Windows 8 another Vista?

[icerat]

Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha

Here's a game dev's view on Windows 8. The small devs I know are very unhappy with it, but I have no idea what they are talking about .

They don't appear to know either. This key quote from the article is false -

All those people who make free apps for Windows and distribute them on their websites won't be able to any more. They'll only be able to provide them via the Windows 8 store, and to do that, they'll have to get them 'Windows 8 Certified'.

This is only true for Windows RT, not Windows 8

[El Greco]

The way I see it, the greatest feature of Windows 8 is the unified user interface. I would consider buying a device that would actually take advantage of that feature in a meaningful way; a device that would be powerful enough to function as a desktop but also small enough for a touch screen to have a reason to exist. Something small enough that I could take with me anywhere and also function as a mobile phone, but which I could also connect to a monitor and a keyboard for use at home. 5-6" would be ideal for that. This way I would have almost 100% compatibility with my Windows XP/7 applications but also have installed several application for use when on the move. So I'd like very much a 5-6" device with Windows 8 on it. Instead, I get the losers that are destined to be Windows Phone and Windows RT and, as far as I know, no device smaller than 10" with Windows 8 on it.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by icerat

They don't appear to know either. This key quote from the article is false -

All those people who make free apps for Windows and distribute them on their websites won't be able to any more. They'll only be able to provide them via the Windows 8 store, and to do that, they'll have to get them 'Windows 8 Certified'.

This is only true for Windows RT, not Windows 8

Are you sure? They're specifically talking about tiled apps in the Metro interface, based on information from Alen Ladavac. Are you saying that Croteam are either misinformed or lying?

I'm far from an expert, but a quick google for Metro apps finds sites which are telling you ways to hack Windows 8 so that you can download Metro apps without using the Windows store.

[OnlyTellsTruths]

Originally Posted by icerat

This is only true for Windows RT, not Windows 8

I know that is true for normal Windows programs, but are you sure that is the case with Metro apps specifically?

[icerat]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Are you sure? They're specifically talking about tiled apps in the Metro interface, based on information from Alen Ladavac. Are you saying that Croteam are either misinformed or lying?

I'm far from an expert, but a quick google for Metro apps finds sites which are telling you ways to hack Windows 8 so that you can download Metro apps without using the Windows store.

Originally Posted by OnlyTellsTruths

I know that is true for normal Windows programs, but are you sure that is the case with Metro apps specifically?

The quote I cited says -

"All those people who make free apps for Windows and distribute them on their websites won't be able to any more"

Prior to Windows 8 you couldn't install metro apps at all, so if your interpration is correct who were "all those people" distributing metro apps prior to Windows 8? Sorry, but they didn't exist.

Now you can install metro apps, but they've got to be certified.

"all those people" is clearly referring to people who used to distribute non-metro apps, and you can still install any non-metro apps you want, from any website you want - it hasn't changed at all.

[KoihimeNakamura]

Originally Posted by icerat

The quote I cited says -

"All those people who make free apps for Windows and distribute them on their websites won't be able to any more"

Prior to Windows 8 you couldn't install metro apps at all, so if your interpration is correct who were "all those people" distributing metro apps prior to Windows 8? Sorry, but they didn't exist.

Now you can install metro apps, but they've got to be certified.

"all those people" is clearly referring to people who used to distribute non-metro apps, and you can still install any non-metro apps you want, from any website you want - it hasn't changed at all.

That is purposely missing the point of the linked article.

[icerat]

Originally Posted by KoihimeNakamura

That is purposely missing the point of the linked article.

How? The entire premise of the article is based on the belief that you have to publish windows 8 apps through the windows store, and that is patently false.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by icerat

How? The entire premise of the article is based on the belief that you have to publish windows 8 apps through the windows store, and that is patently false.

Only if you quotemine. As parts of the article you didn't quote say:

Quote:

One cannot release a tiled UI application by any other means, but only through Windows Store!

[...]

A large number of developers have expressed their concern with possibility that, probably in Windows 9 or something like that, the ability to get even desktop apps in any other way than through Windows app store may very well be removed.

The part you quoted, in the context of the immediately preceding quotes, is talking about the future of the OS.

Now, is there anything you disagree with in that?

[icerat]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Now, is there anything you disagree with in that?

The "tiled" part of the UI is the start screen, and while you can't use the "live tile" aspect, shortcuts to desktop apps install just fine.

