Support NeoGAF

[Trup1aya]

What do the current UWA restrictions point towards then?

What do you think this aggressive strategy of handing out "free" upgrades to Windows 10 is all for?

Based on their history, why should we assume anything other than what's being said time and time again? A leopard never changes its spots as they say.

I'm not saying anyone should assume anything. I'm saying we don't have any evidence of their intent.

If they flipped a switch today, killing support for Win32 and leaving UWA as the only option, then we'd have the doomsday scenario.

But UWP is a work in progress and Win32 is still the standard, and will be for sometime. so it takes a leap to conclude that current limitations will still be in place when UWP is ready for prime time.

It's definately possible, but it's not guarunteed. Certainly to early to levy accusations of intent. Suspicion is certainly warranted though.

 

[LordRaptor]

Nor did the owner of Valve which prompted them to work on SteamOS as a back-up plan when the first signs were shown in 8.

"Edward Snowden is a dirty stinking lying traitor, because if there was any governmental abuse going on someone would whistle blow it"

 

[DeepEnigma]

"Edward Snowden is a dirty stinking lying traitor, because if there was any governmental abuse going on someone would whistle blow it"

Funny, right?

I'm not saying anyone should assume anything. I'm saying we don't have any evidence of their intent.

If they flipped a switch today, killing support for Win32 and leaving UWA as the only option, then we'd have the doomsday scenario.

But UWP is a work in progress and Win32 is still the standard, and will be for sometime. so it takes a leap to conclude that current limitations will still be in place when UWP is ready for prime time.

It's definately possible, but it's not guarunteed. Certainly to early to levy accusations of intent. Suspicion is certainly warranted though.

Who said they would flip a switch? What a disingenuous argument you keep curtailing. We know they will not just, flip a fucking switch. That is the point we are arguing.

They will slowly do it over time, and the initial way it works now, points heavily it will be this way. If it truly was open, it would be open from the start. Not DRM to fuck all like an Xbox, and then we 'slowly open it'.

You also do not wait until it is too late. You voice concerns NOW, and force them to act. Why does that seem to bother you so much?

 

[gamz]

"Edward Snowden is a dirty stinking lying traitor, because if there was any governmental abuse going on someone would whistle blow it"

 

[Trup1aya]

Funny, right?



Who said they would flip a switch? What a disingenuous argument you keep curtailing. We know they will not just, flip a fucking switch. That is the point we are arguing.

They could slowly do it over time, and the initial way it works now, points heavily it will be this way. If it truly was open, it would be open from the start. Not DRM to fuck all like an Xbox, and then we 'slowly open it'.

Ftfy...

There's no evidence that they will flip a switch OR do it over. Just speculation.

You also do not wait until it is too late. You voice concerns NOW, and force them to act. Why does that seem to bother you so much?

When did I say you wait to voice your concerns? When did I say voicing concerns bothers me? Please show me.

If you are truly reading what I'm saying, you'll see that I share the concerns.

My issue is when speculation is presented as fact.

 

[Night Angel]

It's definately possible, but it's not guarunteed. Certainly to early to levy accusations of intent. Suspicion is certainly warranted though.

Once again, you're implying that no one should speak out until it's too late, until we know with 100% certainty that the bad thing we're worried about is going to happen.

You say suspicion is warranted, but in the same breath you say "but shut up about it cuz you don't KNOW." This is completely absurd. Silent suspicion is useless and won't help us do anything about the very real potential scenario this thread is discussing.

Question: What, in your mind, are the signposts after which we are allowed to start discussing this topic?

You say it takes a leap to conclude the current limitations of UWP will exist in the future, I say it takes a much bigger leap to conclude it will get better, especially considering the endgame and past actions of the party who will supposedly make it all great some point down the line.

 

[LukasTaves]

https://github.com/dotnet/core

Right, I forgot they announced that. Still, my points stands, they didn't purchased Xamarin to teach them how to use a platform they already know, they had other goals in mind.

