• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

DouglasteR
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:02 PM)
DouglasteR's Avatar
I believe in him.

Proofs and things that happenned are everywhere.
Lunarwhale
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:03 PM)
Lunarwhale's Avatar
Considering that Microsoft's past behavior is partially why tech-related tinfoil hat theories like this exist in the first place...

Windows 10's already been full of this behavior. Remember when an update forcibly uninstalled CCleaner, CPUid's utilities, and more a few months ago? How about the various updates that just so happened to rework all file association to default to Microsoft's programs? Even smaller things like the laptop battery warning on Windows 10 that tells users to switch to Edge for more battery life are a sign of their strategy here. And this is to say nothing of their push to force everyone on to Windows 10.

Steam's probably not the main target here, but Microsoft's gravitating towards holding more control over a user's options.

Originally Posted by RedlineRonin

This sounds like a bunch of nonsense. I don't wanna be that guy, but I was not at all an MS fan (as far as gaming) until Phil came along. When you listen to him talk, he's a real genuine dude and you can tell he wants the gaming community to succeed as a whole. I can never imagine a world where Phil would allow all this garbage Tim is speculating to actually happen.

Like whoever said it above, this is some straight chicken little type shit. MS still has a ways to go, but Phil has done a lot of fine work in earning respect from the community. He deserves to get more faith than this.

hi phil
jelly
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:03 PM)

Originally Posted by Phil0sophy

Because that is most likely the truth my friend, if we take away our bias and look at this situation objectively the facts point towards this being the case.

Xbox one they tried it, didn't get away with it, Windows 10 forced updates is just a subtle continuation of this practice, it's obvious from a business standpoint what they are trying to do at this juncture, that doesn't mean they will accomplish it however.

Spot on, they are trying. It's not a case of them doing the wrong thing and holding their hands up, they just haven't figured out a way to make us swallow it but they want us to swallow it, one day.
SOR5
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:03 PM)
SOR5's Avatar
Ive always thought UWP's can be improved and the entire approach to it is too closed, but dear fuck Tim Sweeney is one argument away from using the word "reptilian"
CosmicQueso
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:03 PM)
CosmicQueso's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dick Justice

Don't be. I'm going to guess that a good portion of them aren't even PC gamers, and are just stanning for MS as usual like with most UWP threads. Just look at that one fucking guy on the first page and his worship of Phil Spencer.

so anyone who believes Sweeney is a conspiracy theorist and anyone that doesn't isn't even a PC gamer and are just Microsoft shills?

Great. Makes for great discussion. Might as well be a politics thread.

Sweeney positioned himself so he cannot be wrong no matter what happens, and no matter what does or doesn't happen he successfully makes MS look either evil or incompetent. Mission accomplished, Tim.
JaggedSac
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:03 PM)
JaggedSac's Avatar
Valve has good documentation for moving to SteamOS. Now is as good a time as any.


http://store.steampowered.com/steamos
watership
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:03 PM)
watership's Avatar

Originally Posted by The Exploder

shrug. I'll buy a steam box and go down with Gabe's sinking ship before I give more gaming money to Microsoft.

GFWL showed me everything I need to know about their business model. I would just quit PC gaming after 30 years and go all in on PlayStation and Nintendo before I bought a single game on the app store.

Business models and people and company policies change. It's like that chart everyone posts about MS org structure with everyone with guns, years after 2 large shifts in corporate culture in the company. This has more to do with people's emotional feelings for one company over another.
leeh
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:04 PM)
leeh's Avatar

Originally Posted by LordRaptor

They either didn't think it through, hence the backlash on their actions, or they are intentionally trying to sabotage PC gaming to take control of it, and they don't give a fuck about the backlash.

They weren't working to anyones timetable but their own.
Would it be acceptable to publish an Xbox One game that has no access to any of Xbox Lives community features? No of course it fucking wouldn't. So why is it acceptable to do the same on the PC, other than the fact that you don't personally use the PC?