The second part is a quote from someone else, citing yet other people, talking about some future OS, not Windows 8 -

A large number of developers have expressed their concern with possibility that, probably in Windows 9 or something like that, the ability to get even desktop apps in any other way than through Windows app store may very well be removed.

The author of the actual article in question went on to say -

All those people who make free apps for Windows and distribute them on their websites won't be able to any more. They'll only be able to provide them via the Windows 8 store, and to do that, they'll have to get them 'Windows 8 Certified'.

See the difference?

Don't support windows 8 because somewhere down the track in some version, sometime, maybe, Microsoft might stop supporting non-Store installs?

I don't recall, was there a campaign to stop developing for the Mac when iOS, and latter Mac App store was released?

The windows desktop is not going away any time soon.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by icerat

The "tiled" part of the UI is the start screen, and while you can't use the "live tile" aspect, shortcuts to desktop apps install just fine.

Yes.

Quote:

The second part is a quote from someone else, citing yet other people, talking about some future OS, not Windows 8 -

A large number of developers have expressed their concern with possibility that, probably in Windows 9 or something like that, the ability to get even desktop apps in any other way than through Windows app store may very well be removed.

The author of the actual article in question went on to say -

All those people who make free apps for Windows and distribute them on their websites won't be able to any more. They'll only be able to provide them via the Windows 8 store, and to do that, they'll have to get them 'Windows 8 Certified'.

Well, sure, you can quibble over semantics, if you like. Or you could address the point being made.

Quote:

Don't support windows 8 because somewhere down the track in some version, sometime, maybe, Microsoft might stop supporting non-Store installs?

Do you not think that's a legitimate concern? If not, why not?

Quote:

I don't recall, was there a campaign to stop developing for the Mac when iOS, and latter Mac App store was released?

I have no idea. Do you think only being able to get applications from one place is a good idea?

Quote:

The windows desktop is not going away any time soon.

Can you please quote where I said it was?

[icerat]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Well, sure, you can quibble over semantics, if you like. Or you could address the point being made.

What point? That developers should boycott Microsoft cause they might do something?

Quote:

Do you not think that's a legitimate concern? If not, why not?

First of all, I think it's fundamentally unethical to boycott something because you think something might happen, especially when there's no evidence to suggest it will and plenty to suggest it won't, at least not any time soon. How about everyone start boycotting Google because they might force you to install chrome OS to use google search?

Secondly, it would be one of the dumbest decisions in the history of business, and utterly unlike Microsoft, which has succeeded in part because they've maintained a base level of backward compatibility.

The idea that Microsoft is suddenly going to make all windows software to date unusable any time in the near future is patently absurd.

It's not going to happen.

Quote:

I have no idea. Do you think only being able to get applications from one place is a good idea?

Overall, yes I do. It's worked fine for iOS and Windows phone. The android path of having an advaned option to install other packages is a path too.

It's not going to happen for the Windows desktop though, there's far far too large an existing ecosystem.

Quote:

Can you please quote where I said it was?

This discussion is predicated on the idea that windows desktop is disappearing. Unless you're suggesting that

(a) the windows store requirements will suddenly broaden to include desktop apps
(b) in the near future millions of existing apps will no longer be installable on windows desktops

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by icerat

What point? That developers should boycott Microsoft cause they might do something?

Yeah, I'm not sure what action we're supposed to take. Right now I'm trying to install NVIDIA drivers in Ubuntu... not something for the general consumer. Also, our favourite games right now are often incompatible with linux, even using wine. What are we supposed to do? Embrace linux over a hypothetical?

Quote:

Secondly, it would be one of the dumbest decisions in the history of business, and utterly unlike Microsoft, which has succeeded in part because they've maintained a base level of backward compatibility.

Ballmer may try, but that may be the thing that finally gets the board to throw him out. Right now, backward compatibility is the only competitive advantage MS has! For most people, app stores are 'good enough.' Break backward compatibility too badly, and why would someone go with MS's app store over Apple's?

Quote:

Overall, yes I do. It's worked fine for iOS and Windows phone. The android path of having an advaned option to install other packages is a path too.

There's the problem. It's 'good enough.' The essential point of the article, though, regards the walled garden. Once you give control of the content to the gardner, they can do as they wish. You only need to google Apple and Censorship to get an idea of the potential problems.

Quote:

(a) the windows store requirements will suddenly broaden to include desktop apps
(b) in the near future millions of existing apps will no longer be installable on windows desktops

You have to be careful, though. Don't put it past any mature business to make a one-off, incredibly stupid, decision that winds up affecting the bottom line.

