BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I love how everyone and their dog has an App Store now.... And Windows shows up, maybe the last major player to the App Store model, and we get DOOM and GLOOM.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Another dev speaks up against Windows 8's "closed distribution model"
- Thread starter alexandros
- Start date
drkOne
Member
Not to mention that this Metro stuff on the Desktop is so you can buy an app and have it work on PC, Tablet and Phone (possibly the next Xbox too).
When the Apple alternative is buy on computer, buy on tablet/phone, and that's when there aren't separate iPad and iPhone versions and you have to buy both.
I'm not misunderstanding anything. I know you can get programs outside the Windows store like Steam and Photoshop.
That's not what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about 'Metro' apps and going forward how the policies in place mean you can only get 'Metro' apps from the Windows Store and what that means for Windows.
You can only get 'Metro' apps from the Windows store. It's stated very clearly.
Now, in the future, if Microsoft decide that this new Metro stuff is the way forward and drop support for 'desktop' apps (Steam etc) then your only choice is using the Windows Store.
In the article the comparison is MS-DOS. The new APIs provided by Windows were used and DOS was phased out. The same thing could happen with the new WinRT stack and in the future the older programs would be phased out.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
I think everyone is really, really confused as to what Windows 8 actually is, and MS has a responsibility to clarify. The amount of misinformation and speculation is getting out of hand.
drkOne
Member
That could happen. But what does that mean for me using Windows 8? Jack shit.
As plagiarize said, it all depends on the market ultimately. If people don't want Metro as the only interface on Windows, it won't happen.
The same way Apple is losing consumers because they're still doing the same old shit with iOS.
It's like being afraid that Valve turns evil and starts jeopardizing Steam. I'm not afraid of that, it could happen, but I also could get stabbed in the eye the next time I go outside.
When that happens everyone who doesn't like it moves to Linux/Mac. Until then, Windows 8 is as open as any previous version of Windows.
saltywalrus
Member
Android allows sideloading, Chrome OS allows sideloading, Mac OS allows sideloading.
iOS does not allow sideloading and there has been lots of complaining about apps being rejected for stupid reasons or unreasonably long waits for approval.
Anton Sugar
Member
But Windows 8 DOES allow side-loading of enterprise Metro apps, in addition to normal installation/"side-loading" of non-Metro apps.
saltywalrus
Member
Consumers aren't enterprises and cannot sideload Metro apps. Microsoft has developed lots of new APIs and cool features for Metro, and they are closing it off.
XOMTOR
Member
- Is Win8 "open"?
- Can one still access the traditional desktop?
- Can users get programs and applications from outside the Windows store?
YES
- Will 95% of new PC purchasers know or be willing to learn about the above?
Fat chance.
That, in my opinion, is the fear. Microsoft is using a similar tactic that they used with Internet Explorer. They're banking on user ignorance and the fact that Windows is bundled with every new PC. The majority of new PC purchasers will have no idea (or won't care enough to educate themselves) about the above; they'll simply turn on their new Dell/Lenovo/Acer etc., use the Metro interface and get all of their app needs satisfied while never having to leave the confines of the Windows store. In time, your program better be certified and on said store or you risk losing sales due to reduced exposure to potential customers. Of course it won't happen overnight but it's the direction they want to take this.
- Can one still access the traditional desktop?
- Can users get programs and applications from outside the Windows store?
YES
- Will 95% of new PC purchasers know or be willing to learn about the above?
Fat chance.
That, in my opinion, is the fear. Microsoft is using a similar tactic that they used with Internet Explorer. They're banking on user ignorance and the fact that Windows is bundled with every new PC. The majority of new PC purchasers will have no idea (or won't care enough to educate themselves) about the above; they'll simply turn on their new Dell/Lenovo/Acer etc., use the Metro interface and get all of their app needs satisfied while never having to leave the confines of the Windows store. In time, your program better be certified and on said store or you risk losing sales due to reduced exposure to potential customers. Of course it won't happen overnight but it's the direction they want to take this.
Anton Sugar
Member
Won't argue with that, but it's disingenuous to compare it to a platform that is truly closed.
saltywalrus
Member
At least iOS lets you pin web apps to the homescreen with nice looking icons that blend in with the platform. Metro makes icons for desktop apps look crappy compared to the icons for Metro apps.