All this is explained by a simple word called priority.
8-Bit Sunset
Banned
(07-26-2016, 03:05 PM)

Originally Posted by RedlineRonin

This sounds like a bunch of nonsense. I don't wanna be that guy, but I was not at all an MS fan (as far as gaming) until Phil came along. When you listen to him talk, he's a real genuine dude and you can tell he wants the gaming community to succeed as a whole. I can never imagine a world where Phil would allow all this garbage Tim is speculating to actually happen.

Like whoever said it above, this is some straight chicken little type shit. MS still has a ways to go, but Phil has done a lot of fine work in earning respect from the community. He deserves to get more faith than this.

leeh
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:06 PM)
leeh's Avatar

Originally Posted by hooijdonk17

In the hands of a capable administrator Linux is pretty secure.

Any system is pretty secure in the hands of a capable administrator. They should definitely not take pointers from Linux.

Objectively, I'd say Linux is harder than any other of OS's to keep secure.
TBiddy
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:07 PM)
TBiddy's Avatar

Originally Posted by CosmicQueso

so anyone who believes Sweeney is a conspiracy theorist and anyone that doesn't isn't even a PC gamer and are just Microsoft shills?

Great. Makes for great discussion. Might as well be a politics thread.

Sweeney positioned himself so he cannot be wrong no matter what happens, and no matter what does or doesn't happen he successfully makes MS look either evil or incompetent. Mission accomplished, Tim.

Unfortunately I've yet to receive my check from Microsoft. It's probably still in the mail, though.

No, seriously, why is it that there's always someone that thinks that everyone who disagrees with him is a shill?

No matter what, though, Sweeney, or anyone else, has still not produced proof, that Microsoft is currently making Steam more buggy via their "force-patching", as Sweeney put it.
watership
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:07 PM)
watership's Avatar

Originally Posted by CosmicQueso

so anyone who believes Sweeney is a conspiracy theorist and anyone that doesn't isn't even a PC gamer and are just Microsoft shills?

I hate this trend, especially on gaf. They immediately call out a pro MS argument as shills. What happened to someone who just doesn't agree? Or a fan? We have crazy people posting SONIC love defense threads every other day here, and if you think that MS is a company rather than a force for evil, you get called a shill.
old manatee
Banned
(07-26-2016, 03:07 PM)
old manatee's Avatar
Watching Microsoft try to jockey their way back into PC gaming is like watching Lyle Lanley sell Springfield a second monorail.

Neuromancer
The Mayuh of f'n Bawston
(07-26-2016, 03:07 PM)
Neuromancer's Avatar
I honestly wouldn't be surprised. Just look at MS's history of shitty anticompetitive moves. They don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalve...hoicepaper.pdf
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
(07-26-2016, 03:08 PM)
Stumpokapow's Avatar
People are interpreting these comments as more conspiratorial, but they're actually more straightforward. Microsoft controls the operating system and has their customers on, essentially, a no opt-out automatic update schedule. Yes, if you're a super nerd and you google for half an hour you can come up with strategies to avoid or delay some updates, but basically you're going to get updated. Sweeney's claim basically boils down to the fact that MS is going to move towards deprecating certain legacy functions--something every OS maker including MS does--including stuff related to legacy executables and middleware technologies. Is it that hard to believe that by 2018, DirectX 8 or lower might not run effectively on Windows? Simultaneously, UWP applications will be supported into the future and updated by Microsoft and sold in Microsoft's store. I don't even think Sweeney thinks it's a case of someone at Microsoft being responsible for kneecapping Steam, rather that even by coincidence this is going to be an issue, and that that coincidence has positive externalities for MS. Further, MS has made it clear that the whole company is oriented around the Windows store.

I guess what I'm saying is that it might be the case that some of Sweeney's tone is a little more excitable than the banal reality, but I actually don't think his arguments will be wrong just on a strictly neutral level. I do agree that the setup in the article seems somewhat unfalsifiable so that does seem unproductive, but in good faith I think it's possible to set that aside and listen to the broader thing he's trying to say about how MS's corporate objectives not aligning with the objectives of others.