No. The purchase of Xamarin is to provide 1 set of tooling for developers who are already on their system using their tools and who want to write apps for android / iOS / mac. The actual idea is pretty simple: if they can provide the tooling, the developers will stay using MS services / platforms, as 'azure' (the real goal) is front and center. If they hadn't bought it, xamarin could keel over or someone else could have purchased them (e.g. amazon). If amazon would have bought xamarin instead, the tooling likely would support AWS instead and that would lead to MS tooling using devs leave the MS ecosystem for good. The main goal is get as much devs to use Azure. There they make money. It's their long term life boat.

That's kinda of what I meant, only very badly worded and without any depth of what you said

On the developer front, MS is mostly focusing on keeping the current devs on MS tech. It's impossible to get the people who left back. It's to be seen whether the devs still on MS tech will stick around though. One thing MS's stack currently still has over other platforms / stacks is that users are more willing to pay for software so it's easier to sell a licensed application. It's the only reason I'm still there.

I assume they also think they can convert some people back if the proposal of a single codebase applying to all platforms is made right. If they offer a truly universal solution I could see it gaining more devs on board.

 

[Gormenghast]

I can boil my position down to 2 very simple questions:

• Can I, as the administrator of my PC, grant any application - regardless of its source - the ability to do anything it damn well pleases on the entire system - including to other applications and UWAs - without either myself or the developer of the application having to interact with Microsoft at all or overcome unnecessary hurdles?
• Can I, as an application developer, freely distribute my UWA to users by any means I deem adequate, again without going through Microsoft and without any disadvantages in terms of features or user experience compared to selling them on their Windows store?

The answer for both of these in Win32 is "yes", and the answer for both of them with UWA is a resounding "no". When Microsoft can answer -- and by "answer", I mean with full technical details and an existing implementation, not vague promises -- both of them with "yes", then we can start talking about any advantages UWP might have.

But they are rhetorical questions.

The current limits of UWP aren't limits because the platform is being developed, they are limits because the platform is designed FOR having them.

Microsoft is looking to increase their control, they are just continuously testing how much they can get away with. They might make minor concessions depending on the volume of the outrage, but their goals are very obvious.

They might claim it's done for "security" reasons or whatnot, but you can already clearly see the goal is increasing control.

It's plausible they'll fix blatant faults like v-synch and g-synch. But everything else is out of the question. And if for some reason it doesn't pass, then they'll concede and try again some time later, and then try again, and again.

 

[Head.spawn]

What do the current UWA restrictions point towards then?

I think it points to them not having an adequate software marketplace for games of their own on PC, while wanting one, then shoehorning their current Xbox game agenda into it without overhauling it first. In its current state, I'd call it a work in progress that will obviously evolve over time to meet the markets demands.

Do you honestly think the current incarnation is what they want to have? Does anyone think those limitations will all still be in place a year from now? Should we ignore the initiatives they referenced last year, the history of openness and what they are saying now? Will their build conference be written off again?

I don't think speculation outweighs any of that, even though it is a valid conversation I admit, but I'm a sheep for not jumping on the bandwagon to rally against the theoretical.

 

[Trup1aya]

Once again, you're implying that no one should speak out until it's too late, until we know with 100% certainty that the bad thing we're worried about is going to happen.

You say suspicion is warranted, but in the same breath you say "but shut up about it cuz you don't KNOW." This is completely absurd. Silent suspicion is useless and won't help us about the very real potential scenario this thread is discussing.

Question: What, in your mind, are the signposts after which we are allowed to start discussing this topic?

I don't think you understand the difference between voicing concerns, and presenting speculation as fact.

When did I ever say that people shouldn't be voicing their concerns. When did I say people should be silent? Please Show me.

what you are accusing me of, I've never implied, ever...

It's actually a maddening accusation, because I share the exact same concern as everyone else...

 

[Durante]

The current limits of UWP aren't limits because the platform is being developed, they are limits because the platform is designed FOR having them.

Microsoft is looking to increase their control, they are just continuously testing how much they can get away with. They might make minor concessions depending on the volume of the outrage, but their goals are very obvious.

They might claim it's done for "security" reasons or whatnot, but you can already clearly see the goal is increasing control.

This is also what I believe.

The point of my questions is to demonstrate that I am not, in fact, damning MS regardless of what they do. I damn them if and only if their proposed replacement for Win32 is far less open.

