Support NeoGAF

[papo]

That was a textbook definition of a non sequitur.

No it is not. I was not trying to make any grander argument by my statement. But PC is not a phone is not true. They are both computers that have an OS they just operate in different ways. I wanted to point out how it relates to the situation and that there have been version of universal apps that we use without issue today.

Durante is not making that argument. No one here is making that argument.

I know they aren't I am just stating what I think is the opposite. People are reaching the conclusion that UWp is going to take completely over Windows and not let you user Steam or mods and have several restrictions. I see at as Xbox being on platform. If you want the XBox gaming experience then there may be restriction. Might be a stupid comparison, but you can't just put and X1 disk in a Pc and play the game right? Similar thing here IMO.

 

[Durante]

There is severe cognitive dissonance going on when one blames hardware that works with a good 99% of all computer applications on a problem, rather than the so-called universal applications that are the 1%, writing the former off as a "hack" and the latter off as proper software.

It is peculiar.

If anything, the vast compatibility of the Steam Controller across Xinput, DirectInput, and all the various mouse and keyboard input options available is a great achievement (and necessary for a true PC controller).

I know they aren't I am just stating what I think is the opposite. People are reaching the conclusion that UWp is going to take completely over Windows and not let you user Steam or mods and have several restrictions. I see at as Xbox being on platform. If you want the XBox gaming experience then there may be restriction. Might be a stupid comparison, but you can't just put and X1 disk in a Pc and play the game right? Similar thing here IMO.

Well, that's pretty much exactly what I say at the end of my conclusion:

However, one fact should be clear. If you buy a game as a UWA then, in many aspects such as user control, interoperability, moddability and the overall ecosystem, what you are getting is closer to a console game running on a PC than what we traditionally consider a PC game.

 

[LordRaptor]

Uwp is the futures of the windows platform.

No it isn't.
Unless you believe that the Future of the Windows platform is as an unpopular mobile phone operating system, not as a desktop monopoly.
I can state pretty definitively that that is not where MS wants to be in 5 years time.

Win32 is old, unwieldy, insecure and broken.

So is democracy, but to paraphrase Churchill its still better than all the other alternatives.

Also UWA is completely designed for games...

It pretty self-evidently and demonstrably isn't.

Also i have no idea what antitrust implications you are talking about.

If you can't see any potential antitrust implications of a monopoly entirely changing direction so that it is the sole gatekeeper of a previously open system, I can only conclude that you are wilfully ignoring all arguments put forwards with your fingers in your ears going lalalala I can't hear you lalala, and as such are not particularly worth the effort of conversation.
Sorry.

The one good thing about Win32 usage right now is that enterprises do NOT (at all) utilize UWP/UWA. All enterprise software is Win32.

Yes, absolutely.
You'll also note that none of MS's own enterprise software is showing any indication of moving to a UAW model - if for no other reason than it puts an entire industry of Ms Authorised volume key licence resellers out of business, and they will be recommending their corporate clients pivot to OSX or Linux long before they let MS disrupt a key revenue stream.

I don't know what you are trying to say. We couldn't have a discussion like this in the first place if we didn't distinguish between the technical features/limitations of UWAs and the sales practices of UWAs in a meaningful way, i.e. in a way that talking about the one is different to talking about the other.

I mean that for the purposes of this discussion, there is no meaningful difference bwtween saying "You can only buy UWAs from the Windows Store" and "UWAs are only installable from the Windows Store".
The arguments put forward are identical, the nature of whether the software is purchased or not is mostly irrelevant.

One thing I don't get is why people think that UWP and or Xbox should be now open to everyone to do whatever they please just because it is now on PC. It is still their platform thing or whatever. Just like how developers don't want MS to tell them ow to run their thing why does everyone want to tell Ms how to run their Xbox platform.

I don't believe anyone with strong opinions against UWAs has had much to say on the topic of how the Xbox 'should be'.
I don't believe the people with strong opinions about UWAs actually give a shit about the Xbox to be blunt.

 

[Costia]

Specific points which have nothing to do with the objective part of the article.
So basically, for every single point that I raise you agree that it will not work with UWAs.
Which is, in fact, the claim of my article.