I hope that preservation efforts ensure Win3.1, early Win95, and later tech stacks run as well in the future as DOS games do through DOSbox. "Infinite backwards compatibility, infinite forwards compatibility" is the mostly fulfilled promise of PC and that would be a disappointment to lose.
SOR5
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:09 PM)
SOR5's Avatar
Like there's so many valid arguments against UWP and so many ways it can be better but when you start spouting InfoWars shit the credibility goes swirling down the toilet, and it's bizarre because he is a very educated man as well. But every time Tim Sweeney has popped up he's been listing off valid complaints but then starts babbling this convoluted master plan.
TheSeks
Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
(07-26-2016, 03:10 PM)
TheSeks's Avatar

Originally Posted by RedToad64

The Windows Store needs to be usable before anyone is convinced UWP are a better alternative.

Well that and Microsoft has to drop UWP from the Windows Store before anyone is convinced Windows Store is a better alternative.

At this point if MS does follow Sweeny's theory and breaks W32 for the sake of pushing UWP, I see Valve and other devs finally going to Linux and telling people to go there if they want non-UWP applications. But then again, how many have had day and date ports of their stuff to Linux? Yeah, that's the problem currently.
Real_Madrid
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:10 PM)
Real_Madrid's Avatar

Originally Posted by FaintDeftone

I wouldn't be shocked if there was truth to these claims at all. I doubt it would affect Valve much though. I could see them ramping up R&D on SteamOS and it becoming the go-to platform for PC gaming if Microsoft pulled these tactics.

SteamOS can never become popular, only with a very niche audience, even if Microsoft would fuck it up (which they won't).

Why would people limit themselves to Linux gaming and a Linux OS in general?
SatelliteOfLove
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:11 PM)
SatelliteOfLove's Avatar
He needs evidence for these to nail coffins shut. Its extremely techical and dry but mandatory with FUD about.

Originally Posted by RedlineRonin

This sounds like a bunch of nonsense. I don't wanna be that guy, but I was not at all an MS fan (as far as gaming) until Phil came along. When you listen to him talk, he's a real genuine dude and you can tell he wants the gaming community to succeed as a whole. I can never imagine a world where Phil would allow all this garbage Tim is speculating to actually happen.

Like whoever said it above, this is some straight chicken little type shit. MS still has a ways to go, but Phil has done a lot of fine work in earning respect from the community. He deserves to get more faith than this.


Is this the new angle: Phil dont sound crazy therefore hes 100% believable.
Ricky Ricardo
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:12 PM)
Ricky Ricardo's Avatar

Originally Posted by Phil0sophy

Because that is most likely the truth my friend, if we take away our bias and look at this situation objectively the facts point towards this being the case.

Xbox one they tried it, didn't get away with it, Windows 10 forced updates is just a subtle continuation of this practice, it's obvious from a business standpoint what they are trying to do at this juncture, that doesn't mean they will accomplish it however.

That is the EXACT opposite of what is going on here. It's so ironic that you would even post that.

We're looking at a situation built on a lot of possibilities, with a very low threshold of factual basis. If Microsoft breaks Win32, it won't just affect Steam. They will literally undermine every aspect of their own operating system, and for what? To sell some AAA games through an app store?

This nonsense is beginning to look a lot like the political fear-mongering agendas that are rife throughout the US and Europe. We want to talk about how Microsoft launched a half-baked app store to play sandboxed AAA games through? Fair game. We want to talk about how invasive these Windows 10 install prompts have been? Fair game.

These are things that are happening, that can be documented, AND PROVED. And as someone studying to be an auditor, I am pretty amazed by some of the responses to this. You don't walk into an audit committee and say "Hey guys, I think bad things could likely be going down. There's a possibility of fraud, if we just follow a virtual pathway of possible decisions ..." You'd better be able to show some receipts.
Vex_
Banned
(07-26-2016, 03:12 PM)
Even if MS attempted to do this - Valve would just update their steam client to be more compatible, right? Like, why would valve just sit around not releasing any updates to their client?

