapping and navigational software" from its store.

It's not all bad as Microsoft did note that they will continue to let users download and install Windows Mobile apps from outside the Marketplace. :)


Now I know other app stores are very popular, but I am struggling to see the positives for "Marketplace".

Will you use it or continue to support developers directly wherever possible?


[Via WMExperts, Electronista and Geekzone]

[Guest ScreamingFalcon]

I think I would use this if they make partnerships with carriers to allow for billing on my service bill instead of needing to use a credit card. I think this is kind of an exciting way to get safe, reliable programs on my Windows Phone instead of worrying if I'm gonna brick it by adding an app from somewhere that I might want but am unsure if it will work.

[Guest pd.ryder]

I can't imagine a situation (yet) where I would elect to go to Windows Marketplace. At least my initial favouring of WinMo was due to the availablity of freeware apps and the vast variety of aftermarket "cookware".

I've had a couple of freebie apps from Windows Mobile World or whatever they call it but they've been no superior to anything without the MS stamp of approval.

[Guest]

So called 'App Stores' are pointless IMHO. They've just been made fashionable by the iphone crowd who are either too lazy or don't have a clue how to install applications manually (I hate the word 'app' - as iff Apple invented the concept of applications). I prefer to download and install software myself and don't need a babysitter to do it for me. That's what makes WM what it is - the freedom to download and install what you like - not what the manufacturer 'approves'. :)

[Guest julienrl]

So called 'App Stores' are pointless IMHO. They've just been made fashionable by the iphone crowd who are either too lazy or don't have a clue how to install applications manually (I hate the word 'app' - as iff Apple invented the concept of applications). I prefer to download and install software myself and don't need a babysitter to do it for me. That's what makes WM what it is - the freedom to download and install what you like - not what the manufacturer 'approves'. :)

I agree in that I would want a good program\update manager over an app store. I do like the idea of a centralized software database, just not the whole "we pick what goes there and you have to pay to add it".

Edited September 18, 2009 by julienrl

[Guest pd.ryder]

I prefer to download and install software myself and don't need a babysitter to do it for me. That's what makes WM what it is - the freedom to download and install what you like - not what the manufacturer 'approves'. :)

What he said :)

[Guest DarkWanderer]

I think I would use this if they make partnerships with carriers to allow for billing on my service bill instead of needing to use a credit card. I think this is kind of an exciting way to get safe, reliable programs on my Windows Phone instead of worrying if I'm gonna brick it by adding an app from somewhere that I might want but am unsure if it will work.

I also don't need babysitting, I prefer to try out new software that interests me as it emerges (usually from xda-devs or similar). I don't want to have to wait till some tester at M$ say its ok to install and pay for that confirmation. I'm not scared of something going wrong with it, that's why I hsve one of the few paid-for programs I use is SpriteBackup.

Edit: surely remote removal of software is against your right to choose to use that software? If it's still on your device for them to wipe it's probably not causing you any problems!

Edited September 20, 2009 by DarkWanderer

[Guest Joel Ivory Johnson]

So called 'App Stores' are pointless IMHO. They've just been made fashionable by the iphone crowd who are either too lazy or don't have a clue how to install applications manually (I hate the word 'app' - as iff Apple invented the concept of applications). I prefer to download and install software myself and don't need a babysitter to do it for me. That's what makes WM what it is - the freedom to download and install what you like - not what the manufacturer 'approves'. :)

I've manually managed my applications too. But a centralized application discovery point has its advantages. I went to a mobile developers conference where we were all given badges with QR codes. If we wanted to exchange contact information all we needed to do was scan each other's badge with our phones. I pulled out my Windows Mobile phone and tried to use the browser to search for QR code readers. I got back results from the search engine but then had to go through them to ensure they were actually for Windows mobile phones, were free, and compatible with my phone. I realized I wasn't going to have quick success so I ended up using my iPhone to get the application that I needed.

