Skip to main content

Epic's Tim Sweeney offers some ideas on how to turn Microsoft's UWP into an open ecosystem

Last week, Epic Games co-founder Tim Sweeney slammed Microsoft's Universal Windows Platform efforts for Windows 10 as a possible attempt to turn Windows on PCs into a closed ecosystem for apps. Now the developer who created the Unreal Engine and helped to make classic games like Unreal Tournament and Gears of War has posted a new editorial, and this time, it offers Sweeney's suggestions to alter UWP so it can be an open ecosystem for app creators.

Sweeney's first editorial last week didn't pull any punches, He stated:

"The specific problem here is that Microsoft's shiny new "Universal Windows Platform" is locked down, and by default it's impossible to download UWP apps from the websites of publishers and developers, to install them, update them, and conduct commerce in them outside of the Windows Store."

Since then Microsoft has responded to Sweeney's statement's wth Xbox head Phil Spencer stating stating, "UWP is a fully open ecosystem, available to every developer, and can be supported by any store." He also said that Microsoft will reveal more on the Xbox team's plans for UWP at Build 2016 in late March. In Sweeney's new editorial, as posted on VentureBeat he points out Microsoft's procedure for developers who want to release UWP apps:

"If you apply to become a Microsoft Registered Developer, and Microsoft accepts you, then you take a UWP app you have compiled and submit it to Microsoft. If Microsoft chooses to accept the app, then it will digitally sign the app using its DRM and return it to the developer, at which point the developer can distribute it to users, and users can manually install and run it on any machine with default Windows 10 Settings."Is this open? You be the judge."

Sweeney's point is that regular win32 apps can be created and offered anywhere, without the need for Microsoft's approval:

"In win32, any developer can obtain a digital certificate from a Certificate Authority, using the same open ecosystem that the web itself uses for digital signatures in the https protocol. This approach scales securely to millions of websites around the world and to countless win32 applications today."

Sweeney says that he would like Microsoft to allow UWP apps to be created and offered the same way as win32 apps, with no need for the company to approve each app or for developers to register with Microsoft. He would also like for UWP apps to be available in any download store, such as Steam or GOG, Finally, he wants Microsoft to be clear about the future of Windows as an open platform. He states:

"Lacking that, I believe it would be foolish for the world's major developers and publishers to adopt this new technology based on mere assumptions about plans that Microsoft has not itself stated with technical clarity."

287 Comments
  • I've always wondered why windows store apps can't be treated like win32 .exe files. Sweeney has a point here.
  • It's a security thing. Microsoft signs the app and therefore viruses "can't" make their way into the store. When you can download a Win32 app from any website and install it, there's a chance someone stole another person's or companies app and infected it with malware of some kind. Apps from the store are safe from this. Also, windows has Developer mode and Sideloading baked into Windows, it's a setting. So, if you choose to take the risk, you can.
  • Great statement, it's a shame people don't understand the security aspect of windows, think it's about putting junk into the eco system thats not built to handle old principles, wake up
  • That's like people who always claimed Mac was more secure than Windows back in the day. They didn't understand, it's not the security. The viruses are compiled for Windows, they WON'T run on a Mac, point blank. Mac doesn't use EXEs. There were viruses for Mac, but they were compiled for Mac.
  • Actually, it was due to Windows being more popular than Mac thus having a larger install base.  The Windows Store is just that.  No different than Apples.  Only on the Windows Platform, Win32 apps can also exist.  Openly. 
  • What would be cool is that they can take their app, get it signed from microsoft, then distribute it in the store and/or also be allowed to have a UWP storage package that can run somehow. So its still signed, still secure, still installs like its from the store, but you can get it from say gog. That would be cool. But I dont think Microsoft will do that nor do I think they should do that. Its just a possible way to make it "open" and still secure.
  • From Microsoft's statement, it sounds like that's exactly what they intend to do.
