Sure, Microsoft’s announcement of a universal Windows development platform got lots of applause at its developer conference last week. Likewise its free licensing of Windows for devices with screens smaller than 9-inches.  But, does this really matter? And, if so, where and how much?

Developers always like to do less work. And Microsoft wants as many applications developed, especially for Windows 8.1 and mobile, as possible. Being able to write once and run on desktops, portables, tablets and phones is a big win — if it works.

My question: Will it work? Or will so much device-specific customization be required and so many trade-offs be made that universal apps will be second-class compared to those developed specifically for a single platform?

I am not a developer, but as a customer I want an app experience designed specifically for whatever device I am using. If universal Windows lessens app quality it will be a non-starter for commercial software. Internally developed universal apps may be fine, since they will be foisted on employees regardless of whether anyone would actually purchase them.

This leads us into Windows for the Internet of Things. Some of us are old enough to remember that the difference between Windows and MS-DOS was the graphical user interface that placed apps in their own windows on the screen.

I realize this makes me too much of a literalist, but how can you call something that runs on a wristwatch or as some sort of embedded system Windows? Lacking a multi-window display, it’s not Windows, it’s just an operating system.

Is Microsoft really saying that my next refrigerator is going to have a Registry lurking someplace inside? Or that it will require as many security fixes as the Windows we all know and mostly tolerate?

Remember the warship that was stuck in port for a weekend after an NT failure in its “smart ship” system left it “dead in the water” — the captain’s words — for more than two hours?

Sure, that was 1998, but Windows still lacks a reputation for being as enterprise-grade as Unix-based systems. Which is probably what the Internet of things should be running, that or Android, where developers can also play with the OS’s innards.

While Microsoft is making Windows for small screens available for free, it is not open-sourcing the code. That alone will prevent its wide adoption by the real Internet of Things. Developers today expect access to the OS in ways Microsoft simply won’t offer for Windows.

On the other hand, free software could dramatically improve acceptance of Windows Phone and any other device where the Windows 8.1 user interface would be a plus. I am bullish on Windows Phone in global markets (not so much the US and Europe) where cheap, wildly functional smartphones could see huge sales.

I am not ready to toss my iPhone, but did find myself recommending Windows Phone 8.1 on a future Nokia model to a friend who wants a smartphone at less than Apple pricing.

It is also possible to imagine a flavor of Windows 8.1 running on appliances and other devices with a smartphone-sized screen. I am not sure it is the best possible user interface, but it might be made to work.

My bets: Windows will not run the Internet of Things except in a very limited way. Windows Phone 8.1 is a real advance and could help drive Windows onto other devices, especially if Windows 8.1 itself becomes more popular. I am skeptical that universal Windows will prove important enough to justify more than limited enthusiasm.

photo credit: JakesTechoman via photopin cc