Newell: Win8 is a catastrophe; Pardo: I don't disagree.
- Thread starter Grall
- Start date
- Status
So driving the various API implementations under the DirectX umbrella or providing the easier to use development environments doesn't constitute support? There's a difference between supporting and pushing the boundaries as visionaries.
Or are you getting at the point where MS opts to keep some games and IP Franchises as XBox exclusives?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That was purely a security measure. One of the easiest ways to compromise and take over a windows system in the past was via 3rd party unsigned drivers. Something could still slip through but since it has to be signed MS could track and block the certificate of whoever released a driver that attempted to compromise system security.
Regards,
SB
QFT.
Nobody with a brain installs an unsigned driver today.
As for integrating an app store into the OS. Why can't Microsoft be allowed to do that when we have Apple App store, Google Play, and even Ubuntu Software center? Microsoft wants to establish Metro as a secure platform, that means control of all apps, it is *exactly* the same as what Apple has done.
Gabe Newell hates the idea, because it means competition for Steam.
Cheers
itsmydamnation
Veteran
I guess i dont have a brain..............
there is plenty of hardware out there with unsigned drivers.
most of the Midi replacement project ( win7 does midi shit) are unsigned etc.
Windows RT is just like an ipad. Windows 8 will allow you to buy metro apps from the windows store or download legacy non metro apps and install them as you would on any windows 7 pc.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Sure, and that will be synonymous with Win8 x86 32 and 64 bit versions.
WinRT which is primarily targetted for slates/tablets will be synonymous with iOS. Although I won't be surprised if one of the OEMs decides to make a desktop machine with WinRT and a cheap Arm processor.
The only difference from Apple then is that you'll have the ability to also buy a regular Win8 x86 slate and avoid the app store entirely if you wish.
So, WinRT/iOS/Android means you have app stores and generally locked devices that would have be hacked/rooted to allow non-app store applications.
Win8 on the other hand will allow the user to run everything they want by default. I'm not sure if it's even possible for an OEM to lock down Win8 x86 such that it can "only" run Metro Apps.
Of course, the benefit versus Apple is that while I'm assuming most iOS Apps would have to be ported to OSX, any Metro App should theoretically be able to run on both WinRT and Win8.
So basically Newell is only whining about being locked out of WinRT just like they are locked out of Android and iOS. They are still unfettered and can do whatever they want on Win8 x86. Only now there's more competition in the form of the Metro App store for the more casual titles (like iOS ports). I'm not sure Metro will affect the sale of mid-large budget titles and whether or not they are sold through Steam.
Hell, even MS are using Steam to sell their own self published games. Age of Empires online is now available through Steam and all in game transactions are handled through Steam and not through MS whether you originally got it from Windows Live Marketplace or not.
Regards,
SB
...And the fat fee is purely a security measure as well? Please. It's a tax, and you know it. That it has security benefits is just incentive for developers to pay said tax. Of course, the big incentive isn't security at all, but the fact windows won't load the driver at all by default if it isn't paid for and signed.
This is entirely obvious stuff.
Thank you, Cpt. Obvious.
We all know this, and what some here are saying is that this is BAD. Having created this setup, MS has now also created incentive for itself to squeeze out the traditional desktop, since it cannot earn any revenue from it.Should MS persist on this path, you will start seeing a decreasing focus on the traditional desktop, continuing immediately in the next version of windows. New features will be limited, old features may be pulled, like the start menu was pulled. MS will excuse itself with that the desktop is "legacy", and that metro fills the same purpose just fine, etc. It'll all simply be talk to try and hide that they want to profit from selling all apps on their own app store, and locking down our PCs so that the people who own them no longer have full control of them.
Where is all this "legacy" (in quotes) desktop talk coming from?
There are lots of users that don't need a full windowing desktop GUI, and there are lots of users that do. And there are lots that want to switch between them when appropriate. If MS stop offering people a desktop there will still be hundreds of millions of people that need one and they'll go where they can get one.