I don't like the situation we're in. MS doesn't like their situation, either. I'm worried they're not doing the right thing.

However, there's not a darned thing I can, or am going to, do about it in the short term, Ubuntu aside.

[Charlie Wilkes]

Bad news for MS and Windows 8...

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wir...5#.UWYdiaK2Yuc

"Unfortunately, it seems clear that the Windows 8 launch not only didn't provide a positive boost to the PC market, but appears to have slowed the market," IDC Vice President Bob O'Donnell said.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

Bad news for MS and Windows 8...

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wir...5#.UWYdiaK2Yuc

"Unfortunately, it seems clear that the Windows 8 launch not only didn't provide a positive boost to the PC market, but appears to have slowed the market," IDC Vice President Bob O'Donnell said.

I'm not so sure. That article seems to gloss over a couple of things. The sales figures used don't include tablet or hybrid tablet/laptop devices, which Win8 is designed for. From MS's point of view, so what if the desktop market is contracting? What's important to them is how many of the newer devices they can get their software on to. Also, the desktop sales decline started well before Win8's release, yet the article seems to want to pin it on 8. How much of the decline in PC sales can be attributed to people just postponing replacing an older PC in order to check out one of the new toys, rather than abandoning the desktop platform altogether? It's still plausible that the figures cited in that article could actually be good news to MS.

[Charlie Wilkes]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I'm not so sure. That article seems to gloss over a couple of things. The sales figures used don't include tablet or hybrid tablet/laptop devices, which Win8 is designed for. From MS's point of view, so what if the desktop market is contracting? What's important to them is how many of the newer devices they can get their software on to. Also, the desktop sales decline started well before Win8's release, yet the article seems to want to pin it on 8. How much of the decline in PC sales can be attributed to people just postponing replacing an older PC in order to check out one of the new toys, rather than abandoning the desktop platform altogether? It's still plausible that the figures cited in that article could actually be good news to MS.

Certainly that is how MS has tried to spin it. And you're right - what counts from here on out is how much traction they get with tablets and phones. They're starting with a small market share. I doubt they have the agility to overcome that or compete effectively. But the real problem is that there's simply no headroom for a Windows license in a $200 tablet.

[quadraginta]

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

Certainly that is how MS has tried to spin it.

<snip>

Not only MS, it would seem. From your link.

Quote:

No matter how things are parsed, the PC market is in the worst shape since IBM Corp. released a desktop machine in 1981. PC sales have now fallen from their year-ago levels in four consecutive quarters, a slide that has been accelerating even amid signs that the overall economy is getting healthier.

PCs are going out of style because they typically cost more than smartphones and tablets, and aren't as convenient to use. Most PCs sell for $500 to $1,500 while the initial out-of-pocket expense for a smartphone runs as low as $99 while an array of tablets sell for $200 to $300.

From the same link. A few salient words from the ineffable Steve Jobs.

Quote:

Apple's late CEO Steve Jobs, whose company propelled the mobile computing revolution with the 2007 release of the iPhone, declared that the world was entering a "post-PC era " shortly after the iPad came out three years ago.


In a June 2010 appearance at a technology conference, Jobs likened challenges facing the PC industry to what happened to trucks in the U.S. decades ago as a shift away from farming caused more people to move into cities where they wanted to drive cars instead.
"I think PCs are going to be like trucks," Jobs predicted at the time. "Less people will need them."

I have yet to be convinced that MS has done anything singularly mistaken. It looks more to me like they are working both sides of the street.

Whether or not they are doing it well remains to be seen, but it is way too soon to label them as down for the count. Or even staggering a little.

[Charlie Wilkes]

Originally Posted by quadraginta

I have yet to be convinced that MS has done anything singularly mistaken. It looks more to me like they are working both sides of the street.

Whether or not they are doing it well remains to be seen, but it is way too soon to label them as down for the count. Or even staggering a little.

They'll bumble along, but their best days are past unless they come up with something that generates real interest.

I agree that the bad quarter for PC sales probably has far more to do with a secular move toward tablets and phones. But the core PC market remains, and it's not exactly fired up about Windows 8.

It will be interesting to see if Ballmer manages to keep his job. This seems like a great time for him to go sail his yacht and let someone else take over.

