To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
siki_miki,
I agree that WinRT programming should not be dependent on using the metro interface, and that such a limitation is entirely artificial. A "write once, run anywhere" philosophy has delivered tremendous benefit to users and devs alike over the years. There's no technical reason WinRT apps couldn't be run on a WIMP desktop with a keyboard and mouse and be just useful as running fullscreen in Metro. Users would benefit from being able to choose where they want to run their apps.
However MS doesn't want to risk having users who prefer to run their WinRT apps on the desktop rather than in Metro. So MS decided the best thing to do was to ban that possibility from the get-go. The ultimate goal is to rope all Win8 users into using metro and make everything else a jarring experience.
Edited 2012-03-13 18:08 UTC




Member since:
2006-01-17
MS should have built WinRT as a complete replacement for the aged and ugly 90's Win32. Just how Apple did it with OS X API's and supported legacy ones for a while (until the 64 bit transition, that is). That would ease development for everyone, regardless of language and whether it is managed or native code.
With WinRT being useful only on Metro, they want to push their troubled and flawed interface, but I can already imagine how this is going to work out with PC crowd - it won't, it will fail spectacularly. All that is another manager (Ballmer) decision that doesn't have much sense, except that MS is comfortable enough on the desktop to go ahead with it trying to make a foothold in the market.
The locked down Metro for Windows doesn't have any sense on PC's, at least without the non-default option to disable signing check. It will be jailbroken and most people will run that, or otherwise completely ignored by devs. Really no need to pretend to be Apple.