  • Sweeney is just a moron.. He wants his cake and eat it too. W32 has its problems and he knows it and its mostly from its open nature and packaging. A more secure framework was needed and a packaging method that also included w32 that could completely uninstall ALL of its components and evolve w32 to a non elevated user state. The problem is he is a honest anarchist and probably in the minority. (control issues) There is absolutely no reason he could not stay with w32 native and right now its a bit faster for gaming. The thing is he knows its a far better experience for users safety/aquistition/security yet his approach is to completely undermine that for personal reasons.
  • People on this site talk about how Apple users are sheep and how they hate the walled garden of iOS. But when Microsoft does the same thing, it's the best thing that happened in the industry.
  • Yes, but at the same time everyone blasts MS for such vulnerabilities and then attacks them when they lock down. Dammed if you do... dammed if you don't.
  • Incorrect.   Apple ONLY has a walled garden.  Windows has BOTH walled garden (UWP) and effectively free ball for developers (win32).    Sweeney just sees the writing on the wall...  Win10 is succeeding and that means UWP will as well...  And for the safety of the consumers a walled garden must exist.  He needs to get over it.. it's a world full of bad guys out there now...   Signing an app with a third party cert does nothing validate the code is not malicious....  
  • @pericle, these are not parallel. Windows supports Win32 for sideloading. Anyone can install a compiler and IDE and start coding and shipping Windows applications. Apple provides no way to install apps that don't go through the App Store. On the contrary, they police against that. This is ONLY about getting the optional benefit of the MS seal of approval and installation tools of a UWP without actually going through Microsoft. It is entirely reasonable for Microsoft to insist that anyone who wants their seal of approval must actualy go through their review process.
  • "Apps from the store are safe from this." Android and iOS's app store have both shown that this is bogus.
  • I agree. There is an element of "cost" associated with better security. I would rather have the security assurance of "approved" apps than the wild west of install any unapproved app from any website that we have now with Windows. It would be nice to be able to continue installing anything we want with Windows in the future, but let's have an approved store (or store framework) that lets users know the app is safe and not malware. If users still want to roll the dice installing unapproved apps, then whatever they end up with is on them.
  • No his point is moot because it is safer to download apps from the store then to get them from a webpage its easier to spoof a website and redirect it than it is to spoof the store and redirect it. If you make the store more open then you run into the problems you have with the play store or any other forked android store. At least with the Windows store you have a certification process that eliminates duplicates and malicious software from being published. Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • I am sorry but that in no way shape or form makes the point moot.  What you are arguing is that there is a tradeoff.  And this is true.  If you want to download only applications with a relatively low chance of being infected with malware, then you would go to a high-quality store, such as MS'.  However, if you want to take a gamble and download something from somewhere else, you should be able to do that, as well. And there are many, many reasons for wanting to do this; for instance, you can keep backups of your applications so that if a new version comes along and breaks something, or the developer pulls the app, you don't lose access to needed features.
  • This is already supported and extremely easy to enable considering its a simple radio button choice in settings. The large majority of users will not know what websites to even go to for 3rd party stores, and these type of users are the ones that need protection of secure default settings. Users who know about Steam are very likely to know about the setting and can make the switch and are more likely to understand the security risk. What I see this guy wanting is to have UWP unsecure by default so he can save 20-30% revenue. Microsoft is making the right decision of making security a priority and another right decision of making it optional. For myself, if it's not on Microsoft Store then I wouldn't download it anyway and for sure I wouldn't pay for it because I appreciate the vetting process that the store represents, it means I don't have to go searching around the web trying to find out if some software is legit or not and from ratings and reviews and consistent descriptions / screenshots I can even see at a glance if something is worth downloading in the first place. The store has huge benefits and is definitely worth a 30% cut of revenue, if you need to be greedy and have 100% then just stick to Win32 and slowly die out while other developers innovate and attract your customers in the store. Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • 20-30% revenue is HUGE!  If Microsoft wants to enforce this then they should lower the fee.  Do you use Steam? Add 30% to the purchase price of every item and see what you think of steam now...