I'm not lazy and I have no problem installing an application manually. I'm a Software Engineer and frequently develop for Windows Mobile so I also have no problem building an application myself if needed. But I consider my time to be valuable and if an effortless mechanism can be made available for discovering and installing applications I'm all for it. Also as a software developer I welcome the idea of people with all levels of expertise from the novice to the mobile sage of being able to easily discover an application I publish.

As for the kill switch I think that Microsoft has the responsibility to have something like this. In the event that an application is found to either intentionally or unintentionally I'm confident that the blogs would not present the situation as being the fault of a single software developer but as a flaw of Microsoft, especially if Microsoft had no way to respond to it.

[Guest l3v5y]

I've manually managed my applications too. But a centralized application discovery point has its advantages. I went to a mobile developers conference where we were all given badges with QR codes. If we wanted to exchange contact information all we needed to do was scan each other's badge with our phones. I pulled out my Windows Mobile phone and tried to use the browser to search for QR code readers. I got back results from the search engine but then had to go through them to ensure they were actually for Windows mobile phones, were free, and compatible with my phone. I realized I wasn't going to have quick success so I ended up using my iPhone to get the application that I needed.

I'm not lazy and I have no problem installing an application manually. I'm a Software Engineer and frequently develop for Windows Mobile so I also have no problem building an application myself if needed. But I consider my time to be valuable and if an effortless mechanism can be made available for discovering and installing applications I'm all for it. Also as a software developer I welcome the idea of people with all levels of expertise from the novice to the mobile sage of being able to easily discover an application I publish.

As for the kill switch I think that Microsoft has the responsibility to have something like this. In the event that an application is found to either intentionally or unintentionally I'm confident that the blogs would not present the situation as being the fault of a single software developer but as a flaw of Microsoft, especially if Microsoft had no way to respond to it.

I agree with you a lot! The market place idea is very attractive to those who don't have much time or expertise (IE, the mass market) so it makes sense for more consumer based products,which seems to be where WM is going.

Also, if there wasn't a kill switch and someone pushed a virus out through their software, I'm pretty sure the whole internet will be in uproar. I personally like the idea that someone else can pull an application if it starts bricking devices, and I'm perfectly happy with it being on my device.

[Guest dave497]

One of the reasons I opted to stay with Windows Mobile when I replaced my Wing last month was because Apple has control over which software packages you can load onto the platform that you bought and own. As an iPhone owner, you own the hardware but you don't own the right to load software on it unless Apple says you can. Apple is not only approving the look/feel and functionality of software they allow iPhone owners to load, but they also approve based on content -- if it's in bad taste or is sexual, you're not likely to see it. Google "iphone" and "censor" together for some examples of Apple's content control.

I'm all for the WM Marketplace, as long as MS doesn't cripple the ability to load anything you want on the platform outside the Marketplace. Whether I would use it or not just depends on what they've got and whether I can find a better version of that functionality elsewhere, same as I do for any purchase.

As far as being able to remotely delete a purchase, I would not want that to be an unconditional right of MS. In fact, I don't really understand the logic of it in the first place. You know there will be disclaimers prior to downloading that say Microsoft is not responsible for any damage the software does to your phone. That same disclaimer is usually part of the software EULA, as well. Everyone from the developer to the distributor tells you they're not responsible for damages. That's the status quo. Maybe MS is concerned about backlash if they happen to let some malware loose, I don't know. In any case, I don't want vendors reaching out without my permission and deleting applications I've downloaded onto my PC at home, and I don't want them reaching out to delete them on my WM device either.

If they insist on being able to delete remotely, I'd prefer something as simple as a configuration item for any package you install via the Marketplace that says, "YES, MS can delete this remotely" or "NO, MS cannot delete this remotely". That would give the user the final choice, as long as MS's software honors the config setting. (I'd bet money that MS would still put a backdoor in so they could delete packages even if locked)