[TheL8Elvis]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I'm not so sure. That article seems to gloss over a couple of things. The sales figures used don't include tablet or hybrid tablet/laptop devices, which Win8 is designed for. From MS's point of view, so what if the desktop market is contracting? What's important to them is how many of the newer devices they can get their software on to. Also, the desktop sales decline started well before Win8's release, yet the article seems to want to pin it on 8. How much of the decline in PC sales can be attributed to people just postponing replacing an older PC in order to check out one of the new toys, rather than abandoning the desktop platform altogether? It's still plausible that the figures cited in that article could actually be good news to MS.

As pointed out in a different article - Windows 8 runs on the same hardware as windows 7, which basically runs on the same hardware as vista. So windows 8 doesn't require the same commitment to new hardware as the previous 2 upgrades likely did for most people.

As to tablet/hybrid devices:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...edictions.html
Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) has sold about 1.5 million Surface devices, people with knowledge of the company’s sales said, a slow start in its bid to crack the fast-growing tablet market to make up for slumping personal-computer demand.

Microsoft has sold little more than a million of the Surface RT version and about 400,000 Surface Pros since their debuts, according to three people, who asked not to be named because sales haven’t yet been made public. The company had ordered about 3 million Surface RTs, they said. Brent Thill, an analyst at UBS AG, had initially projected that Microsoft would sell 2 million Surface RT devices in the December quarter alone.

And just for good measure:
http://wmpoweruser.com/how-many-wind...ld-in-q1-2013/

4) According to Statcounter, worldwide Windows Phone grew from 0.4% to 1.1% market share between Q1 2012 and Q1 2013

At least they didn't lose share :-O

And for some numbers and the long term trend:
http://www.asymco.com/2012/07/04/the...ows-advantage/

[Aepervius]

Originally Posted by icerat

First of all, I think it's fundamentally unethical to boycott something because you think something might happen, especially when there's no evidence to suggest it will and plenty to suggest it won't, at least not any time soon.

On the contrary mon chere, it makes a lot of sense when you take into account the monopoly and predatory practice of MS in past 2 decades.

Better protest now to prevent the future, rather than react too late.

Quote:

How about everyone start boycotting Google because they might force you to install chrome OS to use google search?

Google does not have an history of changing their code to make other application fails intentionally, like MS did.

Quote:

Secondly, it would be one of the dumbest decisions in the history of business, and utterly unlike Microsoft, which has succeeded in part because they've maintained a base level of backward compatibility.

The idea that Microsoft is suddenly going to make all windows software to date unusable any time in the near future is patently absurd.

It's not going to happen.



Overall, yes I do. It's worked fine for iOS and Windows phone. The android path of having an advaned option to install other packages is a path too.

It's not going to happen for the Windows desktop though, there's far far too large an existing ecosystem.



This discussion is predicated on the idea that windows desktop is disappearing. Unless you're suggesting that

(a) the windows store requirements will suddenly broaden to include desktop apps
(b) in the near future millions of existing apps will no longer be installable on windows desktops

It is going to happen if they can maintain a walled garden a la apple, letting the tiled/apps part of the system ONLY works with MS certification, and only allowing standard desktop application to be open.

[Merko]

Certainly seems like my predictions from earlier in the thread are coming true. MS are supposed to increase sales when they release a new version. Dwindling sales are not a good sign indeed. And for those grasping at straws: perhaps bother checking the actual sales of tablets before fantasizing about how they might have made up for lost PC sales? Hint: those sales are absolutely abysmal.

[quadraginta]

Originally Posted by Aepervius

<snip>

It is going to happen if they can maintain a walled garden a la apple, letting the tiled/apps part of the system ONLY works with MS certification, and only allowing standard desktop application to be open.

You seem to be saying that developers are afraid MS is going to start behaving like Apple.

[dudalb]

Rumors are now flying that Microsoft will release the next version of Windows late this year, and it will have an option for the traditional start button and desktop. Sort of an admission that their idea that making a desktop just like a table/mobile device was not a huge sucess.
Agreed that Microsoft is on the verge of taking a nosedive the way that Apple did in the late 80's.

[icerat]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Rumors are now flying that Microsoft will release the next version of Windows late this year, and it will have an option for the traditional start button and desktop. Sort of an admission that their idea that making a desktop just like a table/mobile device was not a huge sucess.

??? They didn't make the desktop just like a tablet/mobile device.

I don't want the start button back, but what I'd like is -

1. option to set defaults to desktop programs (eg windows media player vs music player), includes login to desktop
2. more consistent access to settings, right now it's all over the place
3. live tiles on the desktop task bar

[Charlie Wilkes]

Interesting article...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57581500-92/android-notebooks-yep-intel-says-and-theyll-only-cost-$200/

Intel CEO Paul Otellini last week said touchscreen PCs could debut at prices as low as $200 in the coming months. At the time, he didn't specify what operating system those products would run.

