Support NeoGAF

[SPDIF]

Win32 is - to my eyes - the optimal solution because it has nobody controlling it.
That lack of control is exactly why Windows is the de facto platform of choice for developers.

Except MS you mean? They're the ones that created it. They're the ones that have maintained it and updated it over the years. In fact, isn't it because of the aforementioned that numerous UWP related threads have popped up recently trying to claim that MS, as the controller of Win32, could one day kill it off and force everyone over to UWP? Aren't you one of the people who think that could happen? If so, how can you say that, while at the same time claim that Win32 has nobody controlling it? Or by control, do you mean the control a developer has over the system when they use Win32 APIs?

Regardless, I still don't see how you can call UWP proprietary while trying to claim Win32 as open. They're both proprietary formats created and maintained by MS. They're exactly the same in the respect.

 

[CyberMiguel]

The underlying problem is one of over reach.
You can have a more secure file format designed to be implemented on already closed systems without trying to push that onto a system that has never been closed.
You can have a proprietary format without being the sole controlling authority of it.
You can have a digital storefront without integrating it directly into the OS and blocking any attempts to remove it or make it inaccessible.

e:
Its overly aggressive - and unnecessary - moves like these that foster suspicion

And that's the main problem: you can have all of that with Win32, BUT if the structure that sustain Win32 itself is changed from the ground up, Win32 becomes incresingly dificult to maintain and you have to start looking for other ways to do what you did with Win32 without Win32 to begin with. That's why Microsoft invented UWA and that's why they're trying so hard to push it: they want to get rid of Win32 at all cost.

 

[CyberMiguel]

Of course not, the entirety of Windows is built around it. Explorer and DWM are Win32, UWP will have many hooks into Win32. If they dropped Win32, they may as well redesign Windows.

Which is exactly what they did. Win32 now is not an integral part of the core system and now is a module for current windows software.

 

[Trup1aya]

Which is exactly what they did. Win32 now is not an integral part of the core system and now is a module for current windows software.

Wut?

 

[CyberMiguel]

Wut?

Under the new system structure that comes with Win10, OneCore doesn't include Win32 as an integral part of it, since it isn't necessary for platforms like Xbox or Windows Mobile or Hololens (since none of those platforms need it). Since Win10 for desktop (and Server 2016) use the same core, they had to add Win32 compatibility, but it had to be done as a module (or something like that), so the OneCore could still be used on those other platforms.

 

[dr_rus]

Under the new system structure that comes with Win10, OneCore doesn't include Win32 as an integral part of it, since it isn't necessary for platforms like Xbox or Windows Mobile or Hololens (since none of those platforms need it and they share the same core).

Yeah, people seem to think that Windows itself use Win32 while in fact with Win10 is almost doesn't - only some legacy stuff like Device Manager etc continue to use it and they are slowly but inevitably moving this stuff to UWP as well. At some point in the near future it will actually be possible to have a fully functioning Windows desktop environment without any support for Win32 APIs.

 

[leeh]

Yeah, people seem to think that Windows itself use Win32 while in fact with Win10 is almost doesn't - only some legacy stuff like Device Manager etc continue to use it and they are slowly but inevitably moving this stuff to UWP as well. At some point in the near future it will actually be possible to have a fully functioning Windows desktop environment without any support for Win32 APIs.

Window manager and explorer is win32! UWP wouldn't work without DWM.

Which is exactly what they did. Win32 now is not an integral part of the core system and now is a module for current windows software.

I get the feeling that you didn't read my post, considering the 2 things I used as examples are literally the main pieces of Windows.

 

[Frustrated_me]

Holy shit at people thinking Microsoft is going to dump Win32.

There's crazy, then there's that.

 

[SPDIF]

Under the new system structure that comes with Win10, OneCore doesn't include Win32 as an integral part of it, since it isn't necessary for platforms like Xbox or Windows Mobile or Hololens (since none of those platforms need it). Since Win10 for desktop (and Server 2016) use the same core, they had to add Win32 compatibility, but it had to be done as a module (or something like that), so the OneCore could still be used on those other platforms.