I mean, when win10 first came out, a lot of apps were broken...and a lot of apps got updated too be more compatible with win10. That is just how software development works, sweeney.
Frustrated_me
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:12 PM)
Frustrated_me's Avatar
LOL, go home Tim.
D4Danger
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:12 PM)

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

I hope that preservation efforts ensure Win3.1, early Win95, and later tech stacks run as well in the future as DOS games do through DOSbox. "Infinite backwards compatibility, infinite forwards compatibility" is the mostly fulfilled promise of PC and that would be a disappointment to lose.

I'm sure there's some out there but is there anything created in the past thirty years that you can't get to run on Windows 10?

This idea that Microsoft can push an update and wipe out decades of compatibility is just nonsense. That doesn't benefit anyone (especially them)
dr_rus
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:13 PM)
dr_rus's Avatar
In the meantime it's only three days till the free Win10 upgrade offer expires.

I agree with Tim, they will try to pull this off, most people still won't notice though.
8-Bit Sunset
Banned
(07-26-2016, 03:14 PM)

Originally Posted by Frustrated_me

LOL, go home Tim.

Hilarious and insightful comment!
Really, just superb and adds so much to the conversation!

What is your reasoning behind why that this incredibly talented and respected industry vet should "go home"?
Narroo
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:16 PM)

Originally Posted by Lunarwhale

Considering that Microsoft's past behavior is partially why tech-related tinfoil hat theories like this exist in the first place...

Windows 10's already been full of this behavior. Remember when an update forcibly uninstalled CCleaner, CPUid's utilities, and more a few months ago? How about the various updates that just so happened to rework all file association to default to Microsoft's programs? Even smaller things like the laptop battery warning on Windows 10 that tells users to switch to Edge for more battery life are a sign of their strategy here. And this is to say nothing of their push to force everyone on to Windows 10.

How did I not hear about this? I'm very glad I stayed on Windows 7.
duvjones
Banned
(07-26-2016, 03:16 PM)

Originally Posted by Phil0sophy

Microsoft care about making money, they are a business, if they fear money will be lost through bad PR then their stance will change, the problem is right now they are banking on people just accepting this to be the way it is and unfortunately that has backfired for them in the past and it most certainly will backfire against them on PC if they attempt to continue trying to "wall it off"

There are $55 billion reasons for Mircosoft to NOT care. There is a rather large pattern of history that shows that Mircosoft rarely if ever gives a fuck.
I remember that during Vista's development, Microsoft was planning to vitrualize OpenGL calls via a generic driver (whom performance was questionable), the PC gaming communities screamed to high heaven about it and it never made it to the final build. By the time that happened, the damage was done, there was a mass-migration to DirectX by the time Vista hit gold.
And that is just one of MANY example of this.

If Tim is right, and history does state that he is on to something with this, then tell me why simply continue to do something that keeps playing into Mircosoft's hands? Why continuing to simply discuss this with the company that has shown little signs of changing this in any meaningful way?
SOR5
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:17 PM)
SOR5's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ricky Ricardo

That is the EXACT opposite of what is going on here. It's so ironic that you would even post that.

We're looking at a situation built on a lot of possibilities, with a very low threshold of factual basis. If Microsoft breaks Win32, it won't just affect Steam. They will literally undermine every aspect of their own operating system, and for what? To sell some AAA games through an app store?

This nonsense is beginning to look a lot like the political fear-mongering agendas that are rife throughout the US and Europe. We want to talk about how Microsoft launched a half-baked app store to play sandboxed AAA games through? Fair game. We want to talk about how invasive these Windows 10 install prompts have been? Fair game.

These are things that are happening, that can be documented, AND PROVED. And as someone studying to be an auditor, I am pretty amazed by some of the responses to this. You don't walk into an audit committee and say "Hey guys, I think bad things could likely be going down. There's a possibility of fraud, if we just follow a virtual pathway of possible decisions ..." You'd better be able to show some receipts.

This so much

Argue against the closed nature of UWP
Argue against the buggy nature of the store
Argue against the currently crap layout of the store

But fantasy schemes is where I can't take it seriously anymore.
TheSeks
Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
(07-26-2016, 03:17 PM)
TheSeks's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ricky Ricardo

and for what? To sell some AAA games through an app store?

