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

[geizr]

Doubt Microsoft will allow that, would they allow Steam on the 360?

This is the problem with getting rid of the desktop. Without the desktop, Steam couldn't run on Windows 8 at all. If Windows 9 or 10 had no desktop, where would Steam run?

The 360 is a completely different environment with a completely different business model from the Windows platform. For one thing, as far as I know, on the 360, you are specifically restricted to games and only a handful of business partnered service applications that are allowed for convenience and to provide added value to the device beyond being just a game console. This is allowed because the 360 is not a general purpose information processing platform. A PC, on the other hand, is such a general device and is not subject to such restrictions. You can't really compare the two, in my opinion. And the problem with what you seem to be implying is that it generalizes that NO application, whatsoever, will be capable of running on Windows 8. That just seems absurd. If any application can run at all and be visible in Windows 8, then Steam, being simply another application, will also be capable of such. So, again, I don't see a reason for the doomsaying other than vested interest.

 

[Epona]

If it does happen (Metro only) we all *****, moan and move to Linux then. I know that's what I'd do. It won't happen though as Microsoft couldn't get away with it legally, at least in the EU, and they have too many businesses who won't accept Metro.

EDIT I just wanted to add that while I don't think this will happen the slippery slope argument is actually the only one that makes sense and is likely what people like Notch are actually worried about.

Microsoft has never been afraid to break the law when it suited them, it being legally questionable won't stop them. Really though, if you can see the slippery slope and you know that Microsoft has cared little for legalities in the past, why would you wait until it happens to protest?

I will also move to Linux if I have to, I am hoping that enough people make noise and Microsoft doesn't go the route of console licensing for Windows.

 

[Epona]

Doubt Microsoft will allow that, would they allow Steam on the 360?

This is the problem with getting rid of the desktop. Without the desktop, Steam couldn't run on Windows 8 at all. If Windows 9 or 10 had no desktop, where would Steam run?

The 360 is a completely different environment with a completely different business model from the Windows platform. For one thing, as far as I know, on the 360, you are specifically restricted to games and only a handful of business partnered service applications that are allowed for convenience and to provide added value to the device beyond being just a game console. This is allowed because the 360 is not a general purpose information processing platform. A PC, on the other hand, is such a general device and is not subject to such restrictions. You can't really compare the two, in my opinion. And the problem with what you seem to be implying is that it generalizes that NO application, whatsoever, will be capable of running on Windows 8. That just seems absurd. If any application can run at all and be visible in Windows 8, then Steam, being simply another application, will also be capable of such. So, again, I don't see a reason for the doomsaying other than vested interest.

The Windows Store can be exactly like the 360 store. What kind of software you sell on it is not important. For example, you can buy apps n the 3DS eshop, how would the Windows Store be any different?

I am not saying you can't install anything on Windows 8, you can and I have but in the Metro environment you HAVE to license your software through Microsoft and sell it in the Windows Store. Isn't that true?

What I am saying is that this is the beginning of making the entire OS like that with the removal of the old desktop in Windows 9 or 10.

How can this be so difficult to understand?

Let me make it easier: The Windows Store is just like the 360 store or the PlayStation Store or the 3DS eshop and it operates under Metro. Metro and the old desktop running side by side is temporary.

 

[Turing '88]

Microsoft has never been afraid to break the law when it suited them, it being legally questionable won't stop them. Really though, if you can see the slippery slope and you know that Microsoft has cared little for legalities in the past, why would you wait until it happens to protest?

I will also move to Linux if I have to, I am hoping that enough people make noise and Microsoft doesn't go the route of console licensing for Windows.

I'm waiting because nothing I see suggests that to me Windows 9/10.../15 will be any more closed than 8 is.

The move to Metro was brave, smart and about fucking time after some laughable tablets and phones. Metro though is a clean and usable, it's had a fuckton of research done on it by some awesome UX experts and the whole Metro movement has been very un-Microsoft and more like Apple (in a good way).

All this is good because as much as I hate Apples closed ecosystem I'm (primarily) a Windows developer and I want Windows to do well. To me win 8 has the best of win 7 plus the app store that Microsoft needed.

Metro and the old desktop running side by side is temporary.

What makes you think that?

 

[Epona]

Doubt Microsoft will allow that, would they allow Steam on the 360?

This is the problem with getting rid of the desktop. Without the desktop, Steam couldn't run on Windows 8 at all. If Windows 9 or 10 had no desktop, where would Steam run?