It's only integral when it needs to be. So yes, devices that don't need the full Win32 API, don't have the full Win32 API. While devices that do need the full Win32 API, do. That's not a bad thing.

Yeah, people seem to think that Windows itself use Win32 while in fact with Win10 is almost doesn't- only some legacy stuff like Device Manager etc continue to use it and they are slowly but inevitably moving this stuff to UWP as well. At some point in the near future it will actually be possible to have a fully functioning Windows desktop environment without any support for Win32 APIs.

Until you realise of course that UWP is built on top of, and therefore is completely dependent on, Win32.

 

[Trup1aya]

Under the new system structure that comes with Win10, OneCore doesn't include Win32 as an integral part of it, since it isn't necessary for platforms like Xbox or Windows Mobile or Hololens (since none of those platforms need it). Since Win10 for desktop (and Server 2016) use the same core, they had to add Win32 compatibility, but it had to be done as a module (or something like that), so the OneCore could still be used on those other platforms.

I guess my confusion stems from the word integral. This win32 'module' is neccisary in order to adequately serve 98% of their market on their chosen device.

The modular design isn't inherently threatening, it allows specific devices to get only what they need.

 

[dr_rus]

Window manager and explorer is win32! UWP wouldn't work without DWM.

Hm, I have doubts about DWM being Win32. Why do you think that it is? As for Explorer - it's the same as Device Manager basically, a legacy component.

Until you realise of course that UWP is built on top of, and therefore is completely dependent on, Win32.

And then you realize of course that UWP is working on Xbox One and Windows Phone where no Win32 is present in any form.

 

[TBiddy]

Yes, he made some accusations, but that's because what is at stake is very important, and he has literally put his reputation on the line to try and make people understand the stakes in calling Ms out publically.

I don't doubt for a second that he has his own vested interests; UE is nominally in direct competition with UWA, in that both purport to offer development environments that work on multiple platforms.
I am under no illusion that what would satisfy him on a business interests perspective would be that MS add Epic as a by-default trusted source, and that anything developed in UE is treated as 'safe' in the same way that anything developed by Ms is treated as safe, and that that solution would not address my concerns.

But the point still remains; MS are currently taking actions that are damaging to PC gaming, whether by choice or happenstance.
If left unchecked, those actions can potentially destroy everything that makes Pc gaming it's own unique platform.

It is reasonable to not trust MS to police themselves on this matter, when they have a vested interest in killing off PC gaming entirely and making Xbox the sole platform for gaming.

You shouldn't really trust any companies. None of them have your (or my) best interest in mind, when they make decisions. It's all about profit maximizing. But I think it's highly unlikely that Microsoft will "destoy" PC gaming as we know it. If they do that, people will move someplace else to a platform that allows modding, overlays and everything else we love about PC gaming.

I'd much prefer Tim Sweeney to make some more mature reasoning. He probably has done so, already, in private talks with Microsoft, so I don't understand his need to come out and make crazy accusations like this.

 

[Movalpolos]

Guess I'll just keep 8.1 on my gaming PC then.

 

[SPDIF]

And then you realize of course that UWP is working on Xbox One and Windows Phone where no Win32 is present in any form.

Of course it's present. It's just not there in its full form, because it doesn't need to be (unlike on an PC). If Win32 wasn't there then UWP wouldn't be working. It's as simple as that

 

[leeh]

Hm, I have doubts about DWM being Win32. Why do you think that it is? As for Explorer - it's the same as Device Manager basically, a legacy component.

And then you realize of course that UWP is working on Xbox One and Windows Phone where no Win32 is present in any form.

It's a standard Windows executable, which is Win32. All exe are Win32, if my understanding serves me right.

How is explorer legacy? It's the key to windows, as-in the taskbar and any file browsing.

I also have my doubts around their slimmed down Win10 on Xbox/WP don't contain any Win32.

 

[Gestault]

When someone justifies unsubstantiated accusations with "well it's important" or "they're bad, so we have no reason to doubt it," that's way off base.