  • Funny how 30% is no problem for Apple Store... 30% revenue drop but higher sales due to exposure on a store EVERY windows 10 user has access to is well worth it, in the end they will make more money and there is nothing stopping them from also offering the same app on a 3rd party store to get 100% of revenue for those sales. How hard is it to put instructions on a website that say "open settings app, tick developer mode"? Why ask for 1 billion devices to be unprotected by default just so some ***hole can make a few extra bucks? It's not good for consumers, it's only good for investors and don't you think they make enough money out of us already? Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • You do realize that Steam takes an average of about 30% on all sales right?
  • LOL! I dont think he does. Nor do they realize that the guy mentions being able to run UWP from steam which is DRM as well. This argument is so crazy.
  • What's even funnier, is most people don't realize that the 70/30 revenue split that EVERY app store on the planet uses, including Apple, Google, and Steam, was started by Microsoft when they created XBLA way back in 2014 - XBLA being one of the very first app stores, and being the very first proper app stores for video games. Before Steam was even an itch in Gaben's pants. Developers from the very jump, flooded the XBLA team with entrees they were hoping would be selected for Microsoft's curated XBLA store, because the 70/30 split was a far better, and fairer deal than the age old system of paying royalty fees on physical media to console makers.  With the split, developers and publishers walked away making a whole lot more money per game sale, than they do under the royalty fee system. So no, no one is going to balk at the idea that Microsoft wants to get a 30% cut off the top.  It's an industry standard cut that every store uses, that has been around for well over a decade now. The person who assumes Steam does not take a 30% cut off the top as well, you just lost a lot of geek street cred for saying that out loud.
  • Steam has been around for years lol Posted via the Windows Central App for Android
  • 2014???? You mean 2004 :P
  • What? Steam was around way before XBLA, and even before the 360 was even released In my case I bought my first game on Steam in 2006 (HL2 ep 1), followed by Dawn of War Dark Crusade and a bunch of others shortly after.
  • Imagine UWP wrapped in Steam DRM. What a clusterfuck.
  • Microsoft is only enforcing this in it's store.  If 20-30% is huge then go the W32 route there are other methods.
  • Steam charges 30% as well.
  • They do but they make deals and have a non-disclosure agreement. But a dev mentioned they are in line with other distribution platforms. One dev was mad about sales at some point because he said he had no choice. Wrote a big rant. I think he was forced to take it down lol. It was on reddit I believe. This was a while back.
  • You still can. MS hasn't prevented those types of applications, they're just not UWP apps.
  • Then don't publish through the Windows Store, simple as that. Sweeney is making an arguement where there is none. Win32 apps still exist. Independent developer websites still exist. Executables still exist. Sweeney wants to take advantage of Windows 10 features while sidestepping the security measures in place to maintain those features. If Microsoft is paying developers to publish for the Windows Store, either take the money or take the chance publishing outside of it, don't try and do both.
  • I agree. He wants to be able to get games on XboxOne and PC for free... Thats the one advantage UWP has over Steam/Origin/Uplay/etc.
  • This and those above
  • Look at Android and there's your answer. You can get apps from just about anywhere, and also get all kinds of security issues along with it.
  • Bullshit! Why cant he bash ios? Thing is, if it becomes that opened, the rate and frequency of malware apps will increase. MS need to ensure security first over some irrelevant opinions. It's open as it is. If you create, let's verify before you distribute. That way MS is still in control.
    Dear MS please ignore them. Still to security first.
    Why is MS always bullied?