Microsoft weren't even allowed to give their own browser preference over others in the EU, there's no way they'd be allowed to shut out all other software stores from Windows.

Even if they were able to get away with it, Microsoft are making a point of not alienating their old customers. Removing the traditional desktop would just guarantee people go to Linux. Only way they'd do that is if Surface became the next iPhone and made Microsoft enough money for them to forget about us PC users.

What they are doing with the Windows Store in Windows 8 = giving their own browser preference.

 

[Epona]

Microsoft has never been afraid to break the law when it suited them, it being legally questionable won't stop them. Really though, if you can see the slippery slope and you know that Microsoft has cared little for legalities in the past, why would you wait until it happens to protest?

I will also move to Linux if I have to, I am hoping that enough people make noise and Microsoft doesn't go the route of console licensing for Windows.

I'm waiting because nothing I see suggests that to me Windows 9/10.../15 will be any more closed than 8 is.

The move to Metro was brave, smart and about fucking time after some laughable tablets and phones. Metro though is a clean and usable, it's had a fuckton of research done on it by some awesome UX experts and the whole Metro movement has been very un-Microsoft and more like Apple (in a good way).

All this is good because as much as I hate Apples closed ecosystem I'm (primarily) a Windows developer and I want Windows to do well. To me win 8 has the best of win 7 plus the app store that Microsoft needed.

Metro and the old desktop running side by side is temporary.

What makes you think that?

I think that Microsoft want to recreate the success of the 360 with Windows. I think that's what GFWL was supposed to do but it failed so here we are with something more aggressive that doesn't have to compete with Steam on the same terms as GFWL did.

 

[Turing '88]

What they are doing with the Windows Store in Windows 8 = giving their own browser preference.

I agree, I think there's a good chance they will be forced to relax the rule on no content distribution software being allowed in their store.

 

[Epona]

What they are doing with the Windows Store in Windows 8 = giving their own browser preference.

I agree, I think there's a good chance they will be forced to relax the rule on no content distribution software being allowed in their store.

It makes my point though that they don't care about what's legal or not. They have the "do it and ask forgiveness" attitude as opposed to the "ask permission first" attitude.

 

[Turing '88]

It makes my point though that they don't care about what's legal or not. They have the "do it and ask forgiveness" attitude as opposed to the "ask permission first" attitude.

What point is that? That Microsoft are willing to do what they want?

I think that Microsoft want to recreate the success of the 360 with Windows. I think that's what GFWL was supposed to do but it failed so here we are with something more aggressive that doesn't have to compete with Steam on the same terms as GFWL did.

But where's the evidence for that? Microsoft themselves have said Metro is designed to help them in the tablet and phone markets, as well as simple PC users who want a streamlined and consistent experience.

I think Microsoft are fantasising about apples iPhone money much more than they are about getting a stranglehold on PC gaming. Microsoft are already a big player in gaming, I honestly don't think PC gaming is all that much to them and it's certainly nothing compared to what they will definitely lose from businesses if they dropped desktop support.

 

[Baldr]

Doubt Microsoft will allow that, would they allow Steam on the 360?

This is the problem with getting rid of the desktop. Without the desktop, Steam couldn't run on Windows 8 at all. If Windows 9 or 10 had no desktop, where would Steam run?

The 360 is a completely different environment with a completely different business model from the Windows platform. For one thing, as far as I know, on the 360, you are specifically restricted to games and only a handful of business partnered service applications that are allowed for convenience and to provide added value to the device beyond being just a game console. This is allowed because the 360 is not a general purpose information processing platform. A PC, on the other hand, is such a general device and is not subject to such restrictions. You can't really compare the two, in my opinion. And the problem with what you seem to be implying is that it generalizes that NO application, whatsoever, will be capable of running on Windows 8. That just seems absurd. If any application can run at all and be visible in Windows 8, then Steam, being simply another application, will also be capable of such. So, again, I don't see a reason for the doomsaying other than vested interest.

The Windows Store can be exactly like the 360 store. What kind of software you sell on it is not important. For example, you can buy apps n the 3DS eshop, how would the Windows Store be any different?

I am not saying you can't install anything on Windows 8, you can and I have but in the Metro environment you HAVE to license your software through Microsoft and sell it in the Windows Store. Isn't that true?

