Mixer settles into the Microsoft graveyard on 2020-07-22.

Shifty Geezer said:
What's the difference between Tiles and Android Widgets?
Click to expand...

Widgets are kind of like mini program windows that get added in addition to your regular pinned shortcuts. With Tiles, it acted as both the shortcut and a display for whatever live data the program deemed most appropriate for the size of tile you'd chosen. For getting little snippets of data from lots of programs at once it was just really fast.

I also liked that you could use a single large background image (like a wallpaper) that could show through the tile when compatible with whatever data the tile was choosing to show.

Widgets have functionality available, but you wouldn't want a dozen (or more?) widgets making up your pinned shortcut lists.

I just really liked it. Plus the UI update rate was decoupled from general OS processing before any other phone OS did it. It was so smooth compared to even much faster Apple and Android phones (both of which have long since caught up of course).
 
eastmen said:
Well with tiles it used to show you more relevant information. Like facebook would show you the newest notifications.
Click to expand...
AFAIK there's no limit on the functionality of widgets. It's just a matter of the developer choosing what to show and how to show it. A quick Google reads that Apple is following Android's lead in this regard, just adding widgets which have existed on Droid since 2008.

Okay, this suggests it as app-integrated widgets. An app can present a user-fronted info box for a Tile, as opposed to Android and iOS where a separate Widget app is created. In terms of providing user experience and at-a-glance interactivity and updates, the outward design was pioneered by Android and iOs isn't particularly copying Windows Phone.
 
well Satya just announced they are spending 500m over the next 3 years to double the number of black/african American owned approved suppliers so maybe the mixer budget was appropriated?
 
I like the Live tiles too. To me it seemed as a way to inform the user of notifications at-a-glance before the notification area started becoming the de-facto location to aggregate the data. Plus you could resize them to get more or less information. Even with that said, if I could go back I'm not sure I would. I'm rocking the Google Pixel 2 now & I'm pretty happy with the experience.

Tommy McClain
 
Shifty Geezer said:
AFAIK there's no limit on the functionality of widgets. It's just a matter of the developer choosing what to show and how to show it. A quick Google reads that Apple is following Android's lead in this regard, just adding widgets which have existed on Droid since 2008.

Okay, this suggests it as app-integrated widgets. An app can present a user-fronted info box for a Tile, as opposed to Android and iOS where a separate Widget app is created. In terms of providing user experience and at-a-glance interactivity and updates, the outward design was pioneered by Android and iOs isn't particularly copying Windows Phone.
Click to expand...

I can only say that the functionality in practice was much better on windows phone than anything I have encountered on android. I don't really use IOS
 
eastmen said:
I can only say that the functionality in practice was much better on windows phone than anything I have encountered on android. I don't really use IOS
Click to expand...

Yeah, uniform design language, memory efficient, very quickly scannable despite the ability for relatively densely packed information. Some nice animations, like favourite photos cycling through on the photos link.

A living shortcuts menu really, that also provided useful notifications all in the same space (or less) than a page full of inert Apple or Android shortcuts.

Widgets don't have the same design objective and become pretty nasty if you try and cram too many on a page. Tiles were a wonderful evolution of shortcuts, something that Widgets are a long way from replacing.
 
function said:
Widgets are kind of like mini program windows that get added in addition to your regular pinned shortcuts. With Tiles, it acted as both the shortcut and a display for whatever live data the program deemed most appropriate for the size of tile you'd chosen. For getting little snippets of data from lots of programs at once it was just really fast.
Click to expand...


They're extremely unattractive. Basically when they were just single colored squares, it looked like you had some beta software on your screen. Xbox still has that in many annoying ways. Looks very crude when some tiles are detailed graphics and most are a red or green block.

Noone else will ever do anything like this. They are not that stupid.

Too be fair I dislike iOS forced icons on home screen too (non removable, cant be moved to the bottom of screen etc), and that's very popular. At least they're icons, though. Android has it perfect. Icons, and I can do whatever I want with them. Android is truly windows in a mobile OS. Funny they did it better than MS.