  • Not really a lot of margin to even create a malicious Win10 Universal (Sandboxed) app. Maybe save a file somewhere. But there are places in the design guidelines that are out of bounds. All MS needs is a certificate tool that checks (maybe under a VM) whether the app breaks those guidelines. Done.   Source: Experience; Really want a DS emulator on the Windows Store
  • He has good points, but half of which aren't true. I have been building software for the Windows Store for 2 and a half years and they aren't like Apple and actually "accept or decline" you to actually build an application, anyone can do it as long as your 18. Also, they check the app for malware, porn, false advertisement, etc... They don't restrict it. Yes, they encrypt it with DRM signing, but that's to keep it safe and not violate copyright/trademarking, etc... Zachary Bowling - ZAD Apps
  • Thank you, Zachary. That's a much better explanation of how it works. You just saved me from having to type it out.
  • I, for one, am for more rigorous screening. IIRC there have been a few articles about store apps doing what you'd not expect them to do Posted from WC 920, 1520, 920, 635, 640 950XL
  • Half of his good points aren't true? ;) Posted from WC 920, 1520, 920, 635, 640 950XL
  • His points can make the UWP system less secure.
  • I don't want it treated like win32 apps. I don't want developers sneeking in adware or maleware into the apps. I want them to be easily uninstallable. I don't want it to do things in the background that you aren't aware off. If microsoft charges exorbitant fees, then I see a problem. Otherwise, I don't see a problem with microsoft certifying apps. Especially since it will be Microsoft that will take the heat if the UWP apps become a virus and maleware magnet like win32 became.
  • My concern is since UWPs are designed to run Hololens too. Opening them for injected code would be a catastrophe. I'm not saying they are 100% secure, never the less they are alot more secure then random .exes from scrupulous sources.
  • Like the guy above already said. Windows will be a lot safer when they have to go through Microsoft. It's a pain in the ass for developers but there's no other way to make sure users don't download crap. If they really want to use it like win32. Then they can still use win32. It's a none issue really. For me as an end-user I'd much rather download through the windows store knowing it's safe than download it from a website.
  • Then continue to use Win32. I don't get the problem.... I am over this guy.
  • Thinking the same. What a tool this guy is.
  • UWP has a lot of advantages...like Xbox integration...or develop once for all screen sizes...cant make that happen using win32...
  • Right, but in order to take advantage of that you have to agree to put the apps in the store. That's what makes them "universal." If you are going to create a UWP for the Xbox, you are already going to put it in the store by default and so there is no need to side-load it unless you want to offer it as a side-loaded option on your own which Microsoft already allows.
  • Don't worry, most game devs will, and will ignore UWP.  
  • will and will huh? so quick to troll you can't even get the wording right.
  • Hardly a troll. I can pretty much guarantee 99%+ of game developers will stick to Steam.
  • You're wrong. The Win10 store already has a larger install base than steam and is preinstalled with every pc, phone and Xbox. Any developer that doesn't publish there is just hurting themselves. For better or worse, the MS store is the new amazon of software.
  • Hurting themselves how? It makes no sense to code exclusively for Windows 10 when you can code for Windows 7, 8 and 10 together.
  • You mean this installbase that only exists because it comes bundled by default?   Steam is still far more popular, and will most likely stay the most popular option. You don't have to get on your knees because Microsoft wants to that way.
  • How does the steam install base help for anyone that wants stuff other than games, or very specific pieces of software? Also, Steam takes 30% just like MS does, and they don't give it back if there's a piece of software returned. SO you not only get on your knees with steam, but you have to swallow at times too.
  • This comment chain is obviously talking in the context of gaming.
  • Ok, I'll put it only in context of gaming. The fact remains that the Windows store has more users. So right there, the comment that Steam is more popular is incorrect and it only has the potential to increase the gap. Now when you said it only makse sense to code for just 10 and not others, that's already being done for games, regardless of Windows store with DirectX12. So with a higher install base, it makes sense to release your titles onto the Windows store.