The claims in the objective part of the article are broader than the specific issues you have just raised. "Lack of interoperability" is not the same as saying "specifically, X doesn't work". It's a much wider claim.
You present things as if they are inherent problems of UWA, when in fact some of those things can be done, by using DX12 for example.
(And others will have to be changed/fixed, or UWA will die from lack of dev support.)
You have also omitted the positives of such a system to the average user (not just gamers) from your objective review.
It is clear that the objective part of your article is specifically meant to support the subjective part, and not as a neutral technical review of the platform.
I have no problem with that, but i wouldn't call that objective.

Edit: I understand your concerns, but i dont see it taking over, no matter what MS might want.

 

[Krejlooc]

The claims in the objective part of the article are broader than the specific issues you have just raised. "Lack of interoperability" is not the same as saying "specifically, X doesn't work". It's a much wider claim.
You present things as if they are inherent problems of UWA, when in fact some of those things can be done, by using DX12 for example.
(And others will have to be changed/fixed, or UWA will die from lack of dev support.)
You have also omitted the positives of such a system to the average user (not just gamers) from your objective review.
It is clear that the objective part of your article is specifically meant to support the subjective part, and not as a neutral technical review of the platform.
I have no problem with that, but i wouldn't call that objective.

Neutrality is not a component of objectivity. Durante would never claim to be neutral, but he was objective.

 

[Ushay]

I actually like the Windows Store and UWA apps for a lot of things. The Facebook and Pandora apps are fantastic, for example. I've also grabbed a few free games like Sonic Dash on it.

It's a shame to see all the limitations on them tho. Definitely not something I really want for my PC gaming experience.

This is pretty much my stance on this, if the apps are high quality and work well I have no complaints at all.

A lot of what's in the article is admittedly over my head as I am not a developer. What I am is a gamer that started out on PC, the biggest reason I left that platform was the headache that comes with modification and custom settings.

If the W10 store keeps it's doors open to things like mods while keeping things user friendly etc I'd be a happy camper.

 

[laxu]

This is kinda arguing for the wrong thing. You do want things to become universal apps because they are portable and have a number of nice effects for usability and security. You don't want games to install all sorts of DRM bullshit, you don't want a myriad of different updaters and background processes, you want predictability for easier preservation. There are limitations though, you need to know the use cases of features to properly address them. Things like post-effects on a framebuffer are useful for color correction, f.lux style shades, disability modes etc. They should be a supported feature of the platform and implemented in a consistent and secure manner and that's what we should push for.

While I kinda agree with this because the current Windows program installation scheme of "let's litter the filesystem" is downright idiotic, I would be ok if we had a similar setup to OSX where you can still easily access the files inside the container (thus allowing unofficial mods etc) if you want. It doesn't need to be too complicated.

 

[SunBroDave]

No it isn't.
Unless you believe that the Future of the Windows platform is as an unpopular mobile phone operating system, not as a desktop monopoly.
I can state pretty definitively that that is not where MS wants to be in 5 years time.


So is democracy, but to paraphrase Churchill its still better than all the other alternatives.



It pretty self-evidently and demonstrably isn't.



If you can't see any potential antitrust implications of a monopoly entirely changing direction so that it is the sole gatekeeper of a previously open system, I can only conclude that you are wilfully ignoring all arguments put forwards with your fingers in your ears going lalalala I can't hear you lalala, and as such are not particularly worth the effort of conversation.
Sorry.



Yes, absolutely.
You'll also note that none of MS's own enterprise software is showing any indication of moving to a UAW model - if for no other reason than it puts an entire industry of Ms Authorised volume key licence resellers out of business, and they will be recommending their corporate clients pivot to OSX or Linux long before they let MS disrupt a key revenue stream.



I mean that for the purposes of this discussion, there is no meaningful difference bwtween saying "You can only buy UWAs from the Windows Store" and "UWAs are only installable from the Windows Store".
The arguments put forward are identical, the nature of whether the software is purchased or not is mostly irrelevant.



I don't believe anyone with strong opinions against UWAs has had much to say on the topic of how the Xbox 'should be'.
I don't believe the people with strong opinions about UWAs actually give a shit about the Xbox to be blunt.