 

[LordRaptor]

Regardless, I still don't see how you can call UWP proprietary while trying to claim Win32 as open. They're both proprietary formats created and maintained by MS. They're exactly the same in the respect.

As a developer, right now, I can build a native Win32 application without running Windows, without using any MS toolchains, without registering with MS as a developer, without agreeing to any licencing restrictions, and in fact without MS having any influence, control or say in what I do at any point in the entire development pipeline, from concept to sale to end user.

You literally cannot do the same with UWA.

 

[leeh]

As a developer, right now, I can build a native Win32 application without running Windows, without using any MS toolchains, without registering with MS as a developer, without agreeing to any licencing restrictions, and in fact without MS having any influence, control or say in what I do at any point in the entire development pipeline, from concept to sale to end user.

You literally cannot do the same with UWA.

I don't know where you get your information from, but literally all you do is download Visual Studio (which is now free) and then click "File > New > Project" then "Installed > Templates > Visual C# > Windows > Universal".

Couldn't be easier.

 

[LordRaptor]

I don't know where you get your information from, but literally all you do is download Visual Studio (which is now free) and then click "File > New > Project" then "Installed > Templates > Visual C# > Windows > Universal".

Couldn't be easier.

sorry, who makes visual studio and therefore controls your ability to do that?
It's on the tip of my tongue but I can't quite remember

 

[leeh]

sorry, who makes visual studio and therefore controls your ability to do that?
It's on the tip of my tongue but I can't quite remember

My god. I give up.

Do you just do this for fun or something?

 

[LordRaptor]

My god. I give up.

Do you just do this for fun or something?

A response to "it is impossible to create a UWA without using MS software or agreeing to MS T&Cs" is not "Sure you can, just use MS software and agree to MS T&Cs".

e:
And I 'do this', as established before, because I am a PC gamer and I therefore care about the state of PC gaming.
you are not, and your motivations for cheerleading MS while demonstrably not fully understanding whats involved are far murkier.

 

[Pokemaniac]

Which is exactly what they did. Win32 now is not an integral part of the core system and now is a module for current windows software.

Eh, if you want to get technical, it never really has been. Microsoft wasn't particularly confident in win32 catching on in the beginning, and designed windows to be modular. That's why they're even able to do stuff like add a subsystem for natively running Linux software.

However, from a practical standpoint, most of the Windows userland is still win32. Some of it has been pushed to UWP, but UWP isn't really poised to replace win32 anytime soon.

 

[Frustrated_me]

Remember Windows RT? They made a tablet where users couldn't install their Win32 apps.. Remember how bad that failed? Yeah.

 

[leeh]

A response to "it is impossible to create a UWA without using MS software or agreeing to MS T&Cs" is not "Sure you can, just use MS software and agree to MS T&Cs".

Visual Studio, the IDE which now has an open-sourced version, is free and is one of the most popular IDE for developing any app including Android, iOS and Win32!

That last straw your clutching is slipping. Proved you wrong with UWP development and now your saying you're still right because you have to use VS? If you made a Win32 program, you'd use VS. You're hilarious.

Remember Windows RT? They made a tablet where users couldn't install their Win32 apps.. Remember how bad that failed? Yeah.

That's actually a very good point.

 

[LordRaptor]

If you made a Win32 program, you'd use VS. You're hilarious.

No, you do not have to use VS to make Win32 programs.
Visual Studio Code is also not Visual Studio.

 

[Frustrated_me]

That's actually a very good point.

Which is exactly why Microsoft fired the RT chief Steven Sinofsky, changed the CEO at the time Steve Bullmer and discontinued the RT vision.

The Microsoft of today wants to be everywhere on every platform and wants every platform to be on Microsoft. This is what Tim Sweeney fails to fundamentally understand IMO and this is also what makes Microsoft an exciting company now.

 

[LordRaptor]

The Microsoft of today wants to be everywhere on every platform and wants every platform to be on Microsoft. This is what Tim Sweeney fails to understand IMO.