  • In aspect to games, I sincerely doubt that the Windows Store has more users. First of all, this store has been refreshed since Windows 10 and is exclusive to that platform, so that is what, 15% of all Windows devices? Whereas Steam runs on a full 100% of those devices(excluding platforms where UWP is the sole way). So even if the windows Store has a 100% usage rate under this 15% then that is still a very, very small percentage compared to the larger market Steam can be installed on.   I would love to see those numbers(I couldn't find them) but I sincerely doubt that a platform that is Windows 10 exclusive(and isn't even a year old!) has a larger userbase compared to a platform that has been around for years and can be installed on pretty much all PCs.
  • Ok, so let me start of by saying, if you don't have numbers, don't make up your own, you destroy all credibility in your argument that way. As for numbers, Windows 10 has a installed base almost 13% (NetMarketShare), Steam has approximately 125 million users (Kotaku), and the Windows store has an installed base of approximately 122 million, I removed about 18 million as they are not accessable by the Xbox one YET (Windows Central). Now what the software CAN be installed on is completely moot as, when it comes to games, you will need Windows 10 for any AAA games that require DirectX. So with numbers that are a few months old, we can ascertain that, if it hasn't already, Windows 10 will surpass Steam users, and as soon as the Windows store is accessable on X1, that will surpass Steam users by far.     https://netmarketshare.com/ http://kotaku.com/there-are-over-125-million-steam-accounts-1687820875 http://www.windowscentral.com/windows-10-now-more-200-million-devices
  • You're assuming that every Windows 10 owner is interested in using the Store, which is far from the case, and even less so among gamers who are used to Steam, who would only lose features by buying games on the Store in it's current form. Also, the notion that AAA games will ONLY run in DirectX12 is beyond ridiculous. That not only makes an OS barrier but a GPU generation barrier which doesn't need to be there. Fact is that the gamers know where they would prefer to be. Rise Of The Tomb Raider currently has 10,301 reviews on Steam. On the Windows Store? 37. Thirty. Seven. Face it - gamers don't want UWP.
  • Either that, or maybe steam is multiple years old and AAA games just recently came to Windows. Could be either.
  • Yet apparently simply having the Windows Store on millions of PCs is supposed to instantly turn it into a hit, according to previous posts. Obviously not the case. Microsoft needs many incentives to get people buying games on the Store instead of Steam and those incentives are just not there.
  • i can only name reasons as to why not to buy from the Store.
  • "As for numbers, Windows 10 has a installed base almost 13% (NetMarketShare), Steam has approximately 125 million users (Kotaku), and the Windows store has an installed base of approximately 122 million"   You can't assume all those hundred million people use the store they got shoved down their throats.   "when it comes to games, you will need Windows 10 for any AAA games that require DirectX." Nope.   DirectX12 games, yes. But every single one of them uses an older DirectX version as well. In fact, Dx9 still is a very common version that is used.    
  • Since the comparison was made with Steam ,i assumed we were talking games.    Anyways, for "very specific pieces of software" you are looking at W32 instead of UWP as, like said, UWP is much more limited in what you can/can't do.
  • I like,it is good idea to make windows 10 open system. and then i believe there will be lot more simple,but handy app's for all of us!
  • And also a bunch more security flaws.
  • Since when did the world of computing become so unsafe?! I haven't had a virus since XP days. The whole security angle is just a ruse for Microsoft to try and force developers hands...and give over 30% of the revenue for something Microsoft really has no right to demand.
    I say good on the developers for standing up. Monopolistic business practices cost us all in the long run....and Microsoft has more than enough of our money already.
  • Yeah, my in-laws average several viruses per month, because they can't seem to comprehend that they shouldn't not "click" on certain things. I've actually stopped cleaning up after them, because it's too much of a pain. I tell them things like, "Running that bad? Maybe time for a new computer." Then they are finally interested in learning how to do safe surfing. LOL. 
  • Lol besides the continuous pressure to charge sales tax in areas where it doesn't apply to consumers
  • Simple answer? We live in a world where people are willing to give up freedom for false security all so they don't have to deal with responsibility.