Damn, extremely well said. Unfortunately it seems that regardless of evidence to the contrary (and common sense), some people just refuse to believe anything other than that Microsoft are a corporation of angels who would never put themselves before their customers.

 

[Costia]

Neutrality is not a component of objectivity. Durante would never claim to be neutral, but he was objective.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/objectivity
Objectivity is a noun that means a lack of bias, judgment, or prejudice. Maintaining one's objectivity is the most important job of a judge.
He clearly has a bias.

 

[SunBroDave]

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/objectivity
Objectivity is a noun that means a lack of bias, judgment, or prejudice. Maintaining one's objectivity is the most important job of a judge.
He clearly has a bias.

Instead of trying to invalidate Durante's argument by discrediting him, how about you try to invalidate his argument by proving with facts that he's wrong. Oh wait, you can't? That's what I thought.

 

[LordRaptor]

He clearly has a bias.

In fairness, everyone has a bias, and it is difficult to genuinely be objective on aspects that rely on ideological grounds.

For example, if you find the additional security that UWA provides to offset the freedom that it takes away, that is entirely understandable, and I can empathise with that view, but it is still fundamentally an ideological stance that you (hypothetical audience you, not you specifically) are comfortable with sacrificing freedom in the name of security; others will fight to the bitter end to combat that stance, because they are not ideologically prepared to accept such a compromise.

e: Its impossible to be objective because its impossible to say one is 'right' and one is 'wrong'.
At most you can only concede that there is a trade off between security and freedom, and what that trade off means is different to different people.

 

[potatohead]

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/objectivity
Objectivity is a noun that means a lack of bias, judgment, or prejudice. Maintaining one's objectivity is the most important job of a judge.
He clearly has a bias.

A preference =/= bias.

Bias implies some form of inherent corruption in his ideas, rather than simply a stated and thoughtful preference towards one paradigm over another.

I agree with Durante on this issue.

 

[Krejlooc]

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/objectivity
Objectivity is a noun that means a lack of bias, judgment, or prejudice. Maintaining one's objectivity is the most important job of a judge.
He clearly has a bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_(philosophy)

Philosophical objectivity is merely a statement pertaining to truth.

Objectivity does not imply neutral sentiment. Consider:

"If he sold his stock in google today, he would be upset"

vs

"if he kept his stock in google today, he would be happy"

both of these statements are objectively true. Neither are sentimentally neutral. Journalistic objectivity tries to maintain neutrality, but neutrality is not a component of objectivity.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/objectivity

objectivity
[ob-jik-tiv-i-tee, -jek-]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
the state or quality of being objective :
He tries to maintain objectivity in his judgment.
2.
intentness on objects external to the mind.
3.
external reality.

 

[mcrommert]

Yup, smartphone games. The way the store looks, the way UWA acts. It's meant for a smartphone/tablet device.
Basically, it's trash for PC.

Agreed at this point...That is changing

If you can't see any potential antitrust implications of a monopoly entirely changing direction so that it is the sole gatekeeper of a previously open system, I can only conclude that you are wilfully ignoring all arguments put forwards with your fingers in your ears going lalalala I can't hear you lalala, and as such are not particularly worth the effort of conversation.
Sorry.
.

Yeah so you still haven't listed why it isn't open. As of 1511 apps can be freely installed without any ux changes. Like win32 the development of the platform is being done by Microsoft as the platform holder. I don't see how it is in any way less open than win32.

 

[OmarTheHippo]

One thing I don't get is why people think that UWP and or Xbox should be now open to everyone to do whatever they please just because it is now on PC. It is still their platform thing or whatever. Just like how developers don't want MS to tell them ow to run their thing why does everyone want to tell Ms how to run their Xbox platform..

No one is against UWP as a marketplace. No one thinks UWP or Xbox need to be open. People only want Win32 to remain open. Which Microsoft's policies at the OS level could jeopardize

From the article:

If this future—one in which Microsoft gradually incentivizes UWP and the Windows Store at the OS level, and gradually disincentivizes Win32 and competing stores—ever came to pass, many of the wonderful things we love about PC gaming would be imperiled

Incentivising UWP at the OS level at the expense of Win32 gaming is the danger. We're not asking UWP to go away; simply that Microsoft not leverage their position as the OS platform holder to create artificial advantages for UWP

And really, what makes our worries legitimate, is that Microsoft as a platform owner has every right and reason to leverage it to their advantage. We've definitely taken for granted the freedom and open nature of the platform so far. We really really want it to stay that way. It's better for PC gaming. But it's hard to prove just how much better it is for Microsoft, and without that proof we'll continue to face the risk (and express our fears) of it being taken away

 

[DeepEnigma]

Very good article, thank you for sharing your thoughts Durante.