 

[Htown]

People who don't agree with your criticism, which is entirely based on speculation, and instead use common sense by focusing on the facts, are either "Microsoft employees" or "fanboys". Thanks for the discussion.

It's pretty obvious when people come in this thread and you look at their post history and 99 percent of their posts are in Halo threads, or they have posts going back months defending Microsoft in thread after thread.

 

[Durante]

I think it points to them not having an adequate software marketplace for games of their own on PC, while wanting one, then shoehorning their current Xbox game agenda into it without overhauling it first.

UWP is not at all an Xbox agenda. In fact, it's far larger than Xbox (which you can see e.g. in Xbox exclusives being sacrificed on the altar of increasing UWA/Windows Store popularity).

UWP is their latest company-wide attempt to secure the foothold in mobile and tablet which they so desperately desire. And failing that, at least make dominating the PC OS market more profitable.

 

[PnCIa]

What boggles my mind is that you think there would ever be an announcement.

Consider this timeline:
2016: Microsoft convinces some early adopters to jump into UWA by leveraging their console exclusives. They also allow others to sell UWA packages - of course only MS-recognized third party dealers.
2017: Project Centennial (that name tells you all you need to know about the future of Win32) works out and makes it relatively simple to package sandboxed "legacy" Win32 apps in UWA.
2018: With the gradual adoption of Centennial, and more and more software offered as UWA -- and of course a healthy dose of marketing -- the format becomes increasingly popular.
2019: Microsoft introduces DirectX12.5, with some additional features. A footnote mentions that these features are not accessible from legacy (read: Win32) applications.
2020: With even wider adoption of UWA, Microsoft adds additional warnings and hassles for (home, not enterprise!) users trying to install Win32 applications.

And so on and so forth. Obviously, there will never be an announcement that they are dropping Win32. That would just be stupid.

While this is a hypothetical scenario, i believe that this is what Tim and others fear thats going to happen. Of course they are not going to flip the switch tomorrow, thats not the point.
Its all about this being a step towards a greater goal: Making a closed standard (UWA) so viable that the one remaining open standard (Win32) becomes so obselete that no one uses it anymore. Its about a slow transition that Tim believes is visible by this point.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This is also what I believe.

The point of my questions is to demonstrate that I am not, in fact, damning MS regardless of what they do. I damn them if and only if their proposed replacement for Win32 is far less open.

Same.

 

[aeolist]

let me just quote myself here

i absolutely do not believe that microsoft will "improve" UWP to the point where it is just as capable as win32. taking an entirely closed platform and extending it will never fully compare to a platform that was fully open to begin with, and the entire premise of sandboxing every app that UWP has as a founding principle of its security model means that it will always be fundamentally limited in hugely important ways unless MS completely abandons their original reasoning behind it.

to my mind this means there is no speculation needed for people to get upset with UWP. it is already at the point where it is problematic and any ground it gains in the development community is bad for anyone who wants their PC to not become simply a larger iPad.

we don't need to wait for MS to fuck up, they have already fucked up. UWP is here, it's bad, and it's bad by design so i don't see it getting better.

 

[Trup1aya]

It's pretty obvious when people come in this thread and you look at their post history and 99 percent of their posts are in Halo threads, or they have posts going back months defending Microsoft in thread after thread.

TIL, Not attacking a company for a hypothetical scenario = defending that company

 

[draetenth]

Why not? They've never closed Windows. It's always been open and it will always be. That's one of the reasons why it's popular on the desktop.

You don't know that. Things change, people change (the people who don't want to close it now may not be the ones in charge later), Microsoft is a business (they will do what they feel is the most profitable whether it's closing Window OR keeping it open), and they do have a history of shady stuff whether you are aware of it or not (or acknowledge that it affects how people view them). You may be right or Sweeney may be right.

However, the thing is, if you wait for the proof that Microsoft is actually doing this - it's pretty much too late at that point. They would already have you in their grasp. If you don't want a closed system, you have to say so as early as possible, as often as possible, and as loudly as possible. You have to show a business that it will hurt their bottom line if they do something and you must keep showing them because they will keep trying if they think it's the most profitable solution.