Not just games. They want Skype UWP to be used. They want Mail UWP/Outlook to be used. They want non-gaming AND gaming apps to be UWP for the sake of phone-><-Xbox-><-PC "synergy." It's why his "knee-capping" theory is partially true, Microsoft's goal is to have "one true platform for three devices/trees" AND have "one application, one code-base" to do that with.
TBiddy
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:17 PM)
TBiddy's Avatar

Originally Posted by Narroo

How did I not hear about this? I'm very glad I stayed on Windows 7.

It's because it happened to a very small amount of users. Updates have broken computers, apps, files etc. in multiple operating systems for many years.
watership
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:20 PM)
watership's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

People are interpreting these comments as more conspiratorial, but they're actually more straightforward. Microsoft controls the operating system and has their customers on, essentially, a no opt-out automatic update schedule. Yes, if you're a super nerd and you google for half an hour you can come up with strategies to avoid or delay some updates, but basically you're going to get updated. Sweeney's claim basically boils down to the fact that MS is going to move towards deprecating certain legacy functions--something every OS maker including MS does--including stuff related to legacy executables and middleware technologies. Is it that hard to believe that by 2018, DirectX 8 or lower might not run effectively on Windows? Simultaneously, UWP applications will be supported into the future and updated by Microsoft and sold in Microsoft's store. I don't even think Sweeney thinks it's a case of someone at Microsoft being responsible for kneecapping Steam, rather that even by coincidence this is going to be an issue, and that that coincidence has positive externalities for MS. Further, MS has made it clear that the whole company is oriented around the Windows store.

I guess what I'm saying is that it might be the case that some of Sweeney's tone is a little more excitable than the banal reality, but I actually don't think his arguments will be wrong just on a strictly neutral level. I do agree that the setup in the article seems somewhat unfalsifiable so that does seem unproductive, but in good faith I think it's possible to set that aside and listen to the broader thing he's trying to say about how MS's corporate objectives not aligning with the objectives of others.

I hope that preservation efforts ensure Win3.1, early Win95, and later tech stacks run as well in the future as DOS games do through DOSbox. "Infinite backwards compatibility, infinite forwards compatibility" is the mostly fulfilled promise of PC and that would be a disappointment to lose.

I agree with everyone you wrote here. Especially in regards to intent. The problem is that no company, out of the goodness of their hearts, is going to actively support or guarantee support for gaming software/platforms over 10+ or 20+ years old. The fact that windows does, right now, is pretty unique.
hooijdonk17
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:20 PM)
hooijdonk17's Avatar

Originally Posted by leeh

Any system is pretty secure in the hands of a capable administrator. They should definitely not take pointers from Linux.

Objectively, I'd say Linux is harder than any other of OS's to keep secure.

Are you honestly telling me that an OS with an open source kernel is more secure than one with a kernel with whatever hidden backdoors you don't even know about? There is nothing unsecure about Linux inherently, every security measure it has is light years ahead of Windows. Is it more complicated? Yes. But it is definitely NOT less secure.
vpance
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:21 PM)
vpance's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ricky Ricardo

If Microsoft breaks Win32, it won't just affect Steam. They will literally undermine every aspect of their own operating system

If steam.exe then fail
Else do work
stan423321
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:21 PM)
stan423321's Avatar

Originally Posted by Real_Madrid

SteamOS can never become popular, only with a very niche audience, even if Microsoft would fuck it up (which they won't).

Why would people limit themselves to Linux gaming and a Linux OS in general?

I don't really get your question. Why do people "limit themselves to Windows gaming and a Windows OS in general"?