 

[JaggedSac]

You'll also note that none of MS's own enterprise software is showing any indication of moving to a UAW model - if for no other reason than it puts an entire industry of Ms Authorised volume key licence resellers out of business, and they will be recommending their corporate clients pivot to OSX or Linux long before they let MS disrupt a key revenue stream.

This and the 30% cut is why the current incarnation of the UWP will never replace Win32. 0% chance of that. So give them hell, but deep inside realize there is nothing of concern of this thing in it's current state. If it gets to a state where other software providers like Adobe, AutoDesk, HP, etc start developing in UWP, it has most likely gotten into a more palatable state for the gaming population as well.

 

[ShadowSoldier89]

Im asking UWP to go away, its awful all around

 

[Costia]

Instead of trying to invalidate Durante's argument by discrediting him, how about you try to invalidate his argument by proving with facts that he's wrong. Oh wait, you can't? That's what I thought.

Oh wait, i did.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=195670118&postcount=2539
In that thread he claimed dll injection wasn't possible:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=195142126&postcount=451

 

[Krejlooc]

Oh wait, i did.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=195670118&postcount=2539

Oh wait, no you didn't. Becuase his claim is that

Steam, Mumble, FRAPS, ReShade, GeDoSaTo, RTSS, MSI Afterburner, and so on and so forth will not work with it.

Nobody gives a shit about your useless, academic injection DLL. When people are bitching that injection drivers don't work with UWA, they are speaking about specific drivers.

 

[LordRaptor]

This and the 30% cut is why the current incarnation of the UWP will never replace Win32. 0% chance of that. So give them hell, but deep inside realize there is nothing of concern of this thing in it's current state.

Oh, I entirely agree, and have repeatedly held the viewpoint that this is a Games division fuck up with unintended consequences rather than a malicious lockdown attempt.
I will continue to raise hell though, because if they're successful by accident the end result is just as undesirable as if it was an active attempt.

 

[Costia]

Oh wait, no you didn't. Becuase his claim is that



Nobody gives a shit about your useless, academic injection DLL. When people are bitching that injection drivers don't work with UWA, they are speaking about specific drivers.

No his claim was:

Unsigned code cannot interact with "universal apps".
.....

And you post highlights the problem. People prefer bitching about things not working rather than trying to make it work, or atleast check.

 

[JaggedSac]

Oh wait, no you didn't. Becuase his claim is that



Nobody gives a shit about your useless, academic injection DLL. When people are bitching that injection drivers don't work with UWA, they are speaking about specific drivers.

That is some hellacious technical debt there.

 

[mcrommert]

Oh wait, no you didn't. Becuase his claim is that



Nobody gives a shit about your useless, academic injection DLL. When people are bitching that injection drivers don't work with UWA, they are speaking about specific drivers.

Gotcha....so pc platform can't move forward at any point because it might break compat with old injection programs and drivers

?????

 

[Krejlooc]

No his claim was:

In the article?

It is the latter type which is primarily endangered by UWP, and it encompasses a broad swathe of modifications with varying degrees of popularity. For example, it is very common for enthusiasts these days to inject anti-aliasing or additional post processing into games with tools such as ReShade or my GeDoSaTo. These tools depend on intercepting API calls of applications, which is easy enough to accomplish in Win32 but a practice which UWP specifically sets out to eliminate.

...

There are myriad other examples of this type of modding: greatly extending the functionality of existing modding interfaces, adopting older games to new display standards, even polishing games for over a decade after their original developers dissolved. Every single one of them is enabled by the easy access to game files and relative ease of changing executables without asking permission of anyone other than the user. And as such, every single one of them is restricted by the UWP model.

So again, how does your dinky breakpoint injection refute his specific claims? Because I'm telling my copy of VorpX that good old objective user Costia injected a pointless breakpoint into minecraft, yet it still isn't working. Funny that.