They aren't going to remove the desktop. MS is improving their tools and structure of MSDN because they want to make it easy for people to develop applications. Whether they are web apps in Javascript or C++ apps. Why would MS look into improving developer support if they were gonna make windows a closed box? Development of any sort is an advantage for MS since a lot of it is done on windows platforms. And with Metro they can now make tons of money off of it because its easy to go from Visual Studio to Metro. It makes no sense for them to make Windows a closed system and cut themselves off from tons of hobbyist apps, some of which could make them millions. They aren't closing windows.
I wish some of these other rich dudes would just come out and tell the truth instead of spreading FUD to rile up the public.
I wish some of these other rich dudes would just come out and tell the truth instead of spreading FUD to rile up the public.
Anton Sugar
Member
Can't argue with that, either, haha. Wish there was a way to customize those--they look waaay out of place.
Baconsammy
Banned
Agreed. Mainly since I have no idea what's going on Does this mean Steam won't be an option on Windows 8? If so, lame. If not, then what's all the fuss about MS making their own PC software app store?
And? Its up to them to decide what devs have access to. Because devs gave them the power to do so. Should have supported Linux in the 90's before the casual PC market took off. They didn't so now they're screwed.
The bottom line is that these guys are crying about freedom now because they need windows to sell their goods. They were setting up shop in the windows supermarket all this time without giving MS any money while MS kept the supermarket open and in tip top condition. Now the supermarket is offering better floor space and some tools to help you out, but you have to pay rent for it. Now these guys are all crying foul. And to rile up their customers they spread FUD.
No you can use Steam and all your other gubbins on Windows 8, you just won't be able to get them in Metro
They're still available on the desktop
Baconsammy
Banned
So it's like MacOS then?
Anton Sugar
Member
No. Any program you have installed on your computer now will be available in Windows 8 (barring any initial compatibility issues, which Windows 8 notifies you of before you upgrade).
The restrictions are purely for apps that are distributed through the Store.
How exactly is Steam screwed? I want to know a single Steam user who now says, "Hey look I'm going to buy the Metro App instead." Not like it's an insignificant number either hovering over 50 million users. I also want to see the developer brave enough to push their game through the MS App Store as the only place to get it. Good luck.
The worry isn't now, but in the future version of Windows where MS may force the app store on everyone. Going to be awesome to have to wait 2 weeks for MS certification to approve and release a patch on pc. Might as well charge the developer tens of thousands to release that patch as well.
The worry isn't now, but in the future version of Windows where MS may force the app store on everyone. Going to be awesome to have to wait 2 weeks for MS certification to approve and release a patch on pc. Might as well charge the developer tens of thousands to release that patch as well.
Stolen from xkcd.
Rollover quote:
Facebook, Apple, and Google all got away with their monopolist power grabs because they don't have any 'S's in their names for critics to snarkily replace with '$'s.
How is Apple remotely monopolistic? 10% market share in PCs, ~33% market share on phones. Keep in mind that monopoly means "no competition" -- it does not mean "I do not like what this company is doing."
I don't even recall a "power grab" from Facebook.
Baconsammy
Banned
OK, so it's just like on my Mac.
saltywalrus
Member
Maybe if Microsoft, a convicted monopolist, had not used dirty tactics to destroy their competition in the 90s we would actually have some serious competition in the desktop market.
You're talking about with IE? Because that was fucked up, but on the flip side IE was better than Netscape which was better than Mosaic which was better than everything else. And MS didn't have to stop Linux. The thought of having to spend money and resources on improving something that is frees stopped a lot of devs from supporting Linux.
plagiarize
Banned
is Internet Explorer without competition? is it's market share not going down? if MS hasn't been able to force IE on people, how will anyone be able to force Metro apps on people? if people prefer the metro experience, more power to them, but for a desktop that's highly unlikely.
it's file management is terrible. there are so many tasks that metro as is, is not remotely suitable for right now, that are things which desktop users will demand. but hey, they'll be able to do whatever they want though because they'll still have the desktop.
and yes, it's probably the direction they want to go. if they refuse to ignore all the consumers that are against it they will hurt themselves substantially, but history would indicate that microsoft would not do this if it's going to drive people to other OSs.
Computers are going to become like cameras and GPS and phones and every other consumer electronic: they'll get simpler and simpler for the majority and there'll be a niche scene for pros and serious amateurs. At the very worst MS completely shutting off open development (and Apple by the looks of it) would result in a massive boost for alternative OSs like Linux. I don't see an ultimate downside to be honest, just a evolution of the marketplace.