Like do you think Windows should do tiles too since they're so much better? Of course you dont.

The tiles are a big part of windows tablet mode too I assume? That alone would put me off it.
 
Rangers said:
They're extremely unattractive. Basically when they were just single colored squares, it looked like you had some beta software on your screen. Xbox still has that in many annoying ways. Looks very crude when some tiles are detailed graphics and most are a red or green block.

Noone else will ever do anything like this. They are not that stupid.

Too be fair I dislike iOS forced icons on home screen too (non removable, cant be moved to the bottom of screen etc), and that's very popular. At least they're icons, though. Android has it perfect. Icons, and I can do whatever I want with them. Android is truly windows in a mobile OS. Funny they did it better than MS.

Like do you think Windows should do tiles too since they're so much better? Of course you dont.

The tiles are a big part of windows tablet mode too I assume? That alone would put me off it.
Click to expand...

No.
 
will be interesting if MS charges for access to that spot ? They might give gamers a choice but to be one of the choices the company has to pay
 
eastmen said:
https://www.windowscentral.com/mixer-what-went-wrong
Click to expand...

This makes sense. It was incredibly easy to just turn on Mixer and stream myself gaming. I never did because why would anybody want to watch me play video games? Then again, I never turned on anybody else's stream to watch them play video games so I guess I just don't understand the point. I only watch edited videos either showing hints, tricks, walkthroughs or at most compressed gameplay of just some funny or important bits.

I don't get watching live gaming. Hell, actually playing games has too large a percentage of "boring" game play for me, I can't imagine just sitting and watching.

But Xbox was certainly the easiest way I could tell to broadcast myself playing, so I'm not surprised they were creating a bunch of content.
 
RancidLunchmeat said:
This makes sense. It was incredibly easy to just turn on Mixer and stream myself gaming. I never did because why would anybody want to watch me play video games? Then again, I never turned on anybody else's stream to watch them play video games so I guess I just don't understand the point. I only watch edited videos either showing hints, tricks, walkthroughs or at most compressed gameplay of just some funny or important bits.

I don't get watching live gaming. Hell, actually playing games has too large a percentage of "boring" game play for me, I can't imagine just sitting and watching.

But Xbox was certainly the easiest way I could tell to broadcast myself playing, so I'm not surprised they were creating a bunch of content.
Click to expand...
I must say, I also have absolutely no idea what the attraction of watching live streaming of games is. Maybe I'm too old for this shit? What's the point? I get watching Youtube videos of gamers explaining secrets, guides and all that, but the whole streaming thing completely escapes me.
 
RancidLunchmeat said:
This makes sense. It was incredibly easy to just turn on Mixer and stream myself gaming. I never did because why would anybody want to watch me play video games? Then again, I never turned on anybody else's stream to watch them play video games so I guess I just don't understand the point. I only watch edited videos either showing hints, tricks, walkthroughs or at most compressed gameplay of just some funny or important bits.

I don't get watching live gaming. Hell, actually playing games has too large a percentage of "boring" game play for me, I can't imagine just sitting and watching.

But Xbox was certainly the easiest way I could tell to broadcast myself playing, so I'm not surprised they were creating a bunch of content.
Click to expand...
its odd because there are people who spend all day watching other people do things. There are cosplay shows and make up shows and just random shows that have nothing to do with video games.

I also watch more curated stuff online. Mostly YouTube stuff like timtracker etaprime , giant bomb , tim pool , cinamasacer , today I found out and stuff like that
 
At the employee town hall going on Phil confirmed the facebook thing was a way to offer people who made thier living streaming on mixer a path to continue working. So partnered streamers were offered the same terms they enjoyed on mixer but at facebook gaming. MS wants to keep the platform open going foward so no matter what you choose to stream on you can do it on the xbox.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BRiT
The Annual E3 Microsoft press conference thread, 2019 edition
8 9 10
Replies
191
Views
25K
eastmen
E
Back
Top