Gotcha....so pc platform can't move forward at any point because it might break compat with old injection programs and drivers

?????

lol, moving forward by hopefully one day catching up to the status quo?

And you post highlights the problem. People prefer bitching about things not working rather than trying to make it work, or atleast check.

I'm sorry, what exactly have you done to make those technologies work?

 

[dude]

That was a great article. I find the conclusion quite on point and the information given in quite a straightforward way.
I was a bit wary of it as first though, because I feel the general extent of the animosity towards UWAs and UWP is getting a bit out of hand. I find this hostility disagreeable not because I don't understand or disagree with where it's coming from, I game on PC because it is such an open platform where I can play games I enjoyed 15 years ago, where anyone can make a game and put it up on the internet without going through hurdles and loops, where I can modify or decide how to play my games. But I believe painting UWAs as the dawn of the apocalypse of PC gaming as we know it is just a bit north of exaggeration, and I really applaud this article for not outright predicting gloom or spreading panic where none is warranted. UWAs have everything to prove to both developers and users, they need to provide both a "PC" experience that is on par with Win32 software (in terms of openness) and a "mobile" experience that is on par with what people expect of those apps. If they don't succeed in proving their worth and still try pushing UWAs as a replacement to Win32, they risk jeopardizing the entire Windows platform for many users. What's more likely, in my opinion, to happen in the case where UWAs don't actually improve for the desktop environment is that the platform will die off. "Good!" I heard in the back, far enough, but there is another risk to PC gaming that is missed here. Younger audiences are growing up with mobile, they have certain expectation of usability and ease of use. If the Windows desktop environment doesn't improve to offer them the type of software they want, they will find the platform antiquated and we'll see PC gaming become more niche, and even less investment will be made to it then even now. PC use is in decline (even if enthusiast hardware in on rise) because the platform fails to offer some modern niceties many people consider vital. What I'm getting at here is that the strength of PC gaming if very much tied to the strength of the PC. If people stop using PCs in favor of iOS and Android than we're just as lost because this is where the money will go. UWAs, if done right, could be a key to making PCs more relevant. Rather than hope the platform fails and die in a horrific manner, I really do hope UWAs will improve and answer the concerns raised at the end of the article, and become a valid option for dedicated PC gamers. I don't know if they will, but I really do hope people will actually be willing to accept them if they do.

Nobody gives a shit about your useless, academic injection DLL. When people are bitching that injection drivers don't work with UWA, they are speaking about specific drivers.

Well, the importance of any one tool working is not as important as long as it is possible to write new tools just as easily.

 

[mcrommert]

lol, moving forward by hopefully one day catching up to the status quo?

100% yes. Perhaps you weren't around during the transition from DOS to Win16/32. When it was launched it was not nearly as feature rich as what we already had in DOS. Why? because platforms take time to build. Would anyone say we should have just stayed with DOS because it was more feature complete? Hell no. I would recommend for most gamers to not use windows store except for maybe exclusive games they really want. Doesn't mean that a new platform isn't the right choice though.

 

[Costia]

In the article?
So again, how does your dinky breakpoint injection refute his specific claims? Because I'm telling my copy of VorpX that good old objective user Costia injected a pointless breakpoint into minecraft, yet it still isn't working. Funny that.

At least I tried instead of out right saying it's impossible like durante in that thread.
You keep talking to your win32 program. Though I would suggest that trying to go further and dig into UWA would be more effective to achieve your goal.

 

[Akronis]

And you post highlights the problem. People prefer bitching about things not working rather than trying to make it work, or atleast check.

I fail to see the benefit of breaking everyone's work that previously worked fine and putting it on them to fix it.

Seems like kind of a dick move, regardless of how beneficial you might think UWA becomes "in the future"

Spoiler

betting on a MS product to be better in the future is setting yourself up for serious disappointment

 

[Ricky Ricardo]

Oh wait, no you didn't. Becuase his claim is that



Nobody gives a shit about your useless, academic injection DLL. When people are bitching that injection drivers don't work with UWA, they are speaking about specific drivers.

You are behaving very rabidly. The point of contention was that unsigned code could NOT interact with UWAs. This was tested, using the scientific method, and disproved.