  • Computers became more secure after the XP days because Microsoft started signing drivers and taking aways many of the paths malware developers were using. Your acting like viruses just went away on their own. The main way to get viruses is to try to get people to install them and I've seen plenty of sites trying to trick people into installing them. The main one I've seen is the one that says your flash need to be updates. One of the employees at work almost installed on of these just today. Requiring for all apps to be verified isn't a bad thing as long as Microsoft doesn't charge too high a fee for doing this.
  • You do realize that anecdotal evidence is a huge logical flaw right? It doesn't matter when the last time you got a virus was, they do still get installed and that is a fact. I mean, how do you think the DDoS attacks happen? You do realize people don't all sign on at once from their PC and ping servers right? You say MS has no right to demand 30%, if you want to enter their store, they have every single right to demand it, just like Apple, Google, and Steam do. That's the price you pay for storing your software on someone elses server, and the advertising.
  • So in other words, do the same thing with UWP apps that has made Win32 programs a security hazard over the years so that they don't have to pay MS anything while reaping the benefits of the oodles of money MS has poured into unifying Windows. Nice perks like a fast growing user base and an ever growing number of devices. It's not that I don't think he has a point, it's just painfully obvious that it's all about the money.
  • This. I wanted to expand more, but I really should be paying more attention to my conference call... haha
  • They should go Android, when there phone doesn't work after six months, full of adds and malware then they would know, everyone thinks it's about the next 100k of apps that Microsoft are focused on, they are so wrong, it's about the productivity of the eco system and the phone, not about big name apps you will never download just so you can make a comment or two in a post.
  • They should go Android, when there phone doesn't work after six months, full of adds and malware
    Funny, Mactards say the same thing when talking about Windows. Its just as stupid when they say it as you guys sound when you say it about Android. 
  • Damn you just hate everybody? :)
  • Keep spouting that nonsense, in before you can finish another post like that, a million Android phones will be sold. It's amazing how fanboys can turn any freaking topic into an Android bash-fest. The jealousy of Android's success runs deep in these parts.
  • "security hazard" Yeah, except not really. We have such a thing called AntiMalware for quite a while now which does a very good job protecting the people from malware.   People seem to forget that this "security hazard" is people doing it themselves. And to think that they wont be able to do said thing just because it's in a moderated store(Where people delusionally think apps are rigulously tested. Of course they are not, as testers then wouldn't be able to keep up) that they are safe from themselves. Android's and iOS' app store have shown it many times that malware etc. too can find it's way to the app store. To think that somehow Microsoft's App Store would be any different is delusional.   The security hazard is the person itself, and you can't protect them from their own inability.
  • Straight up copy-pasta-ing my own comment so people see it and get it through their heads. As I said last time…you people sure missed the point or don’t know what you’re talking about. (to you few people who do, thanks! This doesn’t apply to you)   Let me list off some restrictions that are in the UWP (as of right now): -Your game/app MUST run borderless windowed mode. This means there is no feasible way to run it in full screen. -Your FPS MUST be 60 FPS maximum. This means that your 144hz monitor with gsync and setup that runs games at 90+ FPS….NOPE! - Vsync HAS to be turned on. If you don’t know why this is relevant, this topic doesn’t apply to you, and you don’t know how many issues turning OFF VSync has fixed for games.   On top of it, all game files are encrypted and cannot be changed in ANY WAY…so this means NO MODS or hot fixes without going through MS certifications. Which…when was the last time you had a AAA ship day one and not need a day 1 patch or hot fix (The fact that you HAVE to think about it says it all)? SLI/Crossfire support is STILL broken as heck. So this aligns with the SAME thing valve said before that seems to align with MS’ tactic that the Windows 8/10 store is a “Direct attempt to create a walled garden for PC” which seems to fit into MS’ strategy of Adopting standards, adding proprietary standards, then using said standards to disadvantage the competition. Even IF this isn’t the case, MS is saying the UWP is open when…that sounds pretty darn closed off to me.  It seems as if that the goal is to lock down a market (i.e. PCs) to achieve simplicity like the consoles, but PC’s HAVE NO STANDARDS because they change every month! No two PC’s are the same, and you can’t force a platform like that to a standard. Clearly people forgot about games for windows live. Oh and why certain software can’t be sold on disc with windows discs because the courts checked them on it.   Let’s take an example: Tomb Raider. Currently on Steam and Windows Store. Patches, add-ons and updates come out later on the UWP version. Probably because they need to pass certs on UWP. With the average person looking at reviews online and advice, there is NO reason to get it from UWP than Steam for that reason.   Do your research people and stop gun jumping in defense of MS. Let’s also take note: If Sweeney actually didn’t want to see this succeed, why would he offer advice and suggestions?