If true, you have to wonder why the time and money spent on UWA wasn't spent opening up non-desktop Windows implementations, like phone and Xbox to run win32 apps.
Or why developers utilising UWP are not permitted to release games on Xbox without going via ID@XBOX.

Because their overall desire for control does not seem to have changed, and their actions still amount to trying to make Windows more closed, rather than their unpopular products more open.

 

[Frustrated_me]

If true, you have to wonder why the time and money spent on UWA wasn't spent opening up non-desktop Windows implementations, like phone and Xbox to run win32 apps.
Or why developers utilising UWP are not permitted to release games on Xbox without going via ID@XBOX.

Because their overall desire for control does not seem to have changed, and their actions still amount to trying to make Windows more closed, rather than their unpopular products more open.

I think Windows 10 was the missing piece of the puzzle, I'm very confident we'll see more and more UWP apps making its way to HoloLens, XBOX and of course Desktop/Laptop/Mobile.

Win32 apps on Phone and Xbox would look and ultimately feel awful without a unified design language.

 

[leeh]

No, you do not have to use VS to make Win32 programs.
Visual Studio Code is also not Visual Studio.

Yeah, but everyone does because it's a excellent IDE, may I say, industry standard. Edit: The only substitute which is probably worth any time is JetBrains. Their IDE's are excellent.

I know it isn't hence why I said an open-source version. It just shows how the nature of MS has changed. A historically expensive IDE now has a community version and a open-source version and the .NET compiler is now open-sourced and Linux friendly.

Running out of arguments.

 

[LordRaptor]

Win32 apps on Phone and Xbox would look and ultimately feel awful without a unified design language.

Possibly, but I feel that is a somewhat minor issue compared to the much more glaring input paradigms.

While touch and mouse inputs may be relatively easily mapped to each other, it all falls apart where standard input is a controller.

Running out of arguments.

I'm running out of arguments in the sense that you are so desperate to prove me wrong while going full Dunning–Kruger you're actively ignoring what I am telling you in your vehement stance that Java and Javascript are the same thing because they have the same words.

 

[SPDIF]

As a developer, right now, I can build a native Win32 application without running Windows, without using any MS toolchains, without registering with MS as a developer, without agreeing to any licencing restrictions, and in fact without MS having any influence, control or say in what I do at any point in the entire development pipeline, from concept to sale to end user.

You literally cannot do the same with UWA.

But then if MS decides to go though with their dastardly plan and kill Win32 you won't be able to run that application. At least not on Win32's native platform. Which means you're still at the mercy of MS, which is where my initial confusion came from when you tried to say that Win32 isn't controlled by anybody. But from this post and your previous one it does now seem clear that you're talking more about the freedom a developer has when developing using Win32, rather than who ultimately controls it, which is kind of what I was starting to suspect. In other words, what you said is fair enough

Although I will say that other than having to use Windows and Visual Studio to create the app, there's no other restriction when creating a UWA. The other stuff you listed only applies if you want to submit the app to their store.

 

[leeh]

I'm running out of arguments in the sense that you are so desperate to prove me wrong while going full Dunning–Kruger you're actively ignoring what I am telling you in your vehement stance that Java and Javascript are the same thing because they have the same words.

The fact that you have to say this rather than counter what I say just makes this whole statement funny.

When did I ever say Java and Javascript are the same thing? Come on man, I'm a Java dev day-to-day (ish). I don't know if you just misused the word vehement.

 

[LordRaptor]

But from this post and your previous one it does now seem clear that you're talking more about the freedom a developer has when developing using Win32, rather than who ultimately controls it, which is kind of what I was starting to suspect. In other words, what you said is fair enough

I believe they are both hugely important; Developer freedom means a platform that is attractive to developers purely on its own merits, and the benefits of such cannot be underestimated.
It's literally the reason Windows has the position is currently has, why nobody ever went OS2/Warp, and why before Apple made their hugely successful hail mary play, Macs were sidelined to being a thing hipsters used to be different.