If you're going to sit in your chair and tell me that an "academic" experiment is worthless in the context of this discussion, you need to do the responsible thing and recuse yourself from the conversation, because clearly, you've no interest in defining the technical boundaries of the UWP initiative.

 

[Krejlooc]

At least I tried instead of out right saying it's impossible like durante in that thread.

You don't think the author of GeDoSaTo hasn't tried to get his own injection driver working with the very applications in question?

 

[papo]

No one is against UWP as a marketplace. No one thinks UWP or Xbox need to be open. People only want Win32 to remain open. Which Microsoft's policies at the OS level could jeopardize

From the article:



Incentivising UWP at the OS level at the expense of Win32 gaming is the danger. We're not asking UWP to go away; simply that Microsoft not leverage their position as the OS platform holder to create artificial advantages for UWP

And really, what makes our worries legitimate, is that Microsoft as a platform owner has every right and reason to leverage it to their advantage. We've definitely taken for granted the freedom and open nature of the platform so far. We really really want it to stay that way. It's better for PC gaming. But it's hard to prove just how much better it is for Microsoft, and without that proof we'll continue to face the risk (and express our fears) of it being taken away

Well, that's pretty much exactly what I say at the end of my conclusion:

Yeah but reading that it just feels so farfetched. Like people are taking exception to the new development because it is Ms behind them. I don't think no one expects this will be done at the expense of Win32 or even then that most of the 'freedom' features we currently have will not eventually come to their store.

I agree MS MS has every right to leverage this to their advantage as far as UWP and their gaming/Xbox division goes, but to shape other existing services just does not make sense and it really does not seems like a possible thing.

It is basically a new service IMO. It is basically MS vision of Steam or Origin only that because they also make and own the OS then they will have some extra control and or features for that particular application. Close the OS out to mods, Steam, Origin and other types of freedom is just stupid IMO. Stupid because it really seems impossible for any company at all to want to do that and Ms has been really good recently at being more open.



Again I am not criticizing the intentions behind the article. It is a good read and it is good to be aware of the freedom we might loose. I'm just hopefully at the positives behind this and the possibilities it could bring to the evolution of gaming. Mainly console gaming to make less outdated, but I think it could be good for gaming and I've yet to see a lot of articlesspeaking on anything else other than fears of MS.

 

[dude]

You don't think the author of GeDoSaTo hasn't tried to get his own injection driver working with the very applications in question?

It seems like Costia just tried it and succeeded so I don't see how an appeal to authority is going to help you here.

 

[Akronis]

I don't understand people jumping to the defense of MS here. I don't see any benefits to gamers as a whole with the move to UWA.

Since when has Microsoft recently improved PC gaming? Games for Windows Live? Yea ok. Let's trust Microsoft to try that again, I'm sure they'll get it right this time!

This is a gaming forum and I don't see this being beneficial to gamers, regardless of how anyone thinks that it could be beneficial to normal users. Which most of NeoGAF isn't.

 

[Corto]

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/objectivity
Objectivity is a noun that means a lack of bias, judgment, or prejudice. Maintaining one's objectivity is the most important job of a judge.
He clearly has a bias.

Of course. Everyone has. In the case of Durante his bias is in favor of PC as an open platform of distribution of software. It was always like this, historically, and he believes that turning that into a walled green ecosystem where the OS provider is also the gatekeeper of the software would be detrimental to gaming in particular. People that seem neutral towards this strategy of Microsoft often use the iOS(mobile platforms)/console success examples to show that there's nothing wrong with Microsoft trying to close and control software distribution forgetting the history of 40 years of a hobbyist platform that exploded to the ubiquitous devices that we now have due to its inherent openness. A Personal Computer where the user, if he chooses to do so, can't modify, buy from wherever source he wants, or create software and distribute it freely, it's not a Personal Computer.

 

[Krejlooc]

You are behaving very rabidly. The point of contention was that unsigned code could NOT interact with UWAs. This was tested, using the scientific method, and disproved.

If you're going to sit in your chair and tell me that an "academic" experiment is worthless in the context of this discussion, you need to do the responsible thing and recuse yourself from the conversation, because clearly, you've no interest in defining the technical boundaries of the UWP initiative.

