Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2012 23:34 UTC
Games I'm not 100% sure this is actually word-for-word, but alas. "In a presentation at Ubuntu Developer Summit currently going on in Denmark, Drew Bliss from Valve said that Linux is more viable than Windows 8 for gaming. Windows 8 ships with its own app store and it is moving away from an open platform model." I feel like a broken record by now but here we go again: keep an eye on Valve, even if you're not into games. This is the company pushing NVIDIA and AMD to improve their Linux support, with enough clout and name to actually get stuff done. Valve doesn't mess around.
Thread beginning with comment 540499
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Yes, I know Microsoft plan's for Win32 for the next five years and its not going anywhere. WinRT itself is built on top of Win32, as is the .NET Framework. Win32 is going no where. If there is one thing that Microsoft is consistent at, it is backwards compatibility on the x86 platform. But even on Windows RT, it is running Win32.

For at least the next ten years, Win32 is here to stay. Microsoft cannot get rid of Win32 even if they wanted to. The only way to get rid of it is for Windows 9 to break full compatibility of EVERYTHING out today, including Windows 8.

With the way WinRT is dependent on Win32, the staying power of Win32 is more obvious now than it has ever been.

Reply Parent Score: 4

galvanash Member since:

Yes, I know Microsoft plan's for Win32 for the next five years and its not going anywhere.

Of course its not going anywhere... You guys are missing the point. Microsoft doesn't need to kill win32 to start down this path...

Step one - "since the Windows Store has been such a success, MS is now gong to offer developers the opportunity to sell their win32 apps through our app store. The process is virtually the same as Metro, submit your app for approval and we will sign them for you!"

Nay, I don't want to do that. I like to distribute myself...

Step two - "from now on, in an effort to eliminate malware, you will be required to sign your win32 apps just as is already done for in store apps. We won't make you sell through the Windows Store, and we won't make you get approval, it will simply allow users to establish the identity of the publisher and scan the apps for malware and viruses. Getting an app signed will be easy and free, but you have to supply identity credentials. Unsigned apps will now start generating a warning in the desktop UI"

? huh... Thats kinda sucks. Oh well, not too terribly troublesome (I don't mind giving up anominity), and anyway, its free. Geez though, having to submit my app to MS just to get it signed is a pain. But getting rid of malware is a good goal, Im in.

Step three - "We have determined that the benefits of app signing (for security) are so great that in the next version of Windows unsigned apps will no longer run. We have implemented a whitelist of known-good legacy apps so that they will run going forward without signing, but going forward signing will be required. We highly recommend selling your app through the app store, as the process will be much easier..."

???? Now I HAVE to do it? This is starting to be a real PITA. Maybe I should just publish in the app store?

If it is not obvious, at this point it is game over. They have effectively closed off their platform - even though they havent really closed off the platform yet. All without breaking a single app (at least the ones they don't want to break). The infrastructure to do this is already in the OS - it would be trivial for them to pull this whenever they want to....

Just saying, the issue is not them "killing off" win32, it is closing it off.

Edited 2012-10-31 04:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

TM99 Member since:


This is really how Apple did it. And as the current market leader, Microsoft really wants to use that business model to stay viable in the next decade of computing.

Apple would never get rid of Classic. After all, there is tons of software code out there that would cost millions to upgrade or replace.

Apple will maintain Rosetta for as long as necessary to make the transition that none of us saw coming, right?

Apple would never stop the successful individual developer from creating the software real people want to use.

Apple is purchasing these companies so that they can make that software better for its users from audio/video software to PIM.

Apple is only doing the App Store for the convenience of both users and developers.

Apple is doing away with software DVD's to protect the environment. After all, everyone who uses a Mac has fast internet anyway, so downloading the next OS upgrade is surely no problem, right?

Apple is making important changes so that security is maintained for all users.

Apple is requiring a percentage of sales from every App sold so that the user experience is preserved and everything is uniform & easy for the consumer.

Microsoft will not do this exactly the way Apple did, however, any one who thinks they won't be getting ride of 'classic' on the Windows platform in the next 5 to 10 years, is just not paying attention to history or the computing industry as it has evolved today.

Reply Parent Score: 5

ansidotsys Member since:

I thought you weren't the "omg the sky is falling" type? Those fictional series of steps you just listed are the epitome of the paranoid quote you just said you were not.

When I was referencing Win32 backwards compatibility based on the APIs, that same dependency applies to the current distribution model of a Win32 application (On x86, the only ISA that matters for PC Gaming). In other words, Microsoft CAN'T close off Win32. Because again, the basis of what makes Windows so powerful are applications that exist today *AS THEY ARE NOW*. Closing off Win32 applications and requiring that they be installed via a Store is exactly the same as breaking Win32 API compatibility.

Why? Because by virtue of Windows rejecting an installer, it is breaking compatibility; there are thousands of applications whose installers will never be re-written. Like I mentioned earlier to Thom, this disaster scenario you are making up is making the following assumptions:

1. That Microsoft is willing to throw away all of their backwards compatibility that they worked so hard to preserve the past few decades.
2. That Microsoft even WANTS to get rid of the desktop.
3. That Microsoft even CAN get rid of the desktop.

Microsoft recognizes the strength they have with the desktop. It's why they are using it is as a selling point for Windows 8. Microsoft will not abandon the desktop until the desktop and laptop form factor themselves are dead. And the only way that will happen is if every x86 device on the planet dies and x86 is never again produced. But hey, that's another ridiculous assumption altogether.

Edited 2012-10-31 08:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1