But end user freedom is equally important; we have entire genres on PC that only exist as a result of modders. We have games that would otherwise have been lost to the ravages of software versioning deprecation. Like, an app that scans all of your hard drives looking for user data sounds scary in theory, but in practice is a goddamn lifesaver.

Yes, there are costs to that freedom; Piracy. Malware. The usual suspects.
But the benefits of that free approach is what makes the PC what it is as a platform; something like Minecraft could literally never have been born anywhere else.

I've used this analogy before, but to paraphrase Churchill, Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others.

 

[dragonelite]

sorry, who makes visual studio and therefore controls your ability to do that?
It's on the tip of my tongue but I can't quite remember

Uuh you can get the standalone windows sdk.
Write your code in your text editor of choice and just run msvc on the cli.
Sounds like you haven't really worked with build systems yet or else you would have
known this. Im pretty sure i read you can use msbuild cli to build uwp applications
and also sign them.

Its pretty standard for a platform holder to supply build tools and ide just like osx has xcode and xcodebuilder.

 

[TrynUrLuck]

Where's the history channel, alien guy gif?

 

[killer rin]

Uuh you can get the standalone windows sdk.
Write your code in your text editor of choice and just run msvc on the cli.
Sounds like you haven't really worked with build systems yet or else you would have
known this. Im pretty sure i read you can use msbuild cli to build uwp applications
and also sign them.

Its pretty standard for a platform holder to supply build tools and ide just like osx has xcode and xcodebuilder.

Not to mention that Jetbrains is making a C# IDE that is set to come out soon if he really didn't want to use Visual Studio but still wanted an IDE

 

[koji kabuto]

I thought that everyone knows that Win32 is phasing out, why do people arguing that it's not?

Microsoft want to have what Apple is having and nobody can stop them,It's their OS after all.

 

[Trup1aya]

I thought that everyone knows that Win32 is phasing out, why do people arguing that it's not?

Microsoft want to have what Apple is having and nobody can stop them,It's their OS after all.

Phasing out win32 won't give them what apple is having. Their billions of Windows users are a mix of people who have no need for the flexibility win32 provides, and others who rely on it heavily.

They need a way to capitalize on the demand for more controlled experiences, as demonstrated by Apple, while also catering to the needs of those who want total control.

 

[tiredheadcrab]

Bill Maher has a segment on his show called "I dont for a fact, I just know its true". I thought of Tim.


I don't for a fact that MS is purposefully making Steam slower, I just know its true.

 

[dr_rus]

Of course it's present. It's just not there in its full form, because it doesn't need to be (unlike on an PC). If Win32 wasn't there then UWP wouldn't be working. It's as simple as that

It's not that simple at all. There are no reasons why MS would code UWP on Win32 APIs instead of using their own proprietary OneCore interface.

It's a standard Windows executable, which is Win32. All exe are Win32, if my understanding serves me right.

How is explorer legacy? It's the key to windows, as-in the taskbar and any file browsing.

I also have my doubts around their slimmed down Win10 on Xbox/WP don't contain any Win32.

All UWP apps have EXEs.

 

[prudislav]

All UWP apps have EXEs.

but iirc you cant run these executables outside of appx containers,which makes them pretty much useless (when i tried that with KI it said something about sideloading)

 

[SPDIF]

It's not that simple at all. There are no reasons why MS would code UWP on Win32 APIs instead of using their own proprietary OneCore interface.



All UWP apps have EXEs.

It is that simple. You can say there's no reason, but it's a fact that a lot of UWP is built on top of Win32. What UWP is, is essentially a way to expose a more modern, easier to use, more secure, more efficient version of the Win32 API to developers. A developer can call these new APIs, but at a lower level all that's really happening is the OS is calling original Win32 APIs on behalf of the developer (while of course doing a bunch of other stuff to ensure security etc...) What do you even mean by OneCore interface?

 

[Caffeine]

steam crashed for me today but it has done that at least 3 times in the past 7 years.

 

[Quasar]

Man. Tim really is out there wearing his tinfoil hat.

