Support NeoGAF

[SOR5]

I want to make a transparent but a pretty opinionated post, this shit is getting a bit too crazy now. No i do not believe in a media conspiracy against Microsoft, nor do they need your protection (Microsoft is a big boy now). But there has been this barrage of batshit theories out there recently.

Heres what I believe is valid, in no way do you have to agree with it, in no way should my priorities have to align with yours and its gospel but ill say it anyway:

• UWP needs to be more open
• Windows Store is bad and needs an immediate rehaul
• Kinect was unnecessary and crap
• Online DRM was anti-consumer
• Windows 10 shouldnt be forced upon people at all
• Scantily clad schoolgirl dancers aren't cool at a professional gathering

Heres the shit that has somehow passed into debate

• Microsoft is leaving the industry by announcing two consoles on the same day
• Phil Spencer was lying because he looked away from the camera at a certain point
• Microsoft wants to sabotage Steam by intentionally targeting it and sacrificing all Win32 compatibility for good
• Rocket League cross-play with PSN was done to spite Sony
• Play Anywhere means every Xbox gamer will just go to PC and the Xbox is useless despite being two completely seperate markets
• Nearly the entire 'Microsoft needs more flak 40% smaller' thread

The above things have legitimately been argued I shit you not, if people want to discuss that in a public forum sure do that, nobody wants an MS hugbox and I have absolutely no say in what you talk about anyway, hell i've chimed in loads to the point its probably a decent share of my post history. But I hope you understand that unless you have something to say that isnt pure speculation stuff like the above list is wishful controversy that is completely detached from reality.

Sorry for the ramble and the compilation of the greatest hits of things ive heard recently, lol i'd actually love to see a "Ballmer was a Nazi Reptilian EXPOSED" thread, but at the least, at the very very least, provide evidence.

 

[Nzyme32]

MS trying to push something that is absolutely hated by their existing userbase as part of a bigger picture maneuver elsewhere isn't exactly unprecedented though.

why would you force a touchscreen paradigm onto desktops and servers?
why would you design hardware that no longer functions for its intended purpose if it cannot connect the internet in a 24 hour period?
why would you put advertising telemetry into an OS people pay for?
why would you put performance desktop software on an appstore?

Some of these do have great valid uses like touch on certain workstations / desktops depending on uses. Back on Windows 8, the implementation was stupid and self serving their idea of heading into the more mobile focused space while attempting to maintain what the had traditionally.

Advertising stuff imo is ridiculous, as it is on Xbox in interfaces it shouldn't be. If you pay / derive ownership of the OS from a paid copy, ads have no place on the OS. If the OS was completely free to anyone and ad subsidised, I'd find that more reasonable and a reason to pay in some way to remove that. Of course the intention here though is more to attach that telemetry into all sorts of other areas / apps / web

An "app store" for anything isn't a bad thing again. However MS again has a more restrictive outlook for what that can entail, and in terms of PC applications, in particular graphics and gaming, the open system and complete access has led to boundless innovations that would not exist without it.

 

[CosmicQueso]

So how does the strategy around the Epic Games Launcher for Windows fit into all this?

 

[M3d10n]

I think you should read that more carefully friend. "access to the Win32 and COM APIs that are part of the Universal Windows Platform" UWP only supports part of Win32 and extends it with UWP only APIs. Apps will slow be forced to become UWP only. This is exactly what they've done in the past. History repeats itself.

They did the exact opposite going from Windows 8 to 10. A whole bunch of stuff that was only available to WinRT apps is now usable by win32 apps, like the notification center, live tiles and remote push notifications. The upcoming redstone update basically turns UWPs into the Windows equivalent of Android's APKs, which can be distributed from anywhere.

 

[Willy Wanka]

There possibly is a kernel of truth to what he is saying based on MS's history but as said by others, Valve already do a sterling job of making the Steam client a buggy, out-dated piece of shit. I'm not sure they need Microsoft's help in that regard at all.

 

[LordRaptor]

• UWP needs to be more open

I don't even necessarily agree that that's the case - UWA as a sandboxed software type specifically designed for closed systems like the Xbox One and phones works exactly as intended.

The problem is trying to force performance desktop software sized pegs into a closed ecosystem appstore sized hole.
Which is why I attribute that to the Xbox division fucking up and not sinister plans, because other performance desktop software made by MS themself is still sold as traditional executable format through traditional retail channels.