There are lots of users that don't need a full windowing desktop GUI, and there are lots of users that do. And there are lots that want to switch between them when appropriate. If MS stop offering people a desktop there will still be hundreds of millions of people that need one and they'll go where they can get one.
There are clear commercial interests pushing Microsoft into supporting PC gaming despite what some forces inside Microsoft want ... but the more of those forces are sensitive to internal sabotage within Microsoft the worse the situation becomes for PC gaming.
aaronspink
Veteran
No it is not. The same people who say this were saying netbooks 2-3 years ago. PCs aren't going away any time soon. And they certainly aren't going to be made extinct by tablets and smartphones.
What proportion of the market did tablets and phones make up 10 years ago? What proportion of the market did tablets and phones make up five years ago? And now?
And where did I say PCs were going away, or becoming extinct? I've explicitly stated quite the opposite in this thread, where some posters have said that the desktop is a "legacy" GUI and at least one has implied that MS's master plan is to ditch it for Metro.
You fool!
Newell is upset because the idea of Windows 8 leading onto something like a metro only windows 9 would be a disaster for all windows PC users!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It would give MS a complete monopoly on all windows software sales FFS and make MS a gatekeeper to what you can have on your PC.
Kiss browser plugins, mods, software that MS does not like for one reason or the other, likely Chrome and Firefox (the "metro" versions of them are only allowed to be installed from the desktop and they need to use the Win32 API due to MS locking them out from the things they need with the winrt API) goodbye!
And BTW, you don't need to root android to load apps outside google play and other companies can run there own software stores on it!!!!
itsmydamnation
Veteran
im pretty sure 10 years ago tablets and phones made up 100% of the lablet and phone markets............... might just be me.
what your ignoring when trying to pull numbers like that is content generation vs content consumption. you cant generate content on a phone or tablet(my hope for surface). Almost everyone generates content (from basic word, excel all the way to 3D graphics ) its this reason that a PC's and/or laptops wont go anywhere. its the exact reason netbooks didn't go anywhere (poor responce times when doing even simple tasks and poor quality/resolution screens) so it didn't actually offer anything over a smart phone.
what your ignoring when trying to pull numbers like that is content generation vs content consumption. you cant generate content on a phone or tablet(my hope for surface). Almost everyone generates content (from basic word, excel all the way to 3D graphics
) its this reason that a PC's and/or laptops wont go anywhere. its the exact reason netbooks didn't go anywhere (poor responce times when doing even simple tasks and poor quality/resolution screens) so it didn't actually offer anything over a smart phone.The sky is falling the sky is falling.
some questions.
who are they planning on selling this thing to?
consumers? they sort of buy windows because theyre used to the interface, the actually underpinnings dont really matter so much to them as long as all their applications work....
enterprise customers? it was a tough sell getting them off xp for christs sake.
remember when they tried to break into the mp3 player market, which at the time was completely dominated by apple?
windows live?
at least xbox is profitable.
who are they planning on selling this thing to?
consumers? they sort of buy windows because theyre used to the interface, the actually underpinnings dont really matter so much to them as long as all their applications work....
enterprise customers? it was a tough sell getting them off xp for christs sake.
remember when they tried to break into the mp3 player market, which at the time was completely dominated by apple?
windows live?
at least xbox is profitable.
People now use phones and/or tablets to send and receive email, access the internet, interact with social networks, watch youtube, watch movies, read pdf files, video chat, arrange their diary and work on simple documents.
These are extremely common activities that used to be restricted to desktop or laptop PCs. Pretending that this transfer of uses and user time is not occurring through some strict arbitrary definition of "phone" vs "computer" is not something that Microsoft are willing to do any more, hence Metro (and the renewed push of Windows Phone).
what your ignoring when trying to pull numbers like that is content generation vs content consumption. you cant generate content on a phone or tablet(my hope for surface). Almost everyone generates content (from basic word, excel all the way to 3D graphics
I'm not ignoring anything. I've explicitly stated that there is a continuing need for a huge number of "deskptop" computers (and I include laptops in this, as opposed to phones and tablets). I've not only explicitly stated it but I've also stated (twice now) that I've explicitly stated this.
- Status