4 ms·

At the end of the day, Win10 is a mobile OS with some legacy desktop support. I think once we see it for what it is, we'll be more comfortable with it. Does thi

At the end of the day, Win10 is a mobile OS with some legacy desktop support. I think once we see it for what it is, we'll be more comfortable with it. Does this guy from Epic have a problem with publishing these games to iphone/ipad? The game changed pretty quickly and Nadella has no interest in re-creating Win7 or going back to Desktop OS's and open-ish platforms. This is the new reality for MS, good or bad. Personally, I'm not happy with it, but I think people should be aware of what it means to upgrade to Win10 and be part of the modern MS ecosystem. edit: really 4 downvotes? Care to tell me what is wrong in my comment. Are you guys really defending Win10 and Nadella here? This is his vision - iOS-like system on the desktop and that 30% app revenue. Being cognizant of that should be a positive.

zmmmmm 11y ago
Why should we be more comfortable because it's a mobile OS? I don't really understand why that suddenly makes locked down proprietary systems OK? I do agree, the time to complain about this was 7 years ago when Apple did it (as I did at the time). The horse has now long bolted and we might as well consign ourselves to living in a world where making money from software consists of assigning 30% of revenue to a rent seeking landlord. We can expect the opportunities to do otherwise to narrow down to zero over the next 10 years. It's not good, but it's a decision everyone made collectively 7 years ago while drooling over iPads and iPhones.
- mdasher 11y ago
  Microsoft isn't rent-seeking with Windows 10. They are attempting to build a secure and trusted platform, just like Apple did with iOS. That platform and the store for the platform are valuable. I applaud them for moving in this direction and applaud them some more for doing it without sacrificing the openness of Win32 on the PC (at least for now).
  - makomk 11y ago
    The Windows Store has been stuffed full of fake apps trading off the names of other, genuine big-name apps with various levels of malicious content for years. It's definitely rent-seeking, and not in any way a "secure and trusted platform".
    - mdasher 11y ago
      Your proving my point. When the store was first launched it did have a problem with misleading apps. But today those problems are far less. MS tweaked their submission policies and tossed the misleading app. That shows continued work on the trust and security of the store, a value add, and thus not rent-seeking.
  - zmmmmm 11y ago
    > They are attempting to build a secure and trusted platform, They could do that in a lot of ways without creating a locked down OS with all software distribution centralised through microsoft with a mandatory fixed cut. They just happened to choose the way that eventually puts them in the position to take a 30% slice out of the entire software industry revenue. It's rent seeking.
yakcyll 11y ago
I think it's not hard to argue that Microsoft is, in many ways, exploiting people's lack of awareness about their shift towards OS-as-a-service model and the consequences of it, thus building a user base that either does not care or feels stuck to the platform. What is argued to be wrong about this move is that MS is essentially locking out developers from making high quality games (and I mean, see Street Fighter V's PC launch reactions to realize what it means for a developer to forgo basic PC features such as custom controller configuration) unless they comply with their terms of service. Essentially, they are saying: either play by our rules and get access to our user base or deal with issues on your own, but not on our system (which, mind you, for Windows is still a new notion - all previous releases were essentially products, where if you bought one, you would've been exposed to certain vulnerabilities they didn't manage to fix before release if you decided to never contact them anymore about it, but you'd be in control at all times; this is not the case anymore). For you it might be OK, or even normal, that they do this - just evolution - but believe me, it is Not OK, it is Not Normal and it should never be either.

zmmmmm 11y ago

Why should we be more comfortable because it's a mobile OS? I don't really understand why that suddenly makes locked down proprietary systems OK? I do agree, the time to complain about this was 7 years ago when Apple did it (as I did at the time). The horse has now long bolted and we might as well consign ourselves to living in a world where making money from software consists of assigning 30% of revenue to a rent seeking landlord. We can expect the opportunities to do otherwise to narrow down to zero over the next 10 years. It's not good, but it's a decision everyone made collectively 7 years ago while drooling over iPads and iPhones.

mdasher 11y ago
Microsoft isn't rent-seeking with Windows 10. They are attempting to build a secure and trusted platform, just like Apple did with iOS. That platform and the store for the platform are valuable. I applaud them for moving in this direction and applaud them some more for doing it without sacrificing the openness of Win32 on the PC (at least for now).
- makomk 11y ago
  The Windows Store has been stuffed full of fake apps trading off the names of other, genuine big-name apps with various levels of malicious content for years. It's definitely rent-seeking, and not in any way a "secure and trusted platform".
  - mdasher 11y ago
    Your proving my point. When the store was first launched it did have a problem with misleading apps. But today those problems are far less. MS tweaked their submission policies and tossed the misleading app. That shows continued work on the trust and security of the store, a value add, and thus not rent-seeking.
- zmmmmm 11y ago
  > They are attempting to build a secure and trusted platform, They could do that in a lot of ways without creating a locked down OS with all software distribution centralised through microsoft with a mandatory fixed cut. They just happened to choose the way that eventually puts them in the position to take a 30% slice out of the entire software industry revenue. It's rent seeking.

yakcyll 11y ago

I think it's not hard to argue that Microsoft is, in many ways, exploiting people's lack of awareness about their shift towards OS-as-a-service model and the consequences of it, thus building a user base that either does not care or feels stuck to the platform. What is argued to be wrong about this move is that MS is essentially locking out developers from making high quality games (and I mean, see Street Fighter V's PC launch reactions to realize what it means for a developer to forgo basic PC features such as custom controller configuration) unless they comply with their terms of service. Essentially, they are saying: either play by our rules and get access to our user base or deal with issues on your own, but not on our system (which, mind you, for Windows is still a new notion - all previous releases were essentially products, where if you bought one, you would've been exposed to certain vulnerabilities they didn't manage to fix before release if you decided to never contact them anymore about it, but you'd be in control at all times; this is not the case anymore). For you it might be OK, or even normal, that they do this - just evolution - but believe me, it is Not OK, it is Not Normal and it should never be either.