It's better to listen to someone like Sweeney and make noise now (and perhaps always) even if it won't happen than it is to wait until Microsoft actually closes Windows to say that closing Windows is bad because again it's too late at that point.

 

[GHG]

I think it points to them not having an adequate software marketplace for games of their own on PC, while wanting one, then shoehorning their current Xbox game agenda into it without overhauling it first. In its current state, I'd call it a work in progress that will obviously evolve over time to meet the markets demands.

Do you honestly think the current incarnation is what they want to have? Does anyone think those limitations will all still be in place a year from now? Should we ignore the initiatives they referenced last year, the history of openness and what they are saying now? Will their build conference be written off again?

I don't think speculation outweighs any of that, even though it is a valid conversation I admit, but I'm a sheep for not jumping on the bandwagon to rally against the theoretical.

If it's not ready for games then what's the rush? Tomb Raider is on steam, they could have delayed Quantum Break on the PC until the UWA situation is adequate and as for Forza... What the fuck are they thinking?

The bottom line is, if what they are cooking needs more time in the oven then give it more time. It's a shame as well because games like Forza have the potential to be great on the PC with full peripheral support and mods but no... They are chosing to poison us.

So my big question for all of this is why? What's it all for? Are they testing the waters to see if we just eat their half baked shit up in its current state? Or are they really just that stupid?

This is also what I believe.

The point of my questions is to demonstrate that I am not, in fact, damning MS regardless of what they do. I damn them if and only if their proposed replacement for Win32 is far less open.

This this this.

If I damned every single thing they did then I would have moved away from Windows ages ago, I would not have an Xbox One, I wouldn't have a lumia 950 and I certainly would have never bought a Zune back in the day.

It's about calling a spade a spade.

 

[gamz]

let me just quote myself here



we don't need to wait for MS to fuck up, they have already fucked up. UWP is here, it's bad, and it's bad by design so i don't see it getting better.

Actually Sweeney himself has no issues with it.

 

[DeepEnigma]

TIL, Not attacking a company for a hypothetical scenario = defending that company

It is not hypothetical... see this...

let me just quote myself here



we don't need to wait for MS to fuck up, they have already fucked up. UWP is here, it's bad, and it's bad by design so i don't see it getting better.

But attacking Sweeney with baseless bullshit, that was not even on topic, nor proved they did not read the quotes, interviews or even posts in this thread is any more credible or noble?

Come on son.

TIL, Not attacking a company for a hypothetical scenario = defending that company

No they were attacking Sweeney like he was some random forum posters, just because they saw MSFT being criticized. Let us excuse them however, since it was in defense for said company, lol.

 

[LordRaptor]

If it's not ready for games then what's the rush?

This quarters financial results are at the end of this month.
I have a suspicion that all of these PC releases being suddenly rushed out and announced are an attempt to offset a quarter that has had the Xbox division severely underperforming.
There's no point discussing that suspicion until their financial results however.
Although there might be indicators in the February NPDs when they come out later this week.

 

[jelly]

You have to see it from Microsoft's view. Windows Store priority snowballing into Mobile and app billions across all Windows platforms. So if Microsoft allow UWA to be like Win32 apps right now, in their eyes it kills the Windows Store and therefore the rest like mobile. What I surprised with is why don't they just embrace UWA like Win32 being open and take it from there and get Windows Store support by choice, not forcing it. Why are on earth are they releasing things like Windows Mobile and games when they clearly aren't ready, wouldn't a bigger splash be an awesome one.

 

[GHG]

This quarters financial results are at the end of this month.
I have a suspicion that all of these PC releases being suddenly rushed out and announced are an attempt to offset a quarter that has had the Xbox division severely underperforming.
There's no point discussing that suspicion until their financial results however.
Although there might be indicators in the February NPDs when they come out later this week.

So it's all about inflating MAU numbers as soon as possible to offset poor performance elsewhere? Would be hilarious if true because all they are doing as a result is causing long term damage to the brand of the Windows store, particularly amongst the gaming community.

We wouldn't even be discussing any of this if they didn't release any games on the store until the infrastructure was actually ready. In fact, it never even gets discussed at all. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[Head.spawn]

If it's not ready for games then what's the rush? Tomb Raider is on steam, they could have delayed Quantum Break on the PC until the UWA situation is adequate and as for Forza... What the fuck are they thinking?