What I am saying is that this is the beginning of making the entire OS like that with the removal of the old desktop in Windows 9 or 10.

How can this be so difficult to understand?

Let me make it easier: The Windows Store is just like the 360 store or the PlayStation Store or the 3DS eshop and it operates under Metro. Metro and the old desktop running side by side is temporary.

I have the pro developer version of Win8. As far as I know I can create Metro application buttons for any application, but that may be a feature only to this version. Though I usually don't run anything from Metro, I pin shortcuts to applications/controls on my taskbar, which I did in Win7.

This is the best I can describe Win8: Windows7 with the start menu replaced with Metro which is linked to the Win Shop. Every program I have download works fines without errors or other problems. Windows 8 is not a closed environment from what I can tell.

 

[geizr]

The Windows Store can be exactly like the 360 store. What kind of software you sell on it is not important. For example, you can buy apps n the 3DS eshop, how would the Windows Store be any different?

"Can be" is not the same as "is". Steam would simply be another piece of software available in the store. So, you are not prevented from obtaining it or installing it. Further, they are not necessarily the same because they wouldn't necessarily carry the same restrictions. Again, using the Mac platform as an existing example, Mac App Store under Mac OS X is not exactly like the App Store on iOS. In the latter, there is no other way (outside of jail-breaking the device) to install applications to the device; however, in the former, there still exist avenues outside the store through which software can be installed. This means the former is acting as a convenience, while the latter is acting as a requirement. The 360 and 3DS shop also operate in a restricted manner, although arguably less so than the iOS App Store since you can obtain games (which count as software) outside those shops, whereas you can not on any iOS device. However, they are a requirement for all games not sold through the traditional channel of a disc or cartridge to be read by the device, and mostly likely a definitely requirement for non-gaming software.

I am not saying you can't install anything on Windows 8, you can and I have but in the Metro environment you HAVE to license your software through Microsoft and sell it in the Windows Store. Isn't that true?

I don't know. Is it? This gets at the heart of my original question. If one is not restricted to the Windows Store for installing software on Windows 8, then, as far as I can see, there is not a problem. Even with the idea of applications running in Metro being required to be installed from the store, that does not necessarily preclude applications that do not use the Metro interface from installing outside the Window Store. Now, if you said all applications on Windows 8 must use the Metro interface and all Metro interface applications must be installed via the Windows Store, then that is definitely anti-competive to other store-fronts like Steam. But, if this is not strictly the case, then I'm forced back to this being attempts by vested interests to assassinate potential competition before it develops.

What I am saying is that this is the beginning of making the entire OS like that with the removal of the old desktop in Windows 9 or 10.

How can this be so difficult to understand?

I'm sorry, but this statement sounds purely speculative and, as such, can not be upheld as a basis for argument.

Let me make it easier: The Windows Store is just like the 360 store or the PlayStation Store or the 3DS eshop and it operates under Metro. Metro and the old desktop running side by side is temporary.

Again, the conclusion here sounds purely speculative and does not follow from the preceding statement. Further, as I argued above, unless there is no other way to install software except through it, the Windows Store is not operating exactly like the other stores. So, it's not quite the same, in my opinion.

 

[geizr]

What they are doing with the Windows Store in Windows 8 = giving their own browser preference.

I agree, I think there's a good chance they will be forced to relax the rule on no content distribution software being allowed in their store.

It makes my point though that they don't care about what's legal or not. They have the "do it and ask forgiveness" attitude as opposed to the "ask permission first" attitude.

Every company does that. Microsoft is no different.

EDIT: In fact, people, in general, tend to do that. Hell, if you have kids, THEY tend to do that all the time!

 

[SnowyGamester]

I've used it and Notch, Blizzard, and Valve all have had the chance to use it.

It flat out sucks as a Desktop OS. It's designed for Touch Screen Tables and may work there, but not on my desktop.

Metro UI sucks because it forces far too many applications into full screen mode. As a developer I typically have a dozen or so apps running. If my Email client insists on being FULL SCREEN when ever it is open I cant multitask.

The Start Menu is being replaced because over the last 4 versions of windows they have made the Start Menu unusable by normal people. They end up just pinning all their apps to the task bar and launch that way completely bypassing the start menu. Even advanced users don't use it and instead opt for the quick search option before trying to navigate the squashed in unreadable start menu. And all that was done because some users complained that the old start menu was taking up the entire screen. They've been on the clear path of making the system unusable, and have just finally reached the tipping point.