Ravensmash
Member
I'm interested in knowing how many of these developers have actually tried to sit down with MS and expressed their concerns, instead of just criticising it in the media.
I'm actually fairly ignorant on this whole thing (will read) but all I seem to see is people making fairly damning comments in interviews. Has anyone actually tried sitting down with MS? If enough people express concern, then I highly doubt MS will just ignore it as they surely don't want yet another stopover/disliked OS.
I'm actually fairly ignorant on this whole thing (will read) but all I seem to see is people making fairly damning comments in interviews. Has anyone actually tried sitting down with MS? If enough people express concern, then I highly doubt MS will just ignore it as they surely don't want yet another stopover/disliked OS.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Steve Ballmers Microsoft is not Bill Gates Microsoft.
That's not always true.
All it takes for something to become the new standard going forward is to get enough people to embrace it. It doesn't have to be the majority. It just has to be a large enough group that the product remains profitable while you force a transition. Once you have that toehold, the rest of your userbase will eventually fall into line, so long as there's no competing product available as an alternative.
That's what I think we're looking at here. If MS decides to make Metro the new standard going forward and gradually wean people off of the legacy desktop, where are longtime Windows users going to go? They're not going to migrate to Linux, since Linux isn't a flavor of Windows, or even sufficiently Windows-like to satisfy them. Same with Apple hardware. Windows users that are unhappy with Metro would eventually end up biting the bullet because really, what other options are there for them? And I think the top brass at MS are banking on that.
The idea of MS getting enough traction within the userbase to eventually plow forward with something like this over the objections of the rest of us is part of what has people unsettled.
saltywalrus
Member
Microsoft had many tactics to prevent competition from becoming popular. They would strong arm retailers into selling only Windows computers. They provided rebates to manufacturers who only sold Windows computers. They offered bulk discounts for Windows, but any computer sold by that manufacturer would have to pay for Windows whether it had Windows or not. They embarked on a campaign of FUD, scaring off manufacturers from using other operating systems for fear of being sued for bogus reasons. They paid developers to make programs only for Windows. They helped pay for marketing for companies that make only Windows computers.
That's just scraping the surface.
plagiarize
Banned
if Windows doesn't have the desktop any more, i don't see how a Metro only experience is more 'windows like' than Linux or OSX, both which would still have *windows*.
Anton Sugar
Member
The desktop isn't going away until MS finds an equal or better way to handle applications that can't accommodate a touch interface.
Point. But keep in mind that any change like this wouldn't be done abruptly. You'd see more and more emphasis being placed on Metro and app store apps, while the legacy desktop is gradually phased out. I can imagine a scenario where the desktop is deemphasized further in Win 9, and Windows 10 has limited legacy compatibility with older applications, but virtually every new release is being developed for the Metro/app store ecosystem.
That's not something I'd be too keen on seeing come to pass.
You see, that's the point. Metro is even less "Windows" than Linux or MacOS. The UI, the whole app ecosystem - everything is different. With desktop removed, there would be nothing in the system that would even remotely resemble classic Windows system.
Why would people even want to stay with the system then, when there's a lot of other (free) alternatives? At that point Android-based desktop system would be even better.
Will take far less than 20 years.
Not closed yet, but clearly deprecated.
Microsoft is throwing out what made them mainstream for decades (software backward compatibility on an open hardware system) for something they perceive as the new "mainstream" (closed software environment on a locked down hardware system). Windows 8 is their bridge to achieve that.
Fixed. They need to jump two revs to leave the stink of Win 8, and they'll superficially ape Apple more, and fail at it (and I'm no Apple fanboy).
GoofsterStud
Member
I don't like Windows 8. I have it on my laptop (w/touch screen) and not even the touch screens controls are 100% perfected yet. Still android has google play, ios has apple store, why shouldn't Windows 8 have it's own version?
I think the overacting is a bit much. It's a solid consumer product, it's just not the enterprise product we come to expect.
I think the overacting is a bit much. It's a solid consumer product, it's just not the enterprise product we come to expect.
It's the unknown, what could be next. What if future versions of DirectX only support the Metro APIs?
I was on the "let's see what it's like" side, until I used it for a while. I removed that POS from my desktop, and have no intention of 'upgrading'. I may buy the upgrade for my touch screen netbook, but won't put Win8 on either of my desktops.