  • Ok lets let them be open. Allowing for people to mess with files, put attached virus' inside and give us more to worry about.
  • Sweeny is an idiot. The entire reason why is do not want to install any random exe from a random website is security concerns. Windows store allows anyone to confidently install an app because these are checked and signed by Microsoft. Sweeny is still in 1999. Also this makes me think, why is this dude not complaining about the app store and play store.
  • He's backpedalling slowly. First he goes nuts about it. Now he wants it to be w32. The argument that MS still has to approve it is just ridiculous. So what? They approve it and you're done with. Anyone can get this approval. I think he has some other agenda.
  • Sounds like it to me. Other agenda"
  • While I am uncertain to what extent MS checks submissions to the Windows app store--just look at the amount of fake apps that exist in the Windows Phone app store--I agree with your point that Sweeny did not mention the popularity of the Apple app store, despite the fact that iOS is a closed ecosystem.
  • Which is weird since Apple App Store is similar to Windows Store and vice-versa, I can bet he's using an iPhone so I'm not sure he didn't get it why it's like that. It's really about security and keeping the quality of the apps (unfortunately Windows Store have too much crap apps published over there), and Apple are very successful with it. I bet he's trying to make Universal Apps similarly distributed as Play Store apps, look what happened to Android's reputation, it's the mobile platform that have constant threats to malware because of some users gettings apps outside the Play Store. I bet Microsoft is just not willing to take a risk to have another thing being accused as "malware vurnable" OS from Universal Apps. Windows is already have enough issues with malwares in a form of exe files. Sometimes Microsoft has to do something to save users from their own mistakes.
  • The fake apps are the fault of MS wanting more apps in the store.  But at the same time they are contained so they can't really do much outside of getting some info about you if you don't set privacy settings.  And of course can trick people to enter info.  My guess is that there is a hierachy of how apps are scanned for intrusiveness.  The more info it requires the higher up and deeper scans occur and possibly may have human intervention.  Or at least should.  Thus far nothing bad has come of it.  But MS does seem to be listening to the issues and trying to work on it.  And yah they are slow as most of their focus is on the developer tools side and PC.
  • "But at the same time they are contained so they can't really do much outside of getting some info about you if you don't set privacy settings." Because who cares about a malicious party getting personal info, right?   Drew Neilson makes a good point regarding fake apps. If they can't even properly manage that, then how can we be confident the App Store won't be a malware heaven?   The current trend in malware is to either steal personal info or to hold their files hostage. And the first can very, very well be done via the App Store.
  • The only info they could get is name, maybe contact list.  Depending what the required permissions are. Again, this is nothing to what w32 can do.  That's the whole point.     And no you can't get that stuff through the app store as there are tiers of scanning.  The app would be contained so it wouldn't be able to encrypt any data but its own.  That's what makes UWP so great.  Now look at all the cases of hostage files in windows, they are all w32 malware/viruses/spyware.  UWP solves that.  Again.  You should just let things progress.  See where it goes.  By the time windows 10 is even close to being finalized after redstone 2, Google may already have their OS in beta stages, who knows.  Either way you can go to linux if you are that worried.   See you need to understand these things otherwise people freak out.
