> So, it is a vicious circle. And not an accidental one. This one was carefully designed to be that way.
It's quite simple...
Metro - for consumers. Mostly for touch-based tablets. Internet, Facebook, Twitter, simple games and apps.
Desktop - for producers. Keyboard and PC (everything from a $600 Dell to a powerful $5000 WorkStation). Large games, VS.NET, Office, etc. And also everthing to do with the non-consumer/enterprise market.
Do you have any idea how many situations, work-flows, and applications NEED the desktop?
Microsoft is not getting rid of the Desktop. The Desktop is here to stay. In Windows 8, in 9, and every other version. Including the Server versions.
Half of their revenues depend on the Desktop situations, work-flows, and applications.
They'll get rid of the Desktop when computers start reading your thoughts or everyone in the world becomes a thoughtless consumer that spends his/her entire time buying useless crap (like in the move Idiocracy).
But the point is that games are sold to consumers, and if they only have Metro, you're forced to go through the Store. Whether the developers will have access to Desktop is mostly irrelevant to his argument.
You mean ... if they only have a lower powered ARM device, with Windows RT, they are forced to go through the store... Or if they can't figure out how to get to the Desktop with their Windows 8 device by clicking an icon/tile.
At some point you're going to have to make a choice whether you need a Desktop/PC, a tablet with Windows 8, or a tablet with Windows RT for whatever it is you need Windows for.
I don't think they'll get rid of the desktop, I just think more and more consumers will choose ARM devices. Regular people do little more than chat on Facebook, check their email, and do light internet browsing. If they can do it from a tablet device for half the cost, they will.
And that's exactly who Metro is for. The Windows Desktop still remains for the rest of us, including ones that want a beefy setup, or to run productive applications such as VS.NET, or to isntall and play games that require a bit more than a slow ARM processor.
The author is suggesting at the end of the article that there is a grand conspiracy at Microsoft to lock all games and apps out of Windows eventually unless they go through the App Store (in Windows 9 specifically). I'd like some proof to this because it just does not make sense.
You have to realize though that that's the majority of the market. Most of us aren't programmers who need Visual Studio, or to run servers. So while they may not be getting rid of the desktop (and I don't think they are), it will become less relevant. I'd wager the majority of Windows licenses sold in five years will be WOA. The main thing holding "classic" Windows in place is familiarity, and as you said, games. I think Microsoft looks at the Xbox as hardcore gaming and the PC as "casual", but frankly when it comes to Microsoft and gaming I don't pretend to understand their actions any more. I just hope they realize it's one of the platforms largest selling features over competitors.
>The author is suggesting that there is a grand conspiracy at Microsoft to lock all 3rd parties out of Windows eventually unless they go through the App Store, and to restrict all Windows versions to Metro mode.
You know, I kind of agree. I don't think there is proof other than "it's the logical thing for a company to do".
>I'd like some proof to this because it just does not make sense.
30% from all software sold is a pretty good reason in my mind. Microsoft has Apple envy, and for good reason. Apple is filling swimming pools with dollars right now. Microsoft already has the market share, in both home and enterprise - I have no doubt they want to take advantage of that. If they could move those users to a "faster, safer, easier" interface where suddenly MS makes a cut of all profit - well, that's a really smart thing for them to do.
There's a subtle detail in Windows 8 that makes me look at it this way. It's the way that the desktop is displayed as an app, like it's there for legacy support. You don't boot to the desktop, you boot to Metro, your new interface.
> The main thing holding "classic" Windows in place is familiarity, and as you said, games. I think Microsoft looks at the Xbox as hardcore gaming and the PC as "casual"...
If I were MS, I would somehow extend XBox Live onto tablets. Apple has made a mess of Game Center. MS knows how to do a game ecosystem, and many XBox casual titles would do well on a tablet.
They did great with Xbox, but then they totally botched "Games for Windows Live". I don't know if it's just a different team that couldn't put it together or what, but with MS and gaming I never know what to expect. They seem to want casual games on Metro though, based on the current store selection.
IMO Microsoft is simply catering to both markets with Windows 8. They figured if 70% or more of Windows 8 is on touch based tablets, and 30% or less is on PCs ... might as well boot to Metro because the Desktop folks are smart enough to click on the Desktop icon.
"Conspiracy" is loaded language that is generally used to marginalize.
Taken literally, just about everything a corporation does is a "conspiracy". In real world uses though the world conjures images of green men, truthers, bigfoot enthusiasts, etc.
Using more neutral terminology, what he is suggesting is that Microsoft has a business strategy with their App Store. Doesn't sound quite so outlandish when you put it like that, does it?
> Microsoft is not getting rid of MS-DOS. MS-DOS is here to stay. In Windows 3.1, in 95, and every other version.
There was a time that everything to do with the non-consumer/enterprise market was done in DOS. Soon enough Metro apps will be first class citizens and desktop apps will be second class. If locking down the most important user-facing UI elements to only those apps certified by MS doesn't cause you some trepidation then you might want to examine history a little closer.
