Notch: Windows 8 Could Be "Very Very Bad" for Indies

TheLazyGeek

New member
Nov 7, 2009
125
0
0
I haven't seen anything that would make upgrading from 7 to 8 worth it. I think most gamers will stick with 7, and at the rate all the bad press is popping up, hopefully the OS will bomb so Microsoft can maybe learn the error of their ways...

Bah, who am I kidding? I better get acquainted with ubuntu or something...
 

RhombusHatesYou

Surreal Estate Agent
Mar 21, 2010
6,130
335
88
Country
Australia
Atmos Duality said:
If they really are aiming for an Apple-like closed environment, I don't foresee Windows 8 selling terribly well for gamers. The market did reject Vista pretty hard though, and it never quite reached the levels of usage that Win XP did.
If it's a closed system, I don't see it selling particularly well in most markets including, especially, corporate and government sales. It will be the Vista situation again, only more wide spread... and while Microsoft might not give a flying fuck about PC gamers, they do give one about their corp and govt clients.

I don't doubt the ARM version will be something of a closed system, that's pretty much a given in that market, and possibly the lowest end of the x86 versions, too... but I would also expect open, full service x86 versions to be available as well, much as the Professional, Enterprise and Ultimate versions of Windows 7 offer much more than the Home versions do.
 

RhombusHatesYou

Surreal Estate Agent
Mar 21, 2010
6,130
335
88
Country
Australia
MasterSaji said:
I haven't seen anything that would make upgrading from 7 to 8 worth it. I think most gamers will stick with 7, and at the rate all the bad press is popping up, hopefully the OS will bomb so Microsoft can maybe learn the error of their ways...
Hopefully not before MS release Halo 3 for Windows 8 and we can all have a good laugh.
 

RhombusHatesYou

Surreal Estate Agent
Mar 21, 2010
6,130
335
88
Country
Australia
Jove said:
Anybody else think Google is just going to step in and make their own OS? They have pretty much a superior search engine, social network, web browser, youtube, etc. Now all they need to do is make a superior OS (which with the way Microsoft is doing with 8, this doesn't seem too hard) and they will completely dominate the internet.
That's exactly why they don't do it. Anti Trust suits and the like up the arse if they do.

That and it's completely unnecessary. All they'd need to do is throw their not inconsiderable weight behind Linux.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
RhombusHatesYou said:
If it's a closed system, I don't see it selling particularly well in most markets including, especially, corporate and government sales. It will be the Vista situation again, only more wide spread... and while Microsoft might not give a flying fuck about PC gamers, they do give one about their corp and govt clients.

I don't doubt the ARM version will be something of a closed system, that's pretty much a given in that market, and possibly the lowest end of the x86 versions, too... but I would also expect open, full service x86 versions to be available as well, much as the Professional, Enterprise and Ultimate versions of Windows 7 offer much more than the Home versions do.
Alternatively it could turn into Win2000/NT scenario again. Where you have a lightweight BIY suite for the government and corp markets, and a big ol' FUCK-YOU-with-bloatware version that comes bundled with retail PCs and the like.

(people remember Windows ME as being hellspawn, rightly so, but forget that Windows XP was also a colossal piece of shit on launch too. Of course, most people swapped over after service pack 1 launched and missed out on that bit of business. I didn't.)

They may attempt to lump PC gaming in with the latter; not distinguishing between you, me, or Grandma Goodie. That's what I'm more concerned about in the long-run. As you said, Microsoft may very well not give a flying fuck about PC gamers because we're quite expendable, and in fact, a conflict of interest for as long as they have a stake in the console business.

Of course, if they're going to build a fence, nobody in the production side of business is going to play ball with them if it greatly inhibits development or hikes the cost via royalties.

The most interesting entity to join the protest is neither Notch nor Gabe Newell, but Blizzard's Rob Pardo.
It cannot just be a matter of closed-system/DRM if Blizzard is worried about it; they love DRM. Perhaps there's some deeper element at work here.
 

octafish

New member
Apr 23, 2010
5,137
0
0
RhombusHatesYou said:
snip

I don't doubt the ARM version will be something of a closed system, that's pretty much a given in that market, and possibly the lowest end of the x86 versions, too... but I would also expect open, full service x86 versions to be available as well, much as the Professional, Enterprise and Ultimate versions of Windows 7 offer much more than the Home versions do.
Well that is one of the big things with W8 that will work for MS. There are basically four versions but really just three that aree of consequence to the general public. The mobile one, called Windows RT, which is the locked down one with special versions of Office and the like. Then there is Home and Pro, with a fourth version for corporations who buy in bulk. This is a step in the right direction after the plethora of Windows versions in 7.

The other thing going for W8 is the price. Last I checked it was going to about $40 to upgrade, going from Vista or XP to W7 was at least three times that. That makes it comparable to OSX.

