As I said previously, there is ample evidence that the main point of windows 8 is UI integration and perhaps more importantly the windows store.

 

What makes me believe that Microsoft would prevent developers from avoiding the store is simple logic; who would sell in the store and pay a fee if they didn't have too? It's already true that to access certain functions going through the store is already required, and one of the links I posted went into that in more detail, as well as giving an example of restrictive usage terms that would bar many of today's most popular games from being eligible for that store.

 

After a large outcry, Microsoft is backing down from that a bit, but for many, the writing is on the wall, and just because Microsoft backs down now, does not mean that they will not be more aggressive in the future after the balance of power has shifted enough.

 

And yes, I already mentioned that the EU might view this with scant favor. Microsoft has been burned repeatedly by them to the tune of billions, but when has that stopped them from trying anyway?

There seems to be confusion between Windows 8 and the Windows Store.

Indeed.

 

Devon, can you confirm that you know that the 'store' app in Win8 is just one app out of who knows how many? Thanks. :smile:

 

I get the feeling that you are stuck in a misconception about the actual OS. Free people with free minds great you from their Win8 desktop or tablet. Lets just hope the message gets through. :Worried:

 

 

Maybe we can ask Bryan how he feels about the (MS) store concept. He's a software dev. I could think of 'no, I'll stick to my website and good service' and I'm sure that nobody at MS will ever force him to use it. And I also doubt that MS will ever block his software because of his decision.

 

I could be wrong of course. This sometimes happens.

I am well aware of the difference right now. I am also aware of the obvious strategy and reasoning that practically guarantees that this will not remain the case. Other people are also aware of the probability's and potentials......

 

I am not going to make the mistake of thinking that all of the voices speaking out against this; Smart and respected voices are all simply deluded, confused and/or alarmist. (nor would I dismiss them as frogs)

 

I repeat: I believe windows 8 is primarily the launch vehicle for the windows store. Windows 8 could go the way of the dodo tomorrow, but the windows store will be knocking at our door for years to come as it is part of a primary growth strategy for the future.

I repeat: I believe windows 8 is primarily the launch vehicle for the windows store. Windows 8 could go the way of the dodo tomorrow, but the windows store will be knocking at our door for years to come as it is part of a primary growth strategy for the future.

 

Do you seriously believe that all the major companies who rely on Windows to support their businesses will simply accept that they can no longer commission and instal their own applications but weill have to buy them through the Windows Store and pay Microsoft a cut? They won't!

Do you seriously believe that all the major companies who rely on Windows to support their businesses will simply accept that they can no longer commission and instal their own applications but weill have to buy them through the Windows Store and pay Microsoft a cut? They won't!

 

And they are not. That's what all the complaining is about: the developers fighting back.

 

http://www.gamasutra...hp#.UKT_BIfuXnj

 

If you haven't been keeping up, here's the primary concern with Windows 8: This new OS sports a new "Metro" UI, which is now just referred to simply as the "Windows 8 UI." If a game developer -- or any developer -- wants their product to be compatible with all the fancy new UI features that Windows 8 offers, that software must be subject to Microsoft's policies, certified by Microsoft, and sold through the official Windows Store.

 

But that's not a problem, right? Developers will still be able to make and sell games via the older desktop interface -- the open interface -- many have argued.

 

"To some degree, I think that [argument] is almost immediately obviated by two things," says Muratori. "First, with Windows RT, there's no desktop on Windows RT. On one entire SKU that Microsoft is shipping, that [argument] is not relevant, because RT is not shipping with a desktop. So everything that ships on that platform goes through Microsoft.

 

"Microsoft didn't say [RT] is only going on phones. For all you know, the next set of desktops could be ARM-based processors. The next set of ultrabooks could be Windows RT. A whole slice of the Windows-based market could be Windows RT. There's nothing stopping that from happening."

 

Secondly, he adds that with the "proper" non-RT version of Windows 8, apps made for the old desktop cannot integrate with any of the new features offered by the OS. "What ships on Friday, all the new stuff, is off limits to you, if you don't play by Microsoft's rules. You can't ship a game with [Windows 8 features such as] Share if you don't ship through their app store and pay the toll."

 

And that's just the opening move in the game.

 

I paraphrase my previous statement. The software developers would be remiss in their responsibilities, to not honor the threat.

 

When top people from places like Valve speak out against Windows 8, they're not just talking about restrictions on releasing their games, but about their own distribution services. If the desktop interface is marginalized or -- theoretically -- eliminated, under the current policies, Steam would not be allowed on Windows' new interface, or sold through the Windows Store.