But Dadi Perlmutter, Intel executive vice president and chief product officer, told CNET on Wednesday that notebooks priced at the $200 level will predominantly be Android products running on Intel's Atom mobile processor. Whether Windows 8 PCs hit that price largely depends on Microsoft, he said.

"We have a good technology that enables a very cost-effective price point," Perlmutter said. The price of Windows 8 laptops "depends on how Microsoft prices Windows 8. It may be a slightly higher price point."

If this takes off, developers will support it, and people will no longer pay for a Windows license.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by icerat

??? They didn't make the desktop just like a tablet/mobile device.

I don't want the start button back, but what I'd like is -

1. option to set defaults to desktop programs (eg windows media player vs music player), includes login to desktop
2. more consistent access to settings, right now it's all over the place
3. live tiles on the desktop task bar

You seem to be in a minority in your defence of the Windows 8 Interface.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Wowbagger

Do you think Android treats its users like babies?

Do you think Ubuntu Linux treats its users like babies?

Do you think iOS treats its users like babies...okay that might be a bad example, actually....

Do you think Windows 7 treated its users like babies?

Do you think it just might be possible to design an OS that can be world class operational on every platform it is expected to be installed onto, without necessarily treating its users like babies?!

The vast majority of users of any OS are casual users (Linux might be the exception) who just want to turn on their computers and use them, and are not interested in looking under the hood or jumping through a lot of hoops to get their OS to work.
One of the problems that is eternal is that the people who design software often forget this,and think the average user is a geek who loves to tinker and tweak their software. Huge mistake.

[Charlie Wilkes]

Originally Posted by dudalb

The vast majority of users of any OS are casual users (Linux might be the exception) who just want to turn on their computers and use them, and are not interested in looking under the hood or jumping through a lot of hoops to get their OS to work.
One of the problems that is eternal is that the people who design software often forget this,and think the average user is a geek who loves to tinker and tweak their software. Huge mistake.

A majority will probably be better served with Android tablets than Windows computers.

I don't like to tinker and tweak Avisynth scripts, but sometimes I have to, and I don't think Android supports that just yet. So, I use Windows. MS takes that for granted, and my needs take second place behind their frantic bid to attract users who are better off with Android.

[Wowbagger]

Originally Posted by dudalb

The vast majority of users of any OS are casual users (Linux might be the exception) who just want to turn on their computers and use them, and are not interested in looking under the hood or jumping through a lot of hoops to get their OS to work.
One of the problems that is eternal is that the people who design software often forget this,and think the average user is a geek who loves to tinker and tweak their software. Huge mistake.

You are assuming there is a dichotomy here: Either software must be for babies or it must be for geeks.

A good operating system could deliver an interface that is good for BOTH!

Windows 7, while not being perfect, was much better for both groups of users, at the same time, than Windows 8 is for either of them.

Well, maybe someone who literally only uses one, single app at a time would find no fault in Windows 8. But, the minute anyone does anything involving multi-tasking, they find themselves in a sub-optimal experience.

One can also design software for average users without being condescending to them. And, I think that's a significant factor with Windows 8, although the effect is subtle: It feels like you are being treated like a baby, complete with baby-blocks for the main menu screen!

Apple's OSes (iOS and MacOS) are great for beginners and average users, without the feeling that they are being treated like babies.

[GodMark2]

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

I don't like to tinker and tweak Avisynth scripts, but sometimes I have to, and I don't think Android supports that just yet.

They are working on AvxSynth, but most of us use ffmpeg or Avidemux for that sort of thing.

[Charlie Wilkes]

Originally Posted by GodMark2

They are working on AvxSynth, but most of us use ffmpeg or Avidemux for that sort of thing.

Is there a good comb filter for ffmpeg, something as good as QTGMC? Maybe there is and I just don't know about it.

I use a variety of FOSS, including Avidemux and ffmpeg as well as Avisynth/VirtualDub. I could get some of that functionality on Linux, but not all of it, and I'm not sure what I would use as an NLE. That is really what keeps me on Windows more than anything - the lack of a good (and stable) NLE for Linux. I'm waiting patiently for Lightworks. If they ever deliver their Linux port, and it's good, my days as an MS customer may draw to a close.

[quadraginta]

Originally Posted by HonoluluFilly

<snip>

Apple's OS "all grandmas on board" presentation.