Event details
MicrosoftHi treestryder, On a technical level, I agree. However, ISVs and app vendors unfortunately did not embrace this paradigm and the changes required in their apps to embrace it and we did not force this. We have many running internal conversations on this topic and are open to suggestions.
I think having a strong incentivization program for UWP apps would help the adoption, provided the stakeholders can see that UWP is more secure and convenient than the traditional .exe and .msi.
To give a specific example, Dell's Command Update program has a UWP deployment, but it has not been meeting our organizations operational goals. Since Dell continues to release and support both .exe and .msi methods, our org has continued to use their .exe deployment method.
If Microsoft were to strongly incentivize Dell to utilize UWP, I'm sure that would allow Dell to dedicate resources to stabilizing their UWP deployment.
Yea, it would 'help', but I would argue it wouldn't put any kind of meaningful dent in the larger problem.
As an industry, there's decades of existing software that businesses have come to rely on to print money. In fact, delivering software is the only thing we (in IT) do that actually drives value to the bottom line.
One would think that software vendors would be eager to lower friction points to installing and deploying their software. Alas, I regret to say, you would be wrong. The installer is, in the best of cases, an afterthought and often not even a thought at all.
Porting code to the latest MS standard of the week? Not even up for discussion.
So, MS is forced to either meet customers where they are or just admit that they don't plan to provide them the value they need to continue printing money. You can look at history and see the pattern of repeatedly trying to former to only belatedly cave to the later.