SteamOS specifically, I don't know much about. However in a hypothetical situation where EA, Ubisoft and Activision start releasing their things on Linux, and NVidia and AMD start to care about Linux drivers, how would running on Linux be different from running on Windows through the 360 years? Are you going to tell me about those Microsoft's first-party exclusives which made people stay there?
TheSeks
Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
(07-26-2016, 03:21 PM)
TheSeks's Avatar

Originally Posted by Lunarwhale

Even smaller things like the laptop battery warning on Windows 10 that tells users to switch to Edge for more battery life

To be fair, this is partially true. Chrome on laptops will crank the CPU even off-charger/battery powered and has no means of throttling that because Google wants it to have better performance. Same with Firefox IIRC. Edge is "built in" thereby MS forces it to follow the battery power management they have.
Maddrical
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:23 PM)
Maddrical's Avatar
I'm really surprised so many people are so quick to write off Tim's comments. I honestly don't know, but would it surprise me if it was revealed that's what they did over the next ~5 years? Not even slightly.
Noobcraft
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:24 PM)

Originally Posted by Maddrical

I'm really surprised so many people are so quick to write off Tim's comments. I honestly don't know, but would it surprised me if it was revealed that's what they did over the next ~5 years? Not even slightly.

The last time he said something like this he was totally wrong so it isn't surprising.
DeepEnigma
Banned
(07-26-2016, 03:25 PM)

Originally Posted by jelly

Wait for Build ...Wait until they Build the wall

John Wick
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:26 PM)
John Wick's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gemüsepizza

This is just getting sad, Jesus Christ. How can anyone honestly believe that the industry, customers and organisations like the EU will just silently watch Microsoft doing stuff like this. Hint: They won't. And Microsoft knows this. This is conspiracy level stuff.

Because they aren't gonna flip a switch tomorrow. They gonna slowly and quietly make this transition. Slowly over time phase out win32. While also making UWP the industry standard etc.
SPDIF
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:27 PM)
SPDIF's Avatar

Originally Posted by LordRaptor

No, its the Tim Sweeney who raised entirely legitimate concerns that were handwaved away with "wait for Build" and when Build rolled around literally none of those fucking concerns were addressed, and the handwave was replaced with "Wait for anniversary update"

I really don't know why you keep saying this. Yes, people kept saying "wait for Build", because that's when we'd be getting more information about what Microsoft's plans were. At Build, we did get some of those concerns addressed. The main one being, as far as Sweeney was concerned, the ability to install UWAs from outside the store was going to be enabled. MS then talked about how all these updates would be coming in the anniversary update. So, funnily enough, people then said "wait for the anniversary update" - which will be coming August 2nd. What's so hard to understand about that?

Originally Posted by DeepEnigma

So ... wait for //build/?

See above. Would I be correct in saying that none of you watched the Build conference? It's all well and good to make jokes, but then if you're not even going to pay attention to the conference when it comes around, what's the point?
Trup1aya
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:27 PM)

Originally Posted by metareferential

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embr...and_extinguish

Let's link just this.

Let's see if the DoJ is crazy too.

The difference is, the DoJ had proof.

People in this tread (like Sweeny) are really struggling with the difference between having suspicions and having evidence. It's common practice to provide the latter when you are going to make accusations.

Unless he's got his hands on some internal memo's he shouldn't be telling people that MS has a five year plan to break Steam. This is conspiracy theory by definition.

I appreciate his concern, but right now, he's playing Snowden, without the cables.
Three
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:28 PM)
Three's Avatar

Originally Posted by vasametropolis

Sounds like a load of crap to me. Most obvious choice would be to ruin Chrome, and they haven't done a thing.

Except they have?
John Wick
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:30 PM)
John Wick's Avatar

Originally Posted by stan423321

I don't really get your question. Why do people "limit themselves to Windows gaming and a Windows OS in general"?

SteamOS specifically, I don't know much about. However in a hypothetical situation where EA, Ubisoft and Activision start releasing their things on Linux, and NVidia and AMD start to care about Linux drivers, how would running on Linux be different from running on Windows through the 360 years? Are you going to tell me about those Microsoft's first-party exclusives which made people stay there?