The notion that anyone can predict what technology will look like in 10 years, let alone 15 or 20 years, and is reaching insane paranoid conclusions from those predicitions is hilarious.
20 years ago, the Internet barely existed. Chew on that for a moment. 20 years ago, everything we're arguing about today literally didn't exist in any feasible form whatsoever to the point where you wouldn't even understand these arguments if you heard them 20 years ago.
20 years from now, things will be just as different as they were 20 years ago, if not moreso. These paranoid ridiculous predictions people have will be so antiquated by then because the world will be focused on things we can't even begin to comprehend right now.
Folks, this is what we call cognitive dissonance.
Yeah, "No one asked for this," except for the tens of millions of people buying tablets like the iPad, which ends up meeting most people's needs, causing PC sales to start to drag a bit, which is why Microsoft is trying a model which enables them a piece of the tablet pie in the first place.
Can you please explain how Windows 8 is Microsoft throwing out software backward compatibility on an open hardware system?
20 years ago, the Internet barely existed. Chew on that for a moment. 20 years ago, everything we're arguing about today literally didn't exist in any feasible form whatsoever to the point where you wouldn't even understand these arguments if you heard them 20 years ago.
20 years from now, things will be just as different as they were 20 years ago, if not moreso. These paranoid ridiculous predictions people have will be so antiquated by then because the world will be focused on things we can't even begin to comprehend right now.
Folks, this is what we call cognitive dissonance.
Yeah, "No one asked for this," except for the tens of millions of people buying tablets like the iPad, which ends up meeting most people's needs, causing PC sales to start to drag a bit, which is why Microsoft is trying a model which enables them a piece of the tablet pie in the first place.
Can you please explain how Windows 8 is Microsoft throwing out software backward compatibility on an open hardware system?
Bingo. The PC sales slowdown of late is going to hurt adoption.
papersleeves
Member
All this talk about the market deciding the outcome...All of the following is just my opinion. I think you guys have too much faith towards the mass market. Behind everything, it's always about money. All those big corporates are slowly but surely getting what they want, as it has always been, and they will never stop in order to maximize their profits. The word "enough" isn't in their vocabulary. They will always find a new combine to grab more money out of your pockets.
Back in 2005, peoples were raving about DLC. "It's going to be like a cheap expansion packs!" "Devs and Microsoft swore it will be all new contents worked out after the game has shipped!". People accepted this. Many skeptics thought it would mean that games would be cut in favor of maximizing profits, but most didn't see it that way. Then horse armor happened and people kind of laughed. Well look at the portrait nowadays. On disc DLC, exclusive pre-order contents which frequently differ depending of the store you're purchasing your game, 2 or 3 announced DLC before the game even shipped out, online pass, map packs, season pass and there is even rumour about anti-used game program adoption...I mean damn, if I told you all this shit back in the early 2000, I bet everyone would have laughed at me. It's now an integral part of video games. If people had known all this shit back then, it wouldn't have worked. But those guys know how they must play the game, because they've been doing this for years. They will make you accept it, one by one, because hey, "It's the standard nowadays. I don't really care if only this changes. I'll just ignore it. I swear I won't fall into the next trap though!" Taking the pills, one by one.
Of course this is just a small example, but it works great in the context of this forum, and what to expect from the foreseeable future of Windows. After all, it has already been demonstrated with the move from DOS to Windows 95. Feel free to disagree but I think it is justified to be worried about this.
Back in 2005, peoples were raving about DLC. "It's going to be like a cheap expansion packs!" "Devs and Microsoft swore it will be all new contents worked out after the game has shipped!". People accepted this. Many skeptics thought it would mean that games would be cut in favor of maximizing profits, but most didn't see it that way. Then horse armor happened and people kind of laughed. Well look at the portrait nowadays. On disc DLC, exclusive pre-order contents which frequently differ depending of the store you're purchasing your game, 2 or 3 announced DLC before the game even shipped out, online pass, map packs, season pass and there is even rumour about anti-used game program adoption...I mean damn, if I told you all this shit back in the early 2000, I bet everyone would have laughed at me. It's now an integral part of video games. If people had known all this shit back then, it wouldn't have worked. But those guys know how they must play the game, because they've been doing this for years. They will make you accept it, one by one, because hey, "It's the standard nowadays. I don't really care if only this changes. I'll just ignore it. I swear I won't fall into the next trap though!" Taking the pills, one by one.