The bottom line is, if what they are cooking needs more time in the oven then give it more time. It's a shame as well because games like Forza have the potential to be great on the PC with full peripheral support and mods but no... They are chosing to poison us.

So my big question for all of this is why? What's it all for? Are they testing the waters to see if we just eat their half baked shit up in its current state? Or are they really just that stupid?

I don't think it would be out of line to say, yes, they have been doing this for a while now. As evidenced by Xbox One and Win 10 in general. They have been releasing things in weird base states, then slowly molding them into something better via direct consumer feedback.

They have been up front for the most part, but as far add this goes clearly not enough.

 

[GHG]

I don't think it would be out of line to say, yes, they have been doing this for a while now. As evidenced by Xbox One and Win 10 in general. They have been releasing things in weird base states, then slowly molding them into something better via direct consumer feedback.

Well that worked out well for the Xbox One didn't it...

What's their next play once this one also fails spectacularly as a result?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well that worked out well for the Xbox One didn't it...

What's their next play once this one also fails spectacularly as a result?

Win32 BC.

Spoiler

I will see myself out now.

 

[Head.spawn]

Well that worked out well for the Xbox One didn't it...

What's their next play once this one also fails spectacularly as a result?

I'm sensing sarcasm, but yeah, the way it has evolved has been great IMO. Maybe you disagree.

Win32 BC.

Spoiler

I will see myself out now.

Lol

 

[gamz]

Well that worked out well for the Xbox One didn't it...

What's their next play once this one also fails spectacularly as a result?

Actually, it has worked out well. The feedback from users and the changes made has been great.

 

[Odrion]

Durante, you're doing the lord's work here.

 

[twobear]

Remember when Apple introduced the OS X App Store and everyone was like GIVE IT THREE YEARS THEYLL HAVE TURNED THE WHOLE PLATFORM INTO IOS MICROSOFT IS THE ONLY COMPANY WHO GIVES US FREEDOM and now MS is the company who seems to be totally cackhandedly integrating their platforms? Like is there any technical reason stopping MS from making their system exactly like how Apple does it?

 

[AncientDiety]

Actually, it has worked out well. The feedback from users and the changes made has been great.

Apples and oranges..MS has a windows monopoly, so there is no pressure to change like there was with X1 when sales were going to be heavily effected because of competition.

 

[GHG]

Win32 BC.

Spoiler

I will see myself out now.

Holy shit haha.

I'm sensing sarcasm, but yeah, the way it has evolved has been great IMO. Maybe you disagree.

Actually, it has worked out well. The feedback from users and the changes made has been great.

Guys, I'm talking about the sales, the brand and the mindshare. Yes, the product has evolved, as every other modern technology product does as a result of feedback from its users. What most companies do however is ensure that when a product launches it provides their customers with the minimum expectations that they would have with said product at the very least.

If not, you face a horrible uphill battle as your early adopters are your products greatest ambassadors. If they do not have great things to say about it then what do you think the publics perception of said product ends up being?

Paying consumers should not be forced to alpha/beta test products, that is their job.

 

[LordRaptor]

We wouldn't even be discussing any of this if they didn't release any games on the store until the infrastructure was actually ready. In fact, it never even gets discussed at all. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

I believe I said upthread, my speculation is that UWAs have never been intended for desktop software (enthusiast games included) and the Win 10 Store was never intended as a general purpose software distribution method; both initiatives were designed to propagate the Phone ecosystem by leveraging the existing desktop ecosystem.
The gaming division are in panic mode, and so have co-opted the Store and UWAs for a purpose they were not fit for, because the mess they made with GFWL means they can't use that existing storefront, and are now desperately trying to duct tape necessary modern digital storefront features onto it, hence the backlash as to their motivations.

That is - I freely admit - entirely speculative.

I do think it is clear that what they are currently doing feels very rushed and doesn't feel like poor execution of a strategy, it feels like on the fly reactions to having no strategy at all.

 

[Skinpop]

A lack of support doesn't mean that it won't work.

yeah looks like I was mistaken, but what exactly does supporting a cpu mean in this context?