The day MS Project is available solely as a UWA through the W10 store is the day its a deliberate maneuver and not just incompetence.

 

[Crayon]

That first page of knee-jerk replies and not a single substantive argument against Sweeney is a thing to behold.

 

[BajiBoxer]

I can't even tell what's sarcasm anymore.

It baffles me that so many of the people agreeing with Sweeney are completely ignoring enterprise, which is the reason I cannot take these claims seriously. In the grand scheme of things gaming and even the Windows store are not very significant to the Microsoft that exists today.

Yeah, this is reason #1 I can't believe Tim Sweeney's analysis here. Microsoft isn't so intent on beating Steam that they would do something this drastically crazy. Steam and gaming is not going to be the focus of Microsoft to the point that they kill off win32 in a few years. That would be insane.

 

[demosthenes]

It seems nothing changed since then https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

It's been with Microsoft for a long time.

 

[Glass Shark]

That first page of knee-jerk replies and not a single substantive argument against Sweeney is a thing to behold.

He's the one making unsubstantiated conspiracy-esque claims, the burden of proof is on him

 

[BajiBoxer]

That first page of knee-jerk replies and not a single substantive argument against Sweeney is a thing to behold.

The suggestion is pretty crazy once you remove yourself from the bubble of gaming competition, and look at the software industry as a whole.

 

[SOR5]

That first page of knee-jerk replies and not a single substantive argument against Sweeney is a thing to behold.

There has been plenty of substantive arguments against Sweeneys unsubstantial argument.

 

[The Albatross]

This was previously something that only Apple did widespread through their OS.

Microsoft has a history of being accommodating to 3rd party developers who create competing tools and services, so I'm really hoping they don't move in this direction. It doesn't seem to fit at all with Microsoft's ethos, though.

 

[spazimoose]

Bill Gates didn't become the richest man alive because microsoft plays fair. Microsoft's history of questionable cutthroat business tactics speak for itself. This isn't a conspiracy theory, it's Microsofts history. This is just how they do business. The only difference between now and the 90s is that Microsoft knows not to get caught. That and Microsoft is a person now. They can spend unlimited amounts of money lobbying. There is no more antitrust laws. Microsoft will likely never be caught again.

Thanks Citizens United.

 

[Crayon]

He's the one making unsubstantiated conspiracy-esque claims, the burden of proof is on him

The suggestion is pretty crazy once you remove yourself from the bubble of gaming competition, and look at the software industry as a whole.

There has been plenty of substantive arguments against Sweeneys unsubstantial argument.

Fear.

 

[convo]

edit: wrong thread

 

[Trup1aya]

That first page of knee-jerk replies and not a single substantive argument against Sweeney is a thing to behold.

It's funny you say that, because Sweeney hasn't provided a single substantive shred of evidence to support his claims.

No one can really argue for or against pure speculation, because we, like Sweeney don't have any insight into what MS true intentions are. Literally, all we have for this discussion is what MS says they are doing vs what Sweeney insists they are doing. though The latter has no actual insight into the formers actual plans.

He's making a bold and specific accusation without providing anything resembling proof. He admits that he's running on pure fear and speculation.

No one needs to argue against him. We just want him to support these allegations with something more than "just look at what happened earlier"

 

[SOR5]

Fear.

Yes I am scared of all the evidence that doesn't exist

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

Fear.

So you are saying they are wrong without any substantive evidence to back it up?

 

[Crayon]

It's funny you say that, because Sweeney hasn't provided a single substantive shred of evidence to support his claims.

No one can really argue for or against pure speculation, because we, like Sweeney don't have any insight into what MS true intentions are. Literally all we have to go on is what MS says they are doing vs what Sweeney insists they are doing without having any tangible insight into MS current corporate strategy.

He's making a bold and specific accusation without providing anything resembling proof. He admits that he's running on pure fear and speculation.

No one needs to argue against him. We just want him to support these allegations with something more than "just look at what happened earlier"

Yes I am scared of all the evidence that doesn't exist

So you are saying they are wrong without any substantive evidence to back it up?

He might be right. He might be wrong. Many posts in this thread indicate people who are uncomfortable with the possibility. The wall of ad hominem replies in the first 5 minutes is a good start.

 

[LukasTaves]

Wow, so many people in this thread seem unaware of the term Embrace, Extend and Extinguish. What Sweeney is describing is not only plausible, it's what MS has been doing for decades for many different areas. They are doing it now to move into selling games on PC, and Valve is their competitor. It's no surprise. The only question is if they can get away with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish

Someone should make a version of goldwin law for EEE.