They could decide to separate consumer and business customers in windows 9. No desktop for consumers and no tiles for business. The effect would be similar. Walled garden for consumers. No market for mature games, or home brewed software because business's have become the only pc users still capable. Don't underestimate balmers jealousy of apple.
I used a Windows Surface tablet a few days ago. It was clearly underpowered, but was far better than I expected. For the first time in years I thought, Microsoft may actually survive this mobile thing.
Windows has a massive selection of software. Their top priority should have been to make it as easy as possible for those legacy developers to add any level of metro support and integration to their existing applications.
Instead they chose to handicap themselves, as if they were producing a brand new operating system. Was the tradeoff of taking a cut of all software sales worth the effective action of starting with a software library the size of webOS's?
"I used a Windows Surface tablet a few days ago. It was clearly underpowered, but was far better than I expected. For the first time in years I thought, Microsoft may actually survive this mobile thing."
Same. I thought the flat interface was slick. Gestures on the edges of the tablet were smart. Keyboard selections (soft and hard thicker keys) were a nice features. Only thing I didn't appreciate were some of the Windows salespeople trying to convince me my gripes were unjustified. I typed faster than the keys were registered and he said it was because my stance was tense and I needed to relax.
When you buy it, there's an instructional DVD that helps you practice the correct stance for your Windows Phone. You'll get the hang of it after 2 or 3 20-minute sessions, though it might take a while to master it completely.
Are there different stances for tanking, DPS, and PvP?
I am all about hoping for good MS hardware, and desperately want to find a Windows phone I like, but if you need a special stance for your tablet there's something wrong.
While the technology to detect stance would probably be interesting, I don't see the functionality as being good for general usage. Using your stance as some way of gestering the system seems really inconvenient. That said, there are probably a lot of niche uses for such hardware.
In other words, sounds like something that would be more useful to be hooked into via API be app developers, but doesn't sound like it would solve any general OS usage issues.
> I typed faster than the keys were registered and he said it was because my stance was tense and I needed to relax.
If this happened while you were typing in Word, they may not have installed the update that fixed this issue (was reported in the comments of a surface article on here somewhere).
I got to play with a co-workers Surface RT for a bit, and I experienced this in the browser. With URLs I am familiar with I can type them quite quickly, and it clearly lagged behind.
Some teething issues no doubt, and the store staff are being clueless salespersons, but it feels like it has promise.
I agree with you - it should be a priority of Microsoft to make it easy for legacy developers to migrate to Metro. But at the same time, they can't hamstring their products for the sake of complete backwards compatibility.
I believe that WinRT is actually a relatively easy migration path from .Net. The biggest change is needing to use asynchrony in certain cases. You can even still link to your old C++ dlls! You do need to strip out disallowed API calls (Winsock, for example), but you are allowed to link against offending dlls during development. They only need to be removed for certification.
So Gabe Newell did not overreact on Windows 8... because of what Microsoft might do in Windows 9.
That said, Steam right now is more of an open platform that the Microsoft App Store. Even if Microsoft put up big, scary warnings, they really should allow the side-loading of Metro apps or have a Control Panel option to allow for their installation.
You can sideload store apps in Windows 8 relatively easy. What you need is the .appx file for the app and powershell. Using the PS prompt you can sign up for a developer license (free, renewed each month) and deploy the .appx file containing the app. No store updates this way, but the app appears on the start menu and works normally.
Microsoft even provides a PowerShell script that automates this installation each time you build a Windows Store app in Visual Studio along with the .appx file.
We had a team prepare for a demo on WinRT tablets in the US. They went overseas to do the demo - license expired in route. No connectivity; couldn't VPN in due to no WinRT VPN client, had to drop that part of the demo. Huge pain, no gain.
Steam is more an open platform than Microsoft App Store? Really? While I like Steam, it seems to me to be the most closed and opaque of all the various app stores around
Basically the rules seem to be lots of people apply, everyone pays, and you might get on if we like you, we will set your price and tell you the revenue split. In particular, a very small number of submitted apps get onto the store.
On the other hand, getting into the windows app store seems to have much more clearly defined rules, and Microsoft is trying everything they can to get more games on.
These restrictions are already in place on Windows RT like the MS Surface, right? You can't install apps that use the desktop, and you can't sideload any Metro apps.
Microsoft is just doing what is profitable. I cannot blame them for this. Apple has already proven that this model works quite well. I HIGHLY doubt Microsoft will completely abandon the desktop experience in Windows 9. I also doubt that Apple will force everybody to only use the MAC app store in future OSX releases.
I do believe the gaming landscape is changing and maybe that means Linux is the winner for the next generation of awesome computer gaming titles.
Nevertheless, Microsoft is a company that is in the business in making money, and they are making a huge push for their new platform which is mimicking the most successful company in the world... Seems like they are making good decisions.
But why is that a problem? You can install everything on Win8 classic (non-RT). Tablet version Win8RT is closed platform and marketplace, just like iOS Store, but desktop users can use Win8 like they're using all other win versions till now!