 

[aeolist]

Remember when Apple introduced the OS X App Store and everyone was like GIVE IT THREE YEARS THEYLL HAVE TURNED THE WHOLE PLATFORM INTO IOS MICROSOFT IS THE ONLY COMPANY WHO GIVES US FREEDOM and now MS is the company who seems to be totally cackhandedly integrating their platforms? Like is there any technical reason stopping MS from making their system exactly like how Apple does it?

when apple did it they were just selling standard OS X applications through the app store

microsoft is building an entirely new platform that runs side by side with win32 and has far more restrictions on it

 

[gamz]

Apples and oranges..MS has a windows monopoly, so there is no pressure to change like there was with X1 when sales were going to be heavily effected because of competition.

No pressure?

Holy crap! They had a ton or pressure after Windows 8 and they aren't even the dominate OS anymore. It's Android.

They had to deliver on Windows 10 and they took a ton of feedback from the people who used the preview. If you were in the preview program you'd see the changes and progress.

 

[Head.spawn]

I believe I said upthread, my speculation is that UWAs have never been intended for desktop software (enthusiast games included) and the Win 10 Store was never intended as a general purpose software distribution method; both initiatives were designed to propagate the Phone ecosystem by leveraging the existing desktop ecosystem.
The gaming division are in panic mode, and so have co-opted the Store and UWAs for a purpose they were not fit for, because the mess they made with GFWL means they can't use that existing storefront, and are now desperately trying to duct tape necessary modern digital storefront features onto it, hence the backlash as to their motivations.

That is - I freely admit - entirely speculative.

I do think it is clear that what they are currently doing feels very rushed and doesn't feel like poor execution of a strategy, it feels like on the fly reactions to having no strategy at all.

This is pretty much what I suspect is the actual case, rather than some carefully crafted nefarious scheming. But we will see soon enough, if they do address these questionable restrictions like they say they are.

 

[Trup1aya]

It is not hypothetical... see this...



But attacking Sweeney with baseless bullshit, that was not even on topic, nor proved they did not read the quotes, interviews or even posts in this thread is any more credible or noble?

Come on son.



No they were attacking Sweeney like he was some random forum posters, just because they saw MSFT being criticized. Let us excuse them however, since it was in defense for said company, lol.

There were some people doing that. But someone I was talking to people who were accusing me of doing It which I have not.

As far as hypothetical, it is. Just because UWP sucks now (which it does) doesn't mean it will when win32 is officially replaced..

 

[DeepEnigma]

There were some people doing that. But someone I was talking to people who were accusing me of doing It which I have not.

As far as hypothetical, it is. Just because UWP sucks now (which it is) doesn't mean it will when win32 is officially replaced..

No, you were not doing that, I agree, any more than you should excuse those that were, regardless if the side it 'supports'. It does not make for a healthy discussion.

And it is not hypothetical NOW... because NOW is the present and what is here and NOW is exactly the concern. Saying it will not still suck is a hypothetical.

You are judged by your most recent endeavors/actions, not what could be and words.

 

[FX-GMC]

It's not just that they said they won't do it. There is also the reality that they simply can't do it. It boggles my mind that people like you think, that there is even the slightest chance that massive businesses and governments, companies like EA, Blizzard, Valve, Ubisoft and more, and millions of customers would simply stay quiet if Microsoft announces something like this. Do you think they just go like "Whelp, that's a bit unconvenient. But what can we do." I just can't comprehend it, sorry. They wouldn't be able to get away with it. No matter what they do. And they know it.

Completely agree. It's one thing to think about what Microsoft wants to do with the store. I know they would like a closed system where they get 30% off all software sold.

To actually picture this happening you have to assume that all developers are going just going to conform. Judging by how passionate they are in this thread it will never happen. Small/new devs will use it to get apps on Windows Phone and PC and Microsoft will use it. Beyond that I just don't see it.

Win32 BC.

Spoiler

I will see myself out now.

I have to admit, that was funny.

 

[Trup1aya]

No, you were not doing that, I agree, any more than you should excuse those that were, regardless if the side it 'supports'. It does not make for a healthy discussion.