 

[dk2399]

Man. Tim really is out there wearing his tinfoil hat.

After reading this I'm starting to believe this is a purposeful malicious campaign against Microsoft. I can understand some bias and personal preference, but not lies and slander!

https://medium.com/@benfreeman_16339/why-is-tim-sweeney-wrong-about-uwp-c0a2dd897594#.av0qxmh4k

 

[shoryukens]

Valve already does a good enough job at this as it is tbh

Gottem

 

[michaelius]

Another example of Microsoft removing features from W10

http://www.ghacks.net/2016/07/28/microsoft-removes-policies-windows-10-pro/

Closing Words

The changes take away functionality that was previously a part of the Windows 10 Pro edition. It is without doubt an annoyance, considering that Pro users have no option anymore to disable third-party applications, links or Store apps in general on Windows 10 once the Anniversary Update is installed.

Considering that many Pro users won't be able to get Enterprise or Education versions of Windows 10, it is anything but customer friendly.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Another example of Microsoft removing features from W10

http://www.ghacks.net/2016/07/28/microsoft-removes-policies-windows-10-pro/

LOL, oh MSFT.

 

[LordRaptor]

After reading this I'm starting to believe this is a purposeful malicious campaign against Microsoft. I can understand some bias and personal preference, but not lies and slander!

https://medium.com/@benfreeman_16339/why-is-tim-sweeney-wrong-about-uwp-c0a2dd897594#.av0qxmh4k

Jfc, where did you dredge that article up from?
It is literally one of the worst written things I have ever encountered.
It reads like someone just copy and pasted some info from a press release, but didn't really know how to articulate that into a point so just leaves these non sequiturs dangling.

As the year 2016 began, Windows 10 install base grew to 200 million with the announcements and launch of the first waves of AAA games franchises from Xbox One consoles. PC gamers are used to getting large quality AAA titles from Valve’s Steam gaming distribution platform, which is the home for PC gaming and the leading PC gaming platform service on Windows as they do not see Windows Store as their home for PC gaming. The Windows Store platform where its games have large collection of mobile counterparts from popular mobile developers, Windows mobile developers and Windows 8 developers. The Windows Store had its very first AAA game, The Rise Of The Tomb Raider published by Square Enix back in late January, the same time as the Steam version, which included Xbox live features such as achievements and other usual PC gaming features, this proves the naysayers wrong on Microsoft’s PC gaming ecosystem counterpart to the popular Steam gaming service, but it was still to early to claim the UWP platform for PC gaming a massive win. Even though Windows Store had it’s first AAA game which proved that Windows Store has the ability to publish large scale AAA games not just mobile scaled games and it proved UWP platform is not an traditional mobile app platform or a watered down version of Win32 platform model like Windows 8 Modern Apps and it is capable of large scale games that is not exclusive to the Win32 platform, e.g. DirectX 12, Microsoft achieved that goal by reviving themselves on the PC gaming footprint. However, somewhere down the line UWP felled short, the first AAA game built on UWP encountered its first problems such as forced V-sync issues, no SLI/Crossfire setups, borderless full-screen mode, installation issues from the Store which some people reported through social media, these issues UWP have on PC gaming is not always common on the more matured Win32 platform. The issues on the Rise of The Tomb Raider (UWP) game caused some outcry from the PC gaming community and the tech and gaming media which lead to Phil Spencer (Executive Of Microsoft Studios) to respond to the issues facing UWP games on the Windows 10 platform to get his customers to acknowledge that Microsoft have promised to fix the issues on UWP gaming.

....wat

Whole thing is just filled with misinformation, citations of fucking tweets as 'evidence' and ugh, fuck that article so hard

 

[bobbie424242]

To people that are taking things lightly and think Tim is nuts, let's talk about it again in 5 or 10 years. However, history has proved that you can feed gamers anything (Steam hated at release, DLCs, digital distribution, microtransaction ...) given enough time. So making a PC a console-like appliance for gaming is not out of cards. You will love it. Not now, but in 2026 you will.