Did you even tried read what the strategy is about? If you sure how it is fundamentally silly to bring this to the discussion.

And no, there isn't and never was not even a slick of precedent of ms trying lock windows in a way that they decide what the user should install.

 

[SOR5]

He might be right. He might be wrong. Many posts in this thread indicate people who are uncomfortable with the possibility. The wall of ad hominem replies in the first 5 minutes is a good start.

Nintendos next console will solely be controlled by scanning contractions of the players anus muscles

I might be right, I might be wrong, I'm afraid I have no evidence though. Whats up? Scared it's true or something?

Spoiler

That idea is stupid, but nowhere near as stupid and unevidenced as the assertion that MS will suicide bomb the core of their business to take down Steam

 

[pislit]

I dont think Microsoft cares enough of PC gaming that it will sabotage Steam for it.

 

[Estocolmo]

Heres the shit that has somehow passed into debate

[*]Phil Spencer was lying because he looked away from the camera at a certain point

One of the most absurd gaming related things I've read in a while.

Also. Defending Xbox = being a Microsoft employee.

 

[Glass Shark]

He might be right. He might be wrong. Many posts in this thread indicate people who are uncomfortable with the possibility. The wall of ad hominem replies in the first 5 minutes is a good start.

You're not really saying anything of value here. Yes, if Sweeney is right, it would be a bad thing. But there isn't a shred of evidence that he is right or even that he might be right.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

He might be right. He might be wrong. Many posts in this thread indicate people who are uncomfortable with the possibility. The wall of ad hominem replies in the first 5 minutes is a good start.

Fear mongering or scaremongering is the deliberate use of fear based tactics including exaggeration and usually repetition to influence the public in order to achieve a desired outcome. Fear mongering is a tactic used to scare or put fear into those viewing a campaign/advertisement and influence the outcome based on fear.

This is what is happening here. He is just fueling his campaign.

I would absolutely be with him if he had approached this from a precautionary tale like platform as I think it's up to the consumers to keep the corporations we choose to support in check but he is trying to state this stuff as fact.

 

[gamz]

Bill Gates didn't become the richest man alive because microsoft plays fair. Microsoft's history of questionable cutthroat business tactics speak for itself. This isn't a conspiracy theory, it's Microsofts history. This is just how they do business. The only difference between now and the 90s is that Microsoft knows not to get caught. That and Microsoft is a person now. They can spend unlimited amounts of money lobbying. There is no more antitrust laws. Microsoft will likely never be caught again.

Thanks Citizens United.

No, the only difference now is MS isn't the most successful tech company anymore and there's plenty of competition.

 

[Ricky Ricardo]

He might be right. He might be wrong. Many posts in this thread indicate people who are uncomfortable with the possibility. The wall of ad hominem replies in the first 5 minutes is a good start.

You don't get to make wild accusations without evidence, on a whim or upon a faint breeze of "smells like trouble." That's not just reasonable operating protocol, that's literally the rule of law.

There have been a good number of posts clearly outlining what they find unreasonable about Sweeney's claims. Your custom is, however, to come in and pick from the lowest hanging fruit and insist that there's no honest discussion here.

 

[Crayon]

You don't get to make wild accusations without evidence, on a whim or upon a faint breeze of "smells like trouble." That's not just reasonable operating protocol, that's literally the rule of law.

There have been a good number of posts clearly outlining what they find unreasonable about Sweeney's claims. Your custom is, however, to come in and pick from the lowest hanging fruit and insist that there's no honest discussion here.

No sideways remark of mine would interfere with honest discussion.

 

[Trup1aya]

He might be right. He might be wrong. Many posts in this thread indicate people who are uncomfortable with the possibility. The wall of ad hominem replies in the first 5 minutes is a good start.

If he's presenting his fears of a POSSIBLE MS plot as if it WILL HAPPEN, while lacking any evidence to support his claim, then we have entered conspiracy theory territory... By definition.

As such the arguments towards towards the person are warranted, since making accusations without evidence is generally frowned upon. It's quite unprofessional.

It's actually impossible to effectively argue for or against is "position", because their isn't any actually any evidence to support or defend his position, because it's based solely on an emotion.

For example he can't prove that UWP will never be distributable outside of the windows store. I can't prove that it ever will. But MS says its on their roadmap. That's all we have to go on.