The point of contention is most certainly that UWAs, as they currently exist, present unnecessary barriers that authors of mods must contend with, which manifests in popular mods currently not working.

Costia, in his attempt to prove that it was possible to inject drivers into UWP applications, actually proved this very point - the standard message box injection example he followed wouldn't work, and thus he was forced to demonstrating a simpler call.

It seems like Costia just tried it and succeeded so I don't see how an appeal to authority is going to help you here.

Costia succeeded in injecting GeDoSaTo into a UWP application?

 

[JaseC]

Well the only game in the future I see from MS coming to STEAM is Minecraft story: season 2, now that the halo twin stick games have been replaced with Halo Wars 2.
We will know I assume at E3, if Gabe will block them

Minecraft Story isn't an MS game. Minecraft is an MS IP, yes, but Minecraft Story is a Telltale game -- it's developed by Telltale and funded by Telltale. MS, fortunately, has no say in distribution.

Tons of the free 2 play MMORPG on STEAM already side-load, dont even download via Steamclient.

That's not what I was referring to. By default, Windows 10 doesn't allow the installation of UWAs outside of the Windows Store.

 

[JaggedSac]

I fail to see the benefit of breaking everyone's work that previously worked fine and putting it on them to fix it.

Seems like kind of a dick move, regardless of how beneficial you might think UWA becomes "in the future"

Spoiler

betting on a MS product to be better in the future is setting yourself up for serious disappointment

When my company provides code to outside organizations, we have in the contract that if you use what we provide in any way outside of what we document and intend...then sorry if an update breaks you. We aren't going to accrue technical debt from some other person's coding. Go through the proper channels and we will likely add functionality that is being wanted though.

MS has built a beast that is hard to change without breaking stuff. And, given the outcry here, if they do make a change, it has to have all the features of the previous code, which, given enterprise software I have worked on, that sometimes is not possible. Resources and time are a bitch. Seems to me they are doing what any sensible platform holder would do. Roll something out on the side while the previous thing works and get it to the point to where it is acceptable to pretty much everyone. If it gets to that point, make it the main thing you work on. Simple and expected transitional phase here folks.

 

[mcrommert]

That's not what I was referring to. By default, Windows 10 doesn't allow the side-loading of UWAs.

I see why you would get that impression reading this thread. But that is absolutely incorrect. Sideloading is enabled by default.

 

[dude]

I don't understand people jumping to the defense of MS here. I don't see any benefits to gamers as a whole with the move to UWA.

Since when has Microsoft recently improved PC gaming? Games for Windows Live? Yea ok. Let's trust Microsoft to try that again, I'm sure they'll get it right this time!

This is a gaming forum and I don't see this being beneficial to gamers, regardless of how anyone thinks that it could be beneficial to normal users. Which most of NeoGAF isn't.

I don't know if this is referring to me, but anyway: I believe the strength of PC gaming is pretty neatly tied to the strength of the PC platform. if the PC platform will not present viable opportunities (of the financial kind) to game makers we'll see the move to mobile gaming continue and become stronger as younger people will continue to use the PC less. PC needs to improve in order for PC gaming to thrive. This is why you should care about "normal users".

Costia succeeded in injecting GeDoSaTo into a UWP application?

No, but he did show that DLL injection is possible, which means that potentially GeDoSaTo could be made to work. Now, this is not my area of expertise by any stretch, I'm just saying what I understand from the information presented here.

 

[Durante]

No his claim was:

Indeed, my claim was:

Unsigned code cannot interact with "universal apps".

You "disproved" this claim with a post containing this statement:

i didn't encounter any of the restrictions mentioned in this thread besides the requirement to sign the app package

Hmmm.

 

[LewieP]

I have to wonder whether MS making future versions of DirectX only available for UWP would cause game devs to abandon Win32, or DirectX.

 

[Akronis]

I don't know if this is referring to me, but anyway: I believe the strength of PC gaming is pretty neatly tied to the strength of the PC platform. if the PC platform will not present viable opportunities (of the financial kind) to game makers we'll see the move to mobile gaming continue and become stronger as younger people will continue to use the PC less. PC needs to improve in order for PC gaming to thrive. This is why you should care about "normal users".