Of course this is just a small example, but it works great in the context of this forum, and what to expect from the foreseeable future of Windows. After all, it has already been demonstrated with the move from DOS to Windows 95. Feel free to disagree but I think it is justified to be worried about this.
Is such a thing even possible? With the disdain Windows 8 is receiving, would the emergence of an Android based desktop solution be a solution? Or merely a pipe dream? Does Google have interest in trying to make a desktop version of Android? Why build a completely new OS on Linux when there is a Linux OS available which could be modified.
Could you imagine if developers from all different avenues flocked to an Android based dekstop OS. Microsoft phone and tablet market shares are pitiful. They would lose their biggest strength and money maker. I don't think MS would push Metro to the point of losing long term support.
Metro is paving the way toward a software ecosystem fully controlled by Microsoft (the way it is by Apple on iOS), if it succeeds in future versions of Windows the classic Windows environment (and with it software backward compatibility) is likely further delegated to a niche system only available on specific special Windows versions. Likewise Secure Boot is paving the way toward a hardware ecosystem fully controlled by Microsoft (the way it is by Apple on iDevices), if that succeeds for future versions of Windows there is no obligation anymore for Microsoft to demand the ability to disable Secure Boot from the OEMs, OEMs are then likely saving themselves the hassle offering this.
An overly negative outlook? Certainly. But the possibility is certainly there, and if it works just fine with the mainstream (little outcry, people buying and using it nevertheless) it's bound to be (ab)used.
plagiarize
Banned
microsoft's previous attempt to usurp Steam was soundly rejected. Windows 8 will still allow steam. third party stores aren't going to leave microsoft's consumer OS, because gaming is such a massive part of why people buy PCs... and currently Steam is a big central part of that.
like i said, i'll care when they outline Windows 9 and they've cut the desktop and closed off all software coming from anywhere else other than the microsoft store.
Windows 8 isn't the OS we're afraid of. so i'm not going to avoid it. i'll avoid the shit out of Windows 9 if it turns out as the doom sayers are predicting. so will vast groups of people. and so microsoft will back down, because they want money.
if MS could just make things happen that they want, we'd all be paying to play PC games online and buying all our games through the GFWL store. we'd all be using bing. IE would still be the default browser for 80% of windows users.
but we aren't. because they can't force the market somewhere it doesn't want to go, and people, clearly, as demonstrated by all this negativity and paranoia, do not want the to see the end of the open desktop.
if people are refusing to buy Windows 8 because it seems to hint that one day microsoft may get rid of the desktop, why the heck can't i have faith that if microsoft actually tried to do that the the outcry would be large and notable?
i just don't see the point in having the outcry when we have no way of knowing if it's having an effect. Microsoft may not want to get rid of the desktop like so many are speculating... so all this raging could be completely for nothing. you have literally no way of knowing. like i said, currently it's like yelling at a wall not to be painted blue on the side you can't see.
This is wrong, Microsoft main software platform of the day is Metro, available on all the systems they are pushing. And pushing it hard they are, to get a hold of the phone and tablet market. And given the choice between software for Metro or for classic Windows APIs Microsoft sure prefers more support for the former.
Which still doesn't explain why Microsoft would drop support for the latter . . .
Windows 8 hate thread? Windows 8 hate thread.
Because they want EVERYONE to go into Metro. They don't want to give you choice anymore. It's readily apparent Metro is the direction they want to take, and consumers have spoken: they don't want Metro. So I'm going to dance a merry jig when Windows 8 bombs because developers AND consumers are soundly rejecting it.
Because they want EVERYONE to go into Metro. They don't want to give you choice anymore. It's readily apparent Metro is the direction they want to take, and consumers have spoken: they don't want Metro. So I'm going to dance a merry jig when Windows 8 bombs because developers AND consumers are soundly rejecting it.
Because it's a support hassle? A security hassle? Doesn't fit in with Metro anyway? There are plenty of pretty sound excuses they could pick from as soon as they see that for the mainstream Metro alone is sufficient. Just supporting Metro anymore certainly would be less costly and more profitable for Microsoft should it succeed across all platforms.
The problem is that Microsoft bet on Metro and will do everything to avoid the appearance of it being a failure should it become one. Which is exactly why they removed the start menu and replaced it with an obligatory Metro front, thus delegating the classic Windows desktop out of plenty people's view.