 

Why? Because the new UI's certification requirements prohibit "Metro"-style apps from downloading executable content. That alone is a clear explanation of the whole "catastrophe" remark from Newell, and one can imagine that other digital storefront owners feel the exact same way.

 

While people like Muratori are skeptical, Microsoft has tried to assure gamers and developers that it won't mess with the desktop side. "We want the world of desktop apps to to keep existing [outside of the Windows Store]," Windows Corporate VP of Web Services Antoine Leblond recently told Gizmodo. "There's no reason to get in the way of that. Valve can keep being Valve."

 

Statements like that do little to allay concerns. PC game developers and executives have been quiet, even diplomatic about the changes Windows 8 will make. But rest assured, we know from highly-reliable sources that decision-makers in the game industry are extremely wary of the new OS. They just don't want to come forward about it quite yet.

Devon, can you confirm that you know that the 'store' app in Win8 is just one app out of who knows how many?

I am well aware of the difference right now.

:unsure2: Glad you've said that. I was puzzled for more than a second.

 

I like how you state 'THE developers fight back' without realizing that the very spin on that 'fight back' action and press derives from the main competitors. Sorry to say but it's like asking Boeing about safety concerns on Airbus planes. Nothing wrong with asking, reading, listening. But what sort of answers do you expect? Unbiased ones?

 

Seriously, instead of wondering why it nowadays takes huge companies to sell software via restricted market platforms (our example with the frogs around the pool, selling the water to visitors), you are telling us to 'watch that green one!'. Well, thanks, I guess. :mellow:

 

And I'm sure that the Steam folks know that a simple software running on the desktop UI of Win8 will do the trick. It already does. Since the very early versions of Win8. Hence my note on their strange spin to upset folks about restrictions. They are, among others, the masters of restrictions, demanding to speak up for a free platform. Yeah, irony, isn't it? ^_^

:unsure2: Glad you've said that. I was puzzled for more than a second.

 

I like how you state 'THE developers fight back' without realizing that the very spin on that 'fight back' action and press derives from the main competitors. Sorry to say but it's like asking Boeing about safety concerns on Airbus planes. Nothing wrong with asking, reading, listening. But what sort of answers do you expect? Unbiased ones?

 

I am going to assume the developers are occasionally right from time to time. Microsoft would (and did) argue that its previous anti-competitive practices were not harmful or egregious in any way. "Just business" And some agreed. (Just frogs?) The Eu was not in agreement, and I approve. I also think if somebody yells fire and ones reaction is "oh, those wacky kids" then responsibility for everything after that devolves to the individual.

 

Also, saying that this comes from the main competitors is a way to frame the point that is factually incorrect. More than valve (and the like) are speaking out about this.

 

Seriously, instead of wondering why it nowadays takes huge companies to sell software via restricted market platforms (our example with the frogs around the pool, selling the water to visitors), you are telling us to 'watch that green one!'. Well, thanks, I guess. :mellow:

 

Perhaps because the other frogs have guns, and are kings of their own lilly pads, while "The green one" might have a nuke, and has obvious imperial ambitions. (And is a known killer of unwary frogs) Slight difference.

 

And I'm sure that the Steam folks know that a simple software running on the desktop UI of Win8 will do the trick. It already does. Since the very early versions of Win8. Hence my note on their strange spin to upset folks about restrictions. They are, among others, the masters of restrictions, demanding to speak up for a free platform. Yeah, irony, isn't it? ^_^

 

They probably do know that. After all, many are former Microsoft employees with years of experience with the innards of the system and some even worked on windows. They also know that such workarounds are subject to "regrettable" failures after windows updates. They may also be concerned by such trifles as the DMCA should they be forced to inelegantly bull their way around the system. Again, I think they know their business at least as well as anyone here, and they remain concerned.

 

So am I. How does a notoriously deaf and uncommunicative Microsoft hear about those concerns, and get moved to address them unless somebody speaks out? And considering we are talking about Microsoft, people have to speak out long and loudly in ways that affect the bottom line, or they will probably be just as ignored as we were about cockpit-less planes.

Workarounds?

 

Ok, here's the official guide to running your steam games on Win8.

1) Install and boot Win8.

2) Click 'desktop' (lower left icon)

3) Install and run the Steam client.

4) Play your games. :smile:

 

 

Come on, lets play rumours. You are doing that for longer.

 

Valve/Steam is rumoured to work on its own hardware basis. We may assume that they don't pick any type of Windows to run it. Lets say.. they pick Linux. Oh, look! Some concerns on Win8 and a 'brave' move from Steam moving towards Linux. Suddenly, it all makes sense. :biggrin:

 

Regardless of if that's true or not. Let me assure you that those frogs know how to play PR. And they tend to play it just because that spot at the pool is so lucrative. Less frogs, more win. Everyone of them knows that and, by this, they sometimes line up nicely to get the other one out or at least stop new frogs from getting closer.

