Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 11th Mar 2012 22:21 UTC
Windows And thus, Microsoft bites itself in its behind with Metro. As you all surely know by now, the Metro environment in Windows 8, and its accompanying applications, need to follow a relatively strict set of rules and regulations, much like, say, applications on iOS. For one type of application, Metro has already proven to be too restrictive and limited: web browsers. Microsoft has had to define a separate application class [.docx] - aside from Metro and desktop applications - just to make third party web browsers possible for Windows 8.
Permalink for comment 510280
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I think
by ba1l on Mon 12th Mar 2012 04:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I think"
Member since:

I don't really consider the majority of them asinine. I am sympathetic for the JIT related APIs missing (regarding memory mapping Win32 APIs for which there is no equivalent), but for 99% of the other things, it's not something which can be engineered around.

Not being able to have a JIT (it's technically possible, but applications that do it would fail validation) is, by itself, enough to prevent any modern web browser from being a native Metro application.

That's not even considering everything else. It would require a massive effort to move everything over to WinRT. It wouldn't gain you anything. The new WinRT APIs are still accessible from a hybrid WinRT / Win32 application. The replacement APIs, like networking, don't actually offer any extra features over the existing Win32 APIs.

Besides, the architecture of Windows 8 requires that the Metro web browser be a hybrid application. That's just the way it works. The Metro web browser is determined by whatever the default desktop browser is. That's why, if you install Firefox on Windows 8 and set it as the default browser, the Metro version of IE 10 disappears.

Reply Parent Score: 5