And it is not hypothetical NOW... because NOW is the present and what is here and NOW is exactly the concern. Saying it will not still suck is a hypothetical.

You are judged by your most recent endeavors/actions, not what could be and words.

I don't excuse people who are dismissing valid concerns... I also don't condone presenting speculation as fact.

There's some frustratingly annoying behavior going on, on both 'sides' of the discussion. Dismissing concerns is wrong. Calling folks shills, just for recognizing that most of this discussion hinges around assumptions and extrapolation doesn't help either.

UWP sucks now, I don't dispute that. It has concerning implications for the future.

But whether or not it will still suck in the future is Hypothetical.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Right. It it sucks now, I don't dispute that. It has concerning implications for the future.

But whether or not it will still suck in the future is Hypothetical.

We can both definitely agree on that. My hopes are obviously that it does not suck, lol.

 

[aeolist]

Completely agree. It's one thing to think about what Microsoft wants to do with the store. I know they would like a closed system where they get 30% off all software sold.

To actually picture this happening you have to assume that all developers are going just going to conform. Judging by how passionate they are in this thread it will never happen. Small/new devs will use it to get apps on Windows Phone and PC and Microsoft will use it. Beyond that I just don't see it.

so you guys agree that microsoft has control over the platform and an obvious desire to see as much software as possible moved over to their closed system... but somehow they are completely incapable of actively influencing the platform, however gradually and incrementally, such that this desire is realized?

ok

 

[DeepEnigma]

so you guys agree that microsoft has control over the platform and an obvious desire to see as much software as possible moved over to their closed system... but somehow they are completely incapable of actively influencing the platform, however gradually and incrementally, such that this desire is realized?

ok

Sounds pretty much like what Gabe (Valve) and Sweeney (Epic) were concerned and vocal about.

Dun dun dunnn.

 

[Trup1aya]

We can both definitely agree on that. My hopes are obviously that it does not suck, lol.

I share your hope! I'm confident that the consumers and partners that MS relies on for their business to be successful wouldn't allow for Win32 to be replaced with an API that doesn't at least replicate the functionality they depend on...

Not without huge ramifications that would lead to MS losing their OS dominance in favor of something more open.

I feel like many of the scenarios that are being speculated would actually hurt MS. People are talking about them nixing one of their main selling points... Which admittedly, isnt beyond them, but I recognize some changes in their corporate culture lately. Surely they recognize there's much more $ in them being the location where multiple stores compete for customers (including there own store), than by encouraging all of these businesses to operate elsewhere.

I'm anxiously awaiting more info, which, as Sweeney has mentioned, should have already been made available.

 

[FX-GMC]

so you guys agree that microsoft has control over the platform and an obvious desire to see as much software as possible moved over to their closed system... but somehow they are completely incapable of actively influencing the platform, however gradually and incrementally, such that this desire is realized?

ok

I never said that. What i have said is that devs hold more power than Microsoft in this situation. They have to use the store for it to grow. I hope they don't. Let the store thrive on small time mobile focused apps and let the serious software stay where it is.

In a dream world this change to a completely closed system would happen and after a few dark years SteamOS takes off in a big way and Microsoft can no longer influence any part of PC gaming.

 

[aeolist]

the thing is, i agree that microsoft would ultimately be better off keeping windows open as it has been.

but i don't trust them to do the right thing for themselves, much less their customers or development community. they've proven time and again that they're capable of making monumentally stupid choices, and depending on their foresight and competence is simply foolish. they need aggressive pushback to keep them on the right track.

 

[Trup1aya]

the thing is, i agree that microsoft would ultimately be better off keeping windows open as it has been.

but i don't trust them to do the right thing for themselves, much less their customers or development community. they've proven time and again that they're capable of making monumentally stupid choices, and depending on their foresight and competence is simply foolish. they need aggressive pushback to keep them on the right track.

I don't think anyone should trust MS (or any other mega Corp for that matter).

I just don't think they should be condemned for intent to do something, without any true evidence that they actually intend to do it. Suspicion shouldn't lead directly to condemnation..

We certainly should make it clear what our concerns and expectations are, however.

 

[Dazza]

So what sort of Windows features are they planning on locking out of non UWP apps? It better not be directX features