This whole 'marketplace' story is bad because
- it's not true. Steam is same thing like win store, or apple store (IMHO). Just money will now go to MS, not to Valve
- news portal editors should explain readers that you can install classic apps to Win8 (Pro), but Metro apps must go through Store. So, on PC+Win8 you can install everything.
- MS PR is responsible for this also, they should educate ppl more about this RT/Classic mess
It's a problem because everyone can see the path we're on. You may very well need to jailbreak your pc in a few years just to run something the os vendor doesn't see eye to eye with you on. Or did we forget that we all went sue happy on microsoft just for bundling ie. My world is not improved by having to run a half assed port of my preferred browser on my phone just because the browser manufacturer doesn't get along with the phone manufacturer.
You cannot really compare Windows Store with Steam. There is no Steam-only OS with a name that evokes that it is a successor to Windows 7.
How many non-programmers actually recognize the difference between full Windows 8 and Windows RT? They are both Windows, right? They are both new. Who cares about the details... until it is too late.
Windows RT is not really Windows in the sense it was understood in the past decades. It is a real disaster for every conscious Windows developer.
Come on, the post explicitly addresses this -- he is convinced that this telegraphs the future lockdown of the regular desktop, and that alternate means of installing apps will be removed in later versions of Windows.
You might disagree, but don't pretend it wasn't mentioned.
I'm not sold on this telegraphing the future for Microsoft, though. It seems rather odd that Microsoft would destroy one of the major reasons the OS has remained so prevalent and successful: backwards compatibility. This is much the same reason why Intel has never deprecated instructions from x86. If they bring out a new OS that makes it so we can't install our old apps because of the Windows Store, that just gives people more reason and time to consider a different option like Mac or Linux. I just don't think Microsoft would risk such a thing.
On the other hand, I'm not surprised to see the lockdown on mobile/tablet applications. People are already used to this and haven't yet been introduced to true freedom on their mobile devices (besides those of us who have rooted our phones). It'll be interesting to see what happens if some of the new Ultrabook/transformer devices take off.
In the end, we do need to make sure this issue is still raised. You never know, Microsoft might take this step and that would be bad for many developers and consumers.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, and given the amount of high-profile backclash against Windows 8's policies I might, but the 'problem' seems to be that in order to use the Windows 8 tiles you have to sell your program through Windows Store, right?
In what way is it any different than selling an app through the Apple Store? If you want to add the extra functionality, you have to sell it through the Windows store, but no one is forcing you to use it in order for you costumers to use your program (lets face it, your games probably dont need the tiles) and if you do so choose to use their store, it isn't forcing you to remain exclusive to that store, you can sell it anywhere you want.
I don't know if this is the core issue in the article, but this is my take:
I think the real issue is Microsoft's horribly Apple-esque policy on Windows 8 RT: you can only install software from the app store.
The core worry is that this is going to transcend ARM in future releases. Given the unified branding--both products are called "Windows 8"--I think this is a very real worry.
Even if it doesn't transcend onto x86 and desktop Windows 8, it's still every bit as bad Apple's policy and should not be condoned even only on RT.
I wonder if now isn't the time for a billionaire to start backing something akin to Ubuntu but based on a Windows clone like ReactOS? The goal would be to capture a user base that's disenchanted with the Windows 8 direction and just wants to hold onto the Windows 7 experience? One could even base this on WINE and Linux with the plentiful open source programs for Windows and some tweaks to automate installation of things like MS Office.
I use classic shell with win8. It gives me everything I was use to and I can boot to desktop mode. I think they will bring back some of what they took out in order to cater to businesses. They know businesses will not touch win8 as is and need to reincorporate what was removed during the refactor of win8. There is still support for god mode as well
Wait, he says that you cannot download an application from the internet and run it on your computer, but earlier says that you simply cannot add non-app store apps to the Metro tiled interface. Which one is it? I would assume that you can still install applications from the internet (non-app store), and I'm certain that you can have tiles for those apps. What exactly is the problem?
What? Why? If Steam releases touch games then just throw the steam icon on your desktop and launch it. If you don't have touch games then you wouldn't be playing without a keyboard and mouse.
Lots of Steam games play well, sometimes even best, with a game controller.
The UI formerly known as Metro also seems that it would work reasonably well, at least better than WIMP, with a controller. Have anyone tried to plug in a controller to Surface, and see if it works?
It's quite simple...
Metro - for consumers. Mostly for touch-based tablets. Internet, Facebook, Twitter, simple games and apps.
Desktop - for producers. Keyboard and PC (everything from a $600 Dell to a powerful $5000 WorkStation). Large games, VS.NET, Office, etc. And also everthing to do with the non-consumer/enterprise market.
Do you have any idea how many situations, work-flows, and applications NEED the desktop?
Microsoft is not getting rid of the Desktop. The Desktop is here to stay. In Windows 8, in 9, and every other version. Including the Server versions.
Half of their revenues depend on the Desktop situations, work-flows, and applications.
They'll get rid of the Desktop when computers start reading your thoughts or everyone in the world becomes a thoughtless consumer that spends his/her entire time buying useless crap (like in the move Idiocracy).