Anyway, without an option to NOT start in Metro I won't be rushing to upgrade my desktop anytime soon. But the Metro interface does work well on my TV with my (certainly not a) HTPC. I only have a 32bit XP license for that computer so I'll probably pick up W8 for that (I think it is about $40 to upgrade the preview release to full version too).

The lack of Start button is frustrating when setting up the computer, or indeed trying to do anything remotely power usery, but it can be done, it just isn't intuitive. Once it is running it easy to use and most of my Steam and GOG games run just fine on it (I've only tried the controller friendly ones).

I don't think it will be a very popular upgrade because it doesn't improve a great deal over 7 and introduces an unpopular interface, however integrating the Mobile OS and Desktop OS will probably pay off for MS.
 

Baldr

The Noble
Jan 6, 2010
1,739
0
0
I'm a indie developer who has used and works with Windows 8. I think this is a better platform for indies than ever before. Not only can you do the independent release thing, but if a developer so chooses list it on the windows store(of course you have to split small percentage of profits with Microsoft for the listing.)

I love how fast Windows 8 is.
 

TheDAus

New member
Mar 13, 2012
4
0
0
The reason that everyone is upset is because metro is a closed system, if in windows 9 MS removes the desktop, MS wiil have granted itself a monopoly on ALL software sales and will act as a gatekeeper for ALL programs.

Even in windows 8 the metro store gives MS an unfair advantage by coming preinstalled and right on the metro menu when you start it.
This is far worse than the IE monopoly.
 

fenixkane

New member
Sep 16, 2008
57
0
0
Jove said:
RhombusHatesYou said:
Jove said:
Anybody else think Google is just going to step in and make their own OS? They have pretty much a superior search engine, social network, web browser, youtube, etc. Now all they need to do is make a superior OS (which with the way Microsoft is doing with 8, this doesn't seem too hard) and they will completely dominate the internet.
That's exactly why they don't do it. Anti Trust suits and the like up the arse if they do.

That and it's completely unnecessary. All they'd need to do is throw their not inconsiderable weight behind Linux.
Hmmm...good point, although I disagree with it being unnecessary. As much as I like another to see a new OS take over, Linux is still very complitced to use and program with. They would have to make it much more user friendly if such developers are really serious about it or even google as you mentioned.

I still think it would just be much easier to see a whole new OS instead of just backing Linux. I just thought that maybe Google has the resources and reputation to do it.
Firstly, Google has made their own OS. Two in fact. Called Android and Chrome OS. And they both run on top of Linux.
Secondly, desktop Linux being complicated to use is an argument 4 years outdated. Check out Ubuntu 12.04 adn you'll find an incredibly easy to use, feature rich operating system (however that is if you approach it as a different OS, if you act like it's Windows, of course it will appear hard to use, it's different.). And for difficulty to program on, Linux was initially built by programmers for programmers. It's probably the most powerful OS for a software developer to use if used the way it was designed (once again, if approached with a Windows mindset at first, it will appear difficult, it's once again, just different.).

Hope that helps fill you in. (Hope I didn't sound contentious because I was trying to go for friendly and informative... but I'm pretty sure it didn't come out that way. Please forgive me.)
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2020
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Bhaalspawn said:
The Aero UI and other Windows 7 features are still present in Windows 8. It's more like a Cross Platform system has been added to the Operating System. All the the original functions that Windows XP/7 had. I have the preview on my Desktop, and it's running everything fine. It's Metro is designed to be more closed off, because it's meant to communicate between Microsoft's other devices, like the Windows Phone and the XBox 360 (Cross Platform Gaming, anyone?)

But much like GFWL beforehand, nothing forces you to develop for it. Steam can continue to be Steam the way it's always been, Origin can continue to be Origin, and everyone else can still be everyone else.

Or, in simpler terms:

Gabe Newell: THE WORLD IS ENDING!
Notch: The world might be ending... not sure yet.
Steam can continue to be Steam until Windows 9 where the Metro option is the only option?

Metro is closed off because they want to make a "console shell" for PC's where they can charge license fees. I'll bet that they want to make the entire Windows OS be that console shell in time, could be Windows 9 or it could be Windows 12 but it's coming. Hopefully by the time Microsoft turns Windows into a console, there will be better alternatives.

Windows Vista some kind of punchline when there was nothing seriously wrong with it...
I installed Windows 8 on a Vista system and it runs so much faster than Vista. That's sad, that shows just how piss poor Vista was. When a 2012 OS runs faster on 2006 hardware than an OS that came out in 2006.
 

Atomic

New member
Apr 20, 2012
12
0
0
He Tweeted.
HE TWEETED.
Does he do anything other than tweet? This is why it takes weeks for 1 FUCKING UPDATE.
 

RhombusHatesYou

Surreal Estate Agent
Mar 21, 2010
6,130
335
88
Country
Australia
Atmos Duality said:
Alternatively it could turn into Win2000/NT scenario again. Where you have a lightweight BIY suite for the government and corp markets, and a big ol' FUCK-YOU-with-bloatware version that comes bundled with retail PCs and the like.

