5 ms·

UWP is a sandbox. I wouldn't call that native. You can't even do any sort of local IPC with it if your other process is Win32. Furthermore: - You can't run a

UWP is a sandbox. I wouldn't call that native. You can't even do any sort of local IPC with it if your other process is Win32. Furthermore: - You can't run a UWP as Administrator. - A UWP app has less access to the system and user data. - You can't develop a UWP app that has in-process plugins. - You can't hook into a UWP app like you can with actual native Win32 apps, to send keys, hook keys or do screen overlays. In summary, UWP is full of artificial limitations and that's why nobody is building on it. I'm looking forward to the day when Microsoft announces that UWP is either going away or being pulled out of it's sandbox. Then I'll consider using it.

Const-me 10y ago
Just because you don’t have permissions to do something, doesn’t mean something is wrong with the API. Technically, you can restrict permissions in a similar way on any NT-based OS. Doesn’t mean the Win32 API is not native. Doesn’t mean those ACL permission checks everywhere are “artificial limitations”. Most of those UWP’s limitations are here to protect users. Microsoft learned their lesson about the security. I don’t want your app to be able to do local IPC or hook keys on my PC. Furthermore, you can’t have unrestricted access to the lower levels of the system, and universal apps at the same time. There’s no Win32 subsystem on the phones, or on embedded windows 10.
- WayneBro 10y ago
  There is going to be a Win32 subsystem on phones. That's the next thing Microsoft is trying. They already showed Windows 10 running on arm with Win32 apps running on it. The things I mentioned or not permissions. They are limitations. No UWP app is permitted to do them so they might as will not exist. However those things do exist and there must be a reason why. Maybe people have needed to use them before? I think so.
  - Const-me 10y ago
    > going to be a Win32 subsystem on phones Maybe, but currently there’s none. > Maybe people have needed to use them before? It’s called “progress”. Over time, better and safer APIs replace dangerous lower-level things. For example, DirectX deprecated direct access to the graphics and audio hardware. Similar way, UWP deprecates direct access to system and user data, physical display and keyboard. Apparently, Microsoft prioritized user’s safety and battery life over needs of those few software vendors who heed the functionality for legitimate reasons.
    - flukus 10y ago
      "Regress" would be more appropriate, it's taking away useful features. Gimping what an application is capable of should not be the solution to security.
      - Const-me 10y ago
        How are you going to secure user against key loggers when there’s a “useful feature” allowing any app to listen keyboard events of the whole windows station? Keep in mind there’re another useful features, allowing users to run an unsigned application from any source, with administrator privileges.
        WayneBro 10y ago
        With a permission setting? There are permissions for which apps can use my Mic, Camera, Contacts, Call history, etc... Microsoft could easily add one that lets me run UWP apps with a higher privilege that allows IPC with Win32 apps. As it is right now, you can't even build a UWP app that can talk to a server app running on the same exact machine. Instead, you have to build all of your UWP apps so that they depend on some Internet server.
        Const-me 10y ago
        Permission settings only work for the minority of people who’re into that information security thing. Look at the mobile apps. Many apps require geolocation permission, not because they need it, but because they include some ads, and ad provider who made their ad serving control needs GPS coordinates to serve better ads. The majority of users don’t care. They just click “I agree” on those permission popups, so unlimited number of third-parties able to literally track their each step.
        WayneBro 10y ago
        Right. And I'm assuming since you care about it then you would not allow the permission. So, you're covered. What's your problem now?

Const-me 10y ago

Just because you don’t have permissions to do something, doesn’t mean something is wrong with the API. Technically, you can restrict permissions in a similar way on any NT-based OS. Doesn’t mean the Win32 API is not native. Doesn’t mean those ACL permission checks everywhere are “artificial limitations”. Most of those UWP’s limitations are here to protect users. Microsoft learned their lesson about the security. I don’t want your app to be able to do local IPC or hook keys on my PC. Furthermore, you can’t have unrestricted access to the lower levels of the system, and universal apps at the same time. There’s no Win32 subsystem on the phones, or on embedded windows 10.

WayneBro 10y ago
There is going to be a Win32 subsystem on phones. That's the next thing Microsoft is trying. They already showed Windows 10 running on arm with Win32 apps running on it. The things I mentioned or not permissions. They are limitations. No UWP app is permitted to do them so they might as will not exist. However those things do exist and there must be a reason why. Maybe people have needed to use them before? I think so.
- Const-me 10y ago
  > going to be a Win32 subsystem on phones Maybe, but currently there’s none. > Maybe people have needed to use them before? It’s called “progress”. Over time, better and safer APIs replace dangerous lower-level things. For example, DirectX deprecated direct access to the graphics and audio hardware. Similar way, UWP deprecates direct access to system and user data, physical display and keyboard. Apparently, Microsoft prioritized user’s safety and battery life over needs of those few software vendors who heed the functionality for legitimate reasons.
  - flukus 10y ago
    "Regress" would be more appropriate, it's taking away useful features. Gimping what an application is capable of should not be the solution to security.
    - Const-me 10y ago
      How are you going to secure user against key loggers when there’s a “useful feature” allowing any app to listen keyboard events of the whole windows station? Keep in mind there’re another useful features, allowing users to run an unsigned application from any source, with administrator privileges.
      - WayneBro 10y ago
        With a permission setting? There are permissions for which apps can use my Mic, Camera, Contacts, Call history, etc... Microsoft could easily add one that lets me run UWP apps with a higher privilege that allows IPC with Win32 apps. As it is right now, you can't even build a UWP app that can talk to a server app running on the same exact machine. Instead, you have to build all of your UWP apps so that they depend on some Internet server.
        Const-me 10y ago
        Permission settings only work for the minority of people who’re into that information security thing. Look at the mobile apps. Many apps require geolocation permission, not because they need it, but because they include some ads, and ad provider who made their ad serving control needs GPS coordinates to serve better ads. The majority of users don’t care. They just click “I agree” on those permission popups, so unlimited number of third-parties able to literally track their each step.
        WayneBro 10y ago
        Right. And I'm assuming since you care about it then you would not allow the permission. So, you're covered. What's your problem now?