HE IS participating in FUD at this point. And the suggestions that people don't know MS' history is condecending. As is the idea that Sweeney's background makes such behavior acceptable. It also ignores the reasonable expectation for proof to accompany damning allegations.

 

[Clear]

MS supports UWA, neglects Win32 because it suits their business goals; do the math.

Its not a matter of them sabotaging the API, its just letting progress and natural obsolescence take its course. Their OS, their rules.

 

[gafneo]

It keeps him busy and in business to fix compatibility issues, so why complain?

 

[Vegetable Lasagna]

I wouldn't be surprised if that is MS's end goal with UWP, but come on. Apple is doing it. Google is doing it. I don't get the hate for MS being a business like the rest. Straight saying MS is sabotaging Steam is kind of out there. Where is Valve on this? But anyway, Win32 is not going anywhere soon. 99.999% of apps are built for Win32 and that is MS' revenue stream right now.

Sweeney could have said all of this without sounding like a conspiracy theorist lunatic. Maybe even throw some evidence out there to back up his claims, but yeah.... He just sounds like some rambling idiot right now.

 

[LordRaptor]

You don't get to make wild accusations without evidence, on a whim or upon a faint breeze of "smells like trouble." That's not just reasonable operating protocol, that's literally the rule of law.

If he's presenting his fears of a POSSIBLE MS plot as if it WILL HAPPEN, while lacking any evidence to support his claim, then we have entered conspiracy theory territory... By definition.

As such the arguments towards towards the person are warranted, since making accusations without evidence is generally frowned upon. It's quite unprofessional.

Okay;
True or False - MS would like to have a walled garden they are sole controller of.

It is extremely difficult to believe that they do not want that, yes?

So if we accept that that is true - that they have motive for doing that - what steps might be taken to achieve that?
Can you align actions they have taken with the aforesaid hypothetical steps required to achieve that goal?
If yes, then suspicions that they are acting towards achieving that goal are in fact warranted.

 

[Hockeymac18]

Yed, once UWP is widespread enough and all those programs has UWP versions they can easily shut down Win32.

Is something that will take years, but as Tim said, they know that and will be pacient enough.

Some business customers will continue to use legacy Win32 programs for decades (I know this because I have worked at places that still use/support software that are decades old). For MS not to support their bread and butter (business customers) would be suicidal - and they know that.

We're not on the cusp of some precipice where all Win32 programs are ready to be instantly "updated" to UWP. What you're describing is not realistic.

Gaming is a small piece of MS's business (as we're often reminded here) - think of what you're suggesting, just for a second - you're saying MS would sacrifice their core business models (enterprise support, which consists of supporting legacy code that business often need to keep around) to take out a rival to their gaming division. Even if you make it about more than gaming (turning all Win32 to UWP), what you're suggesting is still a bit absurd, even for MS.

I find this to be complete fear-mongering BS, I'm sorry.

 

[Ricky Ricardo]

Okay;
True or False - MS would like to have a walled garden they are sole controller of.

It is extremely difficult to believe that they do not want that, yes?

So if we accept that that is true - that they have motive for doing that - what steps might be taken to achieve that?
Can you align actions they have taken with the aforesaid hypothetical steps required to achieve that goal?
If yes, then suspicions that they are acting towards achieving that goal are in fact warranted.

The statements in the interview aren't simple suspicions, they are accusations. To pass it off as anything else is completely disingenuous.

 

[QaaQer]

Anyone who gives Microsoft the benefit of the doubt on anything is a fool. Period.

Yup. MS does have a history of paying AstroTurfers though, so maybe actual people don't.

The statements in the interview aren't simple suspicions, they are accusations. To pass it off as anything else is completely disingenuous.

And?

 

[Blam]

Jesus Christ could his tin foil hat be and bigger?

 

[LordRaptor]

The statements in the interview aren't simple suspicions, they are accusations. To pass it off as anything else is completely disingenuous.

Yes, they are accusations, presumably to motivate MS to stop taking those actions.
If their end goal isn't walling up PC gaming into a closed garden, they need to stop taking actions where removing customer freedoms are the result.

Whether its a deliberate attempt to do so, or a side effect of flailing shit around and seeing what sticks, people would really like them to stop doing it.