(people remember Windows ME as being hellspawn, rightly so, but forget that Windows XP was also a colossal piece of shit on launch too. Of course, most people swapped over after service pack 1 launched and missed out on that bit of business. I didn't.)
I stuck with Win98se until I got into 3D modelling and needed something build on the NT kernel before switching up to XP... and the amount of 3rd party fixes that ***** needed before SP1 to stop acting like a fucked up piece of shit was pretty depressing, not to mention switch off most of the useless and very annoying 'security features'.


They may attempt to lump PC gaming in with the latter; not distinguishing between you, me, or Grandma Goodie. That's what I'm more concerned about in the long-run.
I'm not particularly concerned about it. Microsoft can try all they like to put in a closed system OS but as they don't control the hardware (hardware from manufacturers that depend on x86 PCs being an open platform, at that) and never will, they can't stop new alternatives from cropping up nor stop a growth in popularity of already existing alternatives.
 

sapphireofthesea

New member
Jul 18, 2010
241
0
0
While I agree it won't likely break the world as we know it a couple of issues do exsist.

1. Windows has ALWAYS been what come swith every new computer (bar a mac or custom build), which means for most this will be a no choice upgrade.

2. In built connection to a store...FOR A PEICE OF SOFTWARE I ALREADY FUCKING BOUGHT, you are going to clog things up, make me do fucking work to get something I paid money to do what I want it to do without it wasting resources on running a connection to a store, ON A PEICE OF SOFTWARE I ALREADY BOUGHT. (I am not a fan of being fucked with advertising after I have been decent enough to pay a company for a service, recently left McAfee after 4 years of happiness for this very reason)

3. If it brings very little to the table appart from a connection to a fucking inhouse store (will drop the agro at some point), what is the point of PAYING for this feature and suffering the loss in resources need to run it. And if I am just to disable it, what's the bloody point?

4. Notch and others are refering to program restrictions that are likely to come as part of this in house store (think what happened with D3 in trying this). If MS want to have it they will NEED to make it worth using which means ensuring it is the best option.

5. I re-iterate, I AM PAYING THEM MONEY, WHY THE HELL SHOULD I PAY FOR THE PRIVELAGE OF BEING ADVERTISED TO?

I will wait and see what the final decision is on this, but remember internet, it is discussion like this (regardless of the source that starts it) that decides how far businesses go from testing to final product. So make your voices heard and don't stand for anything that is beyind what you consider reason. It is up to the producers to decide what opinion is worthy of following and up to you to decide if you can handle what they give. It is alot harder with MS being standard operating system for new computers, something that garantees them enough sales to lie to themselves and say it was a success either way.

Wait and see where it goes, become familiar with alternatives and those with the ablit, make those alternatives simple enough for those who have no clue (the ones for whom MS as standard is designed for) to work with and access. Nothing changes with the effort of one mind, one side, or one opinion. Nothing is written that we all have to agree either. All we have to do is understand one another and see the value in each persons position and adjust to make the future as diverse as possible on as many levels as possible.

-jumps down from soapbox-

Have a good day all. I for one will be speaking to a friend about a Linux verson that I will be able to use if things go south. I am a big fan of MS but won't stand for anythingI consider to be an affront to my being a paying customer (EA and McAfee know this all to well, and Blizzard is starting to get there).

Captca: fair play
At least I got one backer ^^
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2020
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
RhombusHatesYou said:
Atmos Duality said:
Alternatively it could turn into Win2000/NT scenario again. Where you have a lightweight BIY suite for the government and corp markets, and a big ol' FUCK-YOU-with-bloatware version that comes bundled with retail PCs and the like.

(people remember Windows ME as being hellspawn, rightly so, but forget that Windows XP was also a colossal piece of shit on launch too. Of course, most people swapped over after service pack 1 launched and missed out on that bit of business. I didn't.)
I stuck with Win98se until I got into 3D modelling and needed something build on the NT kernel before switching up to XP... and the amount of 3rd party fixes that ***** needed before SP1 to stop acting like a fucked up piece of shit was pretty depressing, not to mention switch off most of the useless and very annoying 'security features'.


They may attempt to lump PC gaming in with the latter; not distinguishing between you, me, or Grandma Goodie. That's what I'm more concerned about in the long-run.
I'm not particularly concerned about it. Microsoft can try all they like to put in a closed system OS but as they don't control the hardware (hardware from manufacturers that depend on x86 PCs being an open platform, at that) and never will, they can't stop new alternatives from cropping up nor stop a growth in popularity of already existing alternatives.
Most hardware is made with Windows in mind. Drivers are written with Windows in mind. The popularity of 64 bit Windows OS's is shaping hardware and drivers. Didn't they start with driver signing over 10 years ago with the launch of XP?

Am I way off base here, do hardware makers think more about Linux than Windows?
 

zehydra

New member
Oct 25, 2009
5,033
0
0
If Windows 8 locks down, Linux will suddenly look quite more attractive for Windows programmers.