No, Microsoft cares about enterprise users a whole lot more, and guess what? They aren't making any of their server tools or applications that utilize UWA. It's all Win32.

The PC platform doesn't need Microsoft to improve. At all.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Indeed, my claim was:

You "disproved" this claim with a post containing this statement:


Hmmm.

Oops!

 

[Costia]

I fail to see the benefit of breaking everyone's work that previously worked fine and putting it on them to fix it.
Seems like kind of a dick move, regardless of how beneficial you might think UWA becomes "in the future"

Spoiler

betting on a MS product to be better in the future is setting yourself up for serious disappointment

The benefit would be reduced development time in the long run, at the cost of the time required for the initial transtion.
That's the theory, wether it will actually work out that way is anyone's guess.

You don't think the author of GeDoSaTo hasn't tried to get his own injection driver working with the very applications in question?

I dont know. I am not a modder/hacker yet i was able to prove his statement in that thread as wrong in about a day. So to me it doesn't look like he has put much effort into trying before posting about the "impossible".

 

[JaseC]

I see why you would get that impression reading this thread. But that is absolutely incorrect. Sideloading is enabled by default.

Not in my case. "Don't use developer features" is the currently-selected option. Perhaps it was enabled by default in a previous build.

 

[Costia]

Indeed, my claim was:
You "disproved" this claim with a post containing this statement:
Hmmm.

Yes...

Unsigned code cannot interact with "universal apps".

The universal app is the signed part of your claim.
The win32 injector wasn't signed. (Edit: and i didnt place it in system32 as you claimed later)
Meaning that unsigned win32 API code can interact with universal apps (which, as you know, are always signed)

Oops!

So much technical knowledge in one post. It's too much for me.

 

[JaggedSac]

Not in my case. "Don't use developer features" is the currently-selected option. Perhaps it was enabled by default in a previous build.

The public November build last year.

 

[LordRaptor]

I believe the strength of PC gaming is pretty neatly tied to the strength of the PC platform. if the PC platform will not present viable opportunities (of the financial kind) to game makers we'll see the move to mobile gaming continue and become stronger as younger people will continue to use the PC less. PC needs to improve in order for PC gaming to thrive. This is why you should care about "normal users".

This is an economic question of substitute goods; for many people a mobile phone is entirely a substitute good. They can do emails, they can do their internet shopping and they can do their facebooking.

They now don't need to buy a $2000 Dell to do that. Because they never actually needed a $2000 Dell in the first place. They've been arguably missold devices for years, whether it was beige box Dells, over priced laptops, or the brief surge of netbooks.

For other consumers however - and you can definitively place PC gamers here (PC gamers here basically being anyone who cares enough about games to have gone and purchased a dedicated GPU, very much a non-standard component) - a mobile phone is clearly not an adequate substitute. Like, at all.

Which group does making Windows more like a phone benefit? The people for whom a phone is good enough? They're gone. Why would they go and buy another beige box when they already have their phone doing what they need?

 

[dude]

No, Microsoft cares about enterprise users a whole lot more, and guess what? They aren't making any of their server tools or applications that utilize UWA. It's all Win32.

The PC platform doesn't need Microsoft to improve. At all.

I don't exactly understand what you said about enterprise users. PC environment being solely in the realms of the enterprise sector is bad, because it will mean exactly what I said - Less opportunities for game makers on the platform, as it's only used in enterprise and work context.

I believe the PC platform need to improve because it's in decline, if you disagree with that I'm open to new data I might not have.

Which group does making Windows more like a phone benefit? The people for whom a phone is good enough? They're gone. Why would they go and buy another beige box when they already have their phone doing what they need?

These people are, by the numbers of mobile game downloads, also gamers. Many people game on mobile. They're not "gone" even if they won't buy another beige box, because the real benefit of UWAs is that PCs don't have to be beige boxes exclusively. With Windows 10 push to be on more form factors they could potentially play on a Surface or tablet PC just as well as they do on an iPad. And yes, it's not triple-A gaming, but neither is Undertale or any of the other great indies and "double-A" games we have on PC. These people could potentially be in the market for Civ or X-Com even. I don't see why you toss they away so readily when they could be the key to PC gaming becoming bigger, better and more diverse?