It only forces Metro apps to be full screen, not using any Metro apps I haven't run into that problem. And the classic start menu hasn't changed much at all over the past few versions, only getting a scroll bar and having folders expand differently. Regardless, the Metro interface still provides a start menu analogue by hitting right click->all apps that is bigger and easier to read which addresses one of your main complaints, and for those who don't keep their start menu shortcuts under control there is still a search function one click away. It took a few minutes to get rid of all the default pinned apps and put everything I use on the home page but it's stopped me using the start menu, quick launch and taskbar pinning altogether (except having my browser pinned).

 

[Treblaine]

Well who else would you consider PC gaming heavyweights?

Sid Meier and mabey Will Wright?

Those are the ones i can think of just off my head.

Delta said that?

I'm not sure about Will Wright, Sim city is so uber casual you might as well bring in Zynga developers.

Sid Meier. Yes, but he's always been focused on his craft an never had much part in industry machinations.

 

[faefrost]

Everyone is missing part of the core to what Notch and Gabe Newell and Blizzard have been saying. The threat to them isn't simply that MS may elect to close off the OS into an Apple style App store. The threat is MS doesn't make the PC hardware. But a lot of what they are doing with Windows 8 is a direct challenge to their hardware manufacturers, plus it undercuts their bottom ,ine. There are predictions that PC makers may begin to flee the industry. The Microsoft 'Surface" Tablet has really pissed off a lot of PC makers. It is MS using it's power to directly compete with them. The same with the expected Microsoft branded phones. And if the hardware manufacturers leave the industry or abandon MS, that kills much of the tech innovation that drives Windows gaming.

 

[geizr]

Okay, seeing some of the responses from people who have ACTUALLY seriously used the OS, it sounds like Gabe and Notch are just blowing smoke out of their asses. They either have a vested interest against the Windows Store (in which case, you have to hold anything they say on the matter suspect), or they just personally don't like Windows 8 and are trying to throw their weight around against it. In either case, to me, this is sounding like just another tech-tempest in a thimble such to generate a little web-traffic and notoriety for a few people, and we should all just take it for what it is and move on with life as normal.

 

[Fbuh]

I thought the idea of a PC system was to create a system in which 3rd party developers can basically create any program they want? I always assumed that that was the difference between a Mac or a PC: one is used for data crunching/programming, whereas the other is used for arts/entertainment. If tehy make them similar and restrictive, what's the point? The only good thing is that it gives the pportunity for another company to create a platform that could become a replacement programming system, thus leading to more competition berween businesses.

 

[Turing '88]

Everyone is missing part of the core to what Notch and Gabe Newell and Blizzard have been saying. The threat to them isn't simply that MS may elect to close off the OS into an Apple style App store. The threat is MS doesn't make the PC hardware. But a lot of what they are doing with Windows 8 is a direct challenge to their hardware manufacturers, plus it undercuts their bottom ,ine. There are predictions that PC makers may begin to flee the industry. The Microsoft 'Surface" Tablet has really pissed off a lot of PC makers. It is MS using it's power to directly compete with them. The same with the expected Microsoft branded phones. And if the hardware manufacturers leave the industry or abandon MS, that kills much of the tech innovation that drives Windows gaming.

Yeah, but Microsoft shouldn't just not make good products out of fear of pissing off OEMs. I can see how surface will likely cannibalise some ultrabook sales if it's successful but... so what is my response. What's out there now isn't working!

 

[cahtush]

Delta said that?

No, i just get confused by the new forum layout. The old one had the quote on the lower left, so now i accidentally click the quote for the post below.

 

[thesilentman]

So... it just occurs to me...

After reading this thread, can someone explain to me exactly WHY Windows 8 is(n't) the coming of the OS devil? Because... I'm really confused here. All I keep seeing from this is back and forth arguments about Metro (which lost me) and praising/bashing of Notch and other contemporaries listed as voicing their complaints about Windows 8.

Microsoft is taking Apple's approach by closing up. The only reason that this works for Apple as EVERYTHING is closed (besides software development). Microsoft, on the other hand, is making it's own Store. Yeah Microsoft, explain to all the PC builders how forcing a Store on different hardware is going to make sense. Especially after forcing games on there.

For us gamers, we're not interested in Microsoft in trying to win PC gamers. They're failing. See Games for Windows Live.

That is the simplest way I could say it.