 

So Valve/Steam folks are upset? The EA (Origin) folks are too? Activision/Blizzard? What a surprise!

Workarounds?

 

Ok, here's the official guide to running your steam games on Win8.

1) Install and boot Win8.

2) Click 'desktop' (lower left icon)

3) Install and run the Steam client.

4) Play your games. :smile:

 

 

Come on, lets play rumours. You are doing that for longer.

 

Steam is rumoured to work on its own hardware basis. We may assume that they don't pick any type of Windows to run it. Lets say.. they pick Linux.

 

Oh, look! Some concerns on Win8 and a 'brave' move from Steam moving towards Linux. Suddenly, it all makes sense. :biggrin:

 

I am a few steps ahead. I am talking about workarounds to access tile functionality (and you must have tile functionality to access certain windows features) You are talking about the present, whereas others are looking at the current state as just the opening move "foot in the door" for future moves in a direction they do not agree with.

 

You can let the future take care of itself on the assumption that everything will be just fine, but good luck running a business that way. Most especially good luck in assuming Microsoft will not harm your interests in the pursuit of its own well being.

I am a few steps ahead.

That's what I figured.

 

I guess I will apologize to you if it ever turns out that MS locks up the desktop mode (which allows for almost any Win software to run in Win8). Until then, just don't go too far and mind that spin the winds try to give you. Some of them are artificial ones. :smile: It's the system, I guess.

 

 

I always wanted to ask something though. Could it be that your experience with Flight has made you go :mad: towards any new MS plans?

Why? Because the new UI's certification requirements prohibit "Metro"-style apps from downloading executable content

But of course - it's a no-brainer to certify an app that can then download and execute uncertified code!

But of course - it's a no-brainer to certify an app that can then download and execute uncertified code!

 

Its also a no brainer for Microsoft, should they opt to do so, to charge you out the butt for that certification (which coincidentally ties you to their rules, which are subject to change)

 

Advantage Microsoft!

 

(they are not stupid people)

 

That's what I figured.

 

I guess I will apologize to you if it ever turns out that MS locks up the desktop mode (which allows for almost any Win software to run in Win8). Until then, just don't go too far and mind that spin the winds try to give you. Some of them are artificial ones. :smile: It's the system, I guess.

 

 

I always wanted to ask something though. Could it be that your experience with Flight has made you go :mad: towards any new MS plans?

 

Nope. I just tend to use examples relevant to the venue. If I was on a car racing forum, my examples would have been completely differant.

I go to bed and wake up and they debate continues I see :lol:

 

It's already true that to access certain functions going through the store is already required, and one of the links I posted went into that in more detail, as well as giving an example of restrictive usage terms that would bar many of today's most popular games from being eligible for that store.

 

This is exactly how I see it as well. Devon and I have been on the same page it seems. B)

 

For Gaming Developers the catalyst would be DirectX. I think in the future MS could say, Any software using DirectX 12 (or whatever) must be sold exclusively in the Windows Store. That would be a game changer for PC Gaming that is already in a steady decline. Perhaps the straw that breaks the camel's back so to speak.

 

I respect CoolP and MGH side of this discussion as they are merely pointing out that the sky isn't falling, and that is cool. My view is that they are correct, sky isn't falling......yet

Devon and I concerns lie in where Microsoft may take Windows by creating further restrictions and limiting developers.

 

Reason why I like the openness in the past is it creates the ideal conditions for artists to work and produce their projects. To micromanage artists (from my experience) is the best way to drive them away. Talent Management is the way to manage artists. Microsoft has already been creating a negative work environment for game developers for about 10 years now and it isn't getting any better, reality is too much money is on the line and creativity is on the decline.

 

Cheers

Its also a no brainer for Microsoft, should they opt to do so, to charge you out the butt for that certification (which coincidentally ties you to their rules, which are subject to change)

 

You don't seem to understand the purpose of certifiaction which woul be defeated if apps could down load and execute uncertified code.

 

The first line of Windows 8 app certification requirements (Windows)reads

 

In this document, we describe the criteria an app must meet to be eligible for listing in the Windows Store.

[My emphasis]

 

If developers don't like the Windows Store requirements then they needn't use it. It's Microsoft's store after all and it's entitled to decide what it will sell and what charges it it will make. If it wants to sell only apps that meet its standards why shouldn't it? Any other store's entitled to do so.