Microsoft Details Windows Store
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th Dec 2011 22:24 UTC
Windows Yesterday, Microsoft finally unveiled all the details regarding its Windows Store, which will be the default way to distribute Metro applications on Windows 8. Most of the details are all pretty standard and mirror those of other stores, but there's one interesting twist that is sure to make a lot of you happy: Microsoft has made special exceptions for open source software.
E-mail Print r 2   · Read More · 37 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/jln
Thread beginning with comment 499380
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Awful
by WereCatf on Thu 8th Dec 2011 06:21 UTC in reply to "Awful"
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

for doing nothing but hosting a monopoly.


Uh. They are providing a single framework under which developers can easily share their applications, thereby furthering their chances of being noticed. You know, for many a small developer the primary issues are 1) To even be noticed by people and 2) Competing for time against similar applications/games. Also, for small developers even the savings in server bandwidth may be enough to justify using an app store because, well, bandwidth obviously isn't free and maintenance of server hardware costs time and money.

It's easy for you to complain when you're just a user, but start developing something and get your app or game to the market and you'll rather quickly realize the benefits of these things. Not to even mention the benefits of these kinds of things for the non-technically-inclined users who don't where to look for things when they need them or where it's safe to download from. Broaden your perspective.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[2]: Awful
by curio on Thu 8th Dec 2011 07:52 in reply to "RE: Awful"
curio Member since:
2010-05-03

Oh, so we're just the users? No, you're just a developer, and we're the users who are your potential income! You want users to give up their freedoms and privacy so you can have a convenient method of selling your wares? True, a single app store model makes your job easy. But, to do that you feel that end users should give up their privacy and autonomy so you won't have to work to make available your products as every other normal product has to to market their wares.
By your logic bubble gum brands should only be sold at one retailer (Walmart), and also only be made available, too, through credit card purchases and only with special (Walmart (tracked) candy, user accounts. That's total BS, and well you know it!
You have to consider how your distribution model affects your clients, long term.
Listing your wares through major geeks, Softpedia, etc, isn't that difficult and it's still very effective. But, in doing so you preserve the open market and it gives the end user some level of privacy, anatomy and it fosters competition. Paypal type services are your friends.
Download dot com is just an aberration in the general open competition model. It's nothing when compared to the monopoly cell providers foisting their hidden spyware on each and every user of their totally owned (effectively) and controlled cellphones. Or Microsoft and Apple forcing all apps to be bought through their fascist walled-gardens. Get your head out of your self serving hinder parts and start considering the socio-political ramifications of the infrastructure you're espousing.
Single-source ANYTHING (in a so-called democratic capitalist economy) eventually devolves into corporate Fascism.
Like we're not far enough along into that system now, even without your self serving one-stop shopping convenience stance. Your marketing convenience doesn't need to further add to our impending Jack-booted misery. My God, how self interest clouds people's judgment. Wake up!

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: Awful
by WereCatf on Thu 8th Dec 2011 08:57 in reply to "RE[2]: Awful"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

and we're the users who are your potential income!


Indeed. If users aren't aware of the application or game at all then there's also no income.

You want users to give up their freedoms and privacy so you can have a convenient method of selling your wares?


Complain to the appropriate party instead of the developer. Developers aren't responsible for maintaining the app store or its policies.

By your logic bubble gum brands should only be sold at one retailer (Walmart), and also only be made available, too, through credit card purchases and only with special (Walmart (tracked) candy, user accounts. That's total BS, and well you know it!


Oh, really? Where did I say anything even remotely like that? Please, do point me to a direct quote. Besides there is nothing stopping the developer from selling their applications or games on BOTH the app store and on their own website, but in your rage-infuced state you are blissfully ignorant of that fact.

Listing your wares through major geeks, Softpedia, etc, isn't that difficult and it's still very effective.


Perhaps, if your target audience is geeks.

So far I haven't met a single non-geek person who had ever even heard of Softpedia or similar services. Besides, how about e.g. Download.com bundling adware with software ( http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/06/014244/downloadcom-bundling... ), including F/OSS software? A geek would know something's wrong but a non-geek wouldn't. A generic app store that's handled even remotely responsibly protects the users from atleast this kind of stuff, something that you again decide to blissfully ignore.

it gives the end user some level of privacy, anatomy and it fosters competition.


I hope that's a typo.

Get your head out of your self serving hinder parts and start considering the socio-political ramifications of the infrastructure you're espousing.


Pot calling kettle black.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Awful
by Morgan on Sat 10th Dec 2011 11:09 in reply to "RE[2]: Awful"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Or Microsoft and Apple forcing all apps to be bought through their fascist walled-gardens.


I had to stop reading there before I burst out laughing. Fascist, really? So Apple and Microsoft are engaging in a geopolitical plot to ensure their ancestors' bloodlines rule the world, by use of military force and possibly genocide?

Jesus, but you need to check back into reality. Try "monopolistic", except that term really doesn't apply either. Both Apple and Microsoft are behind Android in installed units (an open source OS lest you forget). On their own phones, sure they have the advantage of the only officially supported application path, but it's really easy to avoid being "trapped" in it: Buy an Android phone! If you were truly that worried about it, you wouldn't own a WP7 or iOS device in the first place.

So you see, there's plenty of choice, and you should show Apple and Microsoft how you feel by exercising your freedom to purchase a device they don't have an iron grip on. After all, they aren't holding a gun to your head and making you buy their stuff. That would be...fascist. ;)


* Disclaimer: I now use a WP7 based phone, and I absolutely love it! I still don't like Microsoft, but between this phone and my Xbox 360 (obtained used and broken, and rebuilt by me) I'm really starting to think they know what they are doing this time around, though I'm still wary. Let's hope they continue on this F/OSS friendly path.

Reply Parent Score: 2