The problem is a complex one, and it's sort of a "Catch 22;" developers won't invest time and effort in creating great apps if the users aren't there to download (and perhaps pay) for them, but people won't embrace a platform if the apps aren't there. Alas, the app gap.
During the past few years, countless people have proposed seemingly endless solutions to this significant hurdle Windows faces. More recently, Windows Central forum member Younes Mirzaie created a thread asking whether the solution may be a native Android emulator for Windows and Surface, that would let people run Android apps on their PCs or other Windows devices.
If there's one company that can create flawless emulators, it's Microsoft. They've proven them selves with Xbox 360 on One and Windows 10 on ARM. So why not creating a built-in emulator for android or ask Bluestacks developers to build one for Surface? If this device is a Windows PC then it can easily handle the current Bluestacks app for Windows with no problem. However a built-in version is...
Younes Mirzaie
It sounds great, in theory, right? But anyone who has used emulators like this knows they typically sound better than they work. That's because there's a lot going on behind the scenes of apps and device, and it's often difficult or impossible for an emulator to recreate it all. And even if you do, it puts a major strain on system resources. Bluestacks for Windows 10 is one such solution, and it works pretty well, but it requires powerful PC-grade hardware and full Windows to run properly.
Still, a Microsoft-built Android emulator might be better than nothing, right? And even if it doesn't completely fill in the app gap, it could at least address it in some way.
What do you think? Should Microsoft build an Android emulator? Or should people who want Android just get an Android device? Hit the forum link below and chime in with your two cents.
From the forums: Why fight if you can use your rival for your own benefit?