The thing MS need to worry about is if Google release a proper Android PC OS. Then things will get interesting. Bring steam aboard and tie it in with mobile,android wear and TV etc
stan423321
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:31 PM)
stan423321's Avatar

Originally Posted by hooijdonk17

Are you honestly telling me that an OS with an open source kernel is more secure than one with a kernel with whatever hidden backdoors you don't even know about? There is nothing unsecure about Linux inherently, every security measure it has is light years ahead of Windows. Is it more complicated? Yes. But it is definitely NOT less secure.

It is generally more secure but being open-source is only a part of why it is. The most important reason is that a typical "computer moron" doesn't use Linux, so there's no need to come up with reasons to hack it. Meanwhile things like iOS or UWP are more secure by the means of preventing the programs from doing things. Yet the hacks of various sort happen from time to time, because there's prey there.

Actually, there is a similar mess on the Linux side recently in regards to sandboxing, though certainly less controversial due to general lack of store-pushing, UI changes and such.
LordRaptor
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:33 PM)
LordRaptor's Avatar

Originally Posted by leeh

All this is explained by a simple word called priority.

What?
That doesn't explain shit.

If you have no deadline for releasing a product, there's literally no cause to release a broken product.
W10 store is a complete fucking joke for anything more than mobile apps? Don't release things on it then.
Have improvements in mind to not make it a dumpster fire? Make those improvements before expecting paying customers to have to deal with it.

Originally Posted by TBiddy

No, seriously, why is it that there's always someone that thinks that everyone who disagrees with him is a shill?

I still don't understand why anyone who is not a PC gamer feels any need whatsoever to defend Microsofts actions in the Pc gaming space, or expect that their voice should carry weight.
Why?
Honestly, why?
If you are entirely unaffected, why defend the indefensible?

e:

Originally Posted by SPDIF

MS then talked about how all these updates would be coming in the anniversary update. So, funnily enough, people then said "wait for the anniversary update" - which will be coming August 2nd. What's so hard to understand about that?

What's so difficult to understand that things in the future are not satisfactorily "addressed"?
Bits N Pieces
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:34 PM)
Bits N Pieces's Avatar

Originally Posted by LordRaptor

What?
That doesn't explain shit.

If you have no deadline for releasing a product, there's literally no cause to release a broken product.
W10 store is a complete fucking joke for anything more than mobile apps? Don't release things on it then.
Have improvements in mind to not make it a dumpster fire? Make those improvements before expecting paying customers to have to deal with it.



I still don't understand why anyone who is not a PC gamer feels any need whatsoever to defend Microsofts actions in the Pc gaming space, or expect that their voice should carry weight.
Why?
Honestly, why?
If you are entirely unaffected, why defend the indefensible?

I really do enjoy the UWP threads on here. Carry on Raptor :)
HerroRygar
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:35 PM)
HerroRygar's Avatar
I'm sure Microsoft don't want to support win32 indefinitely, especially given that they have a clear alternative. That they may choose to slowly reduce functionality is entirely believable. Since other platforms seem to be getting away with banning alternative app stores, Windows has a precedent to assume it's safe for Steam to be squeezed out by fading win32 support.

*shrug*

He may or may not be paranoid, but I think this is totally plausible.
itsc4z
Junior Member
(07-26-2016, 03:37 PM)
itsc4z's Avatar
You can't turn a piece of shit into a piece of shit.
TBiddy
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:38 PM)
TBiddy's Avatar

Originally Posted by LordRaptor

I still don't understand why anyone who is not a PC gamer feels any need whatsoever to defend Microsofts actions in the Pc gaming space, or expect that their voice should carry weight.
Why?
Honestly, why?
If you are entirely unaffected, why defend the indefensible?

What makes you assume I don't use my PC for gaming? Who are you to tell me that my opinion is meaningless? If all you want is to slander Microsoft in an echo chamber, I'm sure there are forums for that.
gamz
Member
(07-26-2016, 03:40 PM)
gamz's Avatar

Originally Posted by John Wick

The thing MS need to worry about is if Google release a proper Android PC OS. Then things will get interesting. Bring steam aboard and tie it in with mobile,android wear and TV etc

This. If there's one company we can trust it's Google.

Thread Tools