 

[stan423321]

Gaming is a small piece of MS's business (as we're often reminded here) - think of what you're suggesting, just for a second - you're saying MS would sacrifice their core business models (enterprise support, which consists of supporting legacy code that business often need to keep around) to take out a rival to their gaming division. Even if you make it about more than gaming (turning all Win32 to UWP), what you're suggesting is still a bit absurd, even for MS.

Actually, no. There are huge advantages on their side for moving everyone to this model, even if they somehow manage to do that (properly) while not converting anyone to use Windows Store. Non-interacting programs are easier to deal with than interacting ones, this isn't rocket science.

 

[Hockeymac18]

Actually, no. There are huge advantages on their side for moving everyone to this model, even if they somehow manage to do that (properly) while not converting anyone to use Windows Store. Non-interacting programs are easier to deal with than interacting ones, this isn't rocket science.

Dropping Win32 applications (which are critical to their business customers) would have HUGE implications and drastically change their business model (i.e. losing A LOT of customers). I just don't see this happening anytime soon.

I'm not saying there aren't advantages - nor am I saying that secretly MS doesn't want this (perhaps some people at MS do want this?). I'm saying it's not realistic/likely.

This is a very important distinction.

 

[Maztorre]

MS supports UWA, neglects Win32 because it suits their business goals; do the math.

Its not a matter of them sabotaging the API, its just letting progress and natural obsolescence take its course. Their OS, their rules.

Bullshit. How is it "progress" or "natural obsolecence" if it is objectively worse than its predecessor? And "their OS, their rules" doesn't really mean much in the real world, where their partners are publicly telling the press that their format is ill-advised. Just like they were free to try and charge for online on PC until that initiative dissolved on contact with reality.

UWP is a kludged attempt to sandbox Windows applications so they can leverage them for their failing mobile and Xbox businesses. It has nothing to do with progressing the PC platform, unless you think "progress" is attempting to force PC application development into an iOS styled business model.

 

[QaaQer]

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.

It is simply the vehemence and lack of actual arguments that cause this. Actual disscusion would lead to less of that; but drive-bys designed to marginalize and ridicule seem to be the mo. How do you counter that?

edit: and monopolies/defacto monopolies are inherently evil. Without oversight, they will fuck you over.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

Should've taken a leaf out of Gabens book.

Come off the drugs long enough to be able to feel embarrassment and realise that it's probably best if you stfu with the Winspiracies.

 

[QaaQer]

Should've taken a leaf out of Gabens book.

Come off the drugs long enough to be able to feel embarrassment and realise that it's probably best if you stfu with the Winspiracies.

see what I mean?

 

[mcrommert]

MS supports UWA, neglects Win32 because it suits their business goals; do the math.

Its not a matter of them sabotaging the API, its just letting progress and natural obsolescence take its course. Their OS, their rules.

Lets say i agree...natural obsolescence on win32 can be calculated in decades not years

UWA could eventually replace win32...but it will be in windows for decades

 

[EatinOlives]

Wasn't this the same guy who was arm flailing when Win 8 released that the entire ecosystem of Windows was going to eventually be forced through the App Store, thereby making Windows an iOS-esque "walled garden"?

 

[mcrommert]

Wasn't this the same guy who was arm flailing when Win 8 released that the entire ecosystem of Windows was going to eventually be forced through the App Store, thereby making Windows an iOS-esque "walled garden"?

That was Gaben...though in his defence he has been silent this time around when it has been obvious microsoft isn't doing that. I bet there have been a lot of conversations with steam about the owa implementation.

 

[QaaQer]

Lets say i agree...natural obsolescence on win32 can be calculated in decades not years

UWA could eventually replace win32...but it will be in windows for decades

You know how long it took dos to become obsolete? Moreover, just because something is obsolete doesn't mean it will be ripped out of the OS.

 

[LukasTaves]

Bill Gates didn't become the richest man alive because microsoft plays fair. Microsoft's history of questionable cutthroat business tactics speak for itself. This isn't a conspiracy theory, it's Microsofts history. This is just how they do business. The only difference between now and the 90s is that Microsoft knows not to get caught. That and Microsoft is a person now. They can spend unlimited amounts of money lobbying. There is no more antitrust laws. Microsoft will likely never be caught again.

Thanks Citizens United.

There's absolutely no precedent for Ms to try locking windows at all, nothing in their history suggest that and to claim as such is completely unfounded.

Ms will definitely try to leverage the fact that they own the platform to make the store more successful than steam, but removing the ability of users to install steam is stupid and even if they were dumb enough to try they couldn't pull it off due to the open nature of windows.