  • "The only info they could get is name, maybe contact list.  Depending what the required permissions are." Indeed, depending on what the permissions are. So yeah, you'll just use every permission there is and start mining data. "Again, this is nothing to what w32 can do." It's exactly the same.  "And no you can't get that stuff through the app store as there are tiers of scanning." Hahaha that is such an ironic assumption. You assume that that is the case, you assume that because it is there it is per definition safe. Which, it is not. In fact, it is less safe because you rely on an outside party to do the security checks, without any way to validate that those checks are properly done.  I'd rather decide for myself if an app is safe or not rather than putting blind trust in someone doing it for me.   Also, I believe somewhere else you said that Microsoft doesn't do anything about doubles on the App Store to strengthen the numbers of apps. What makes you so certain that they do not do the same thing in regards of malware? " The app would be contained so it wouldn't be able to encrypt any data but its own.  That's what makes UWP so great.  " Hardly. It hasn't actually solved anything. It gives the delusion that everything is a-okay. Which, imo, is far worse. There are many other ways to do something malicious, by the way. While I named ransomwhere, there are many other things. And privacy is a great one on that aspect. "Now look at all the cases of hostage files in windows, they are all w32 malware/viruses/spyware.  UWP solves that" No it does not. Just because they locked their doors doesn't mean they can't break in. " Again.  You should just let things progress. " Actually, I should not. But then again, how else can you shove UWP down people's throats? " Either way you can go to linux if you are that worried." Not worried at all, I don't know where you got that suggestion from   "See you need to understand these things otherwise people freak out." Was that supposed to be ironic?        
  • MS actually has done a great thing with privacy and per app permissions.  This is why ios and android followed.  You are in total control of this type of information.  I honestly don't care if people get my contacts, nor if i'm someone's contact.  They get my e-mail and number, sure.  But facebook does, everything out there does.  Those items are already all over the internet.   Again most people get stuff that is known and rated in app stores and can read through the comments.  With w32 it's just on the web and you sort of take your chances as you said.   But again w32 will always be there so keep taking your chances.  I'm saying that none of us really know the end result so to fear it is silly.  Once things happen we can make decisions, but for the time being just watch things unfold and see what happens.  There's no Doomsday scenario here.    You keep trying to underscore the security, but ios is proof that this sort of model is secure.  Any exploits on ios have been from jailbroken units.  And the small amount of malware that made it into the store was through a hacked 3rd party publishing software that Apple remedied super quickly due to the control they exhibit.  With w32 MS has no control.  Once the stuff is out there, it's out there.  Heck you could have a rootkit running on your system and you would never know because of how they conceal themselves and control your virus scanners.  That can't happen with UWP.  
  • "MS actually has done a great thing with privacy and per app permissions.  This is why ios and android followed.  You are in total control of this type of information. " Except the vast majority of people never look at such a thing(If they did, then the security wouldn't even be an UWP argument) "I honestly don't care if people get my contacts, nor if i'm someone's contact.  They get my e-mail and number, sure.  But facebook does, everything out there does.  Those items are already all over the internet.  " Most people don't really like that. "Again most people get stuff that is known and rated in app stores and can read through the comments" Who ever looks at the comments? Here my previous point applies again; If people did so security wouldn't be a UWP argument. "With w32 it's just on the web and you sort of take your chances as you said" Can't remember saying that. And no, it's not taking your chances, just using your brain is very useful. "You keep trying to underscore the security, but ios is proof that this sort of model is secure. " http://www.computerworld.com/article/2989037/malware-vulnerabilities/iph... The same thing goes for Android, by the way.  "Any exploits on ios have been from jailbroken units. " Nope, see the link above. "nd the small amount of malware that made it into the store was through a hacked 3rd party publishing software that Apple remedied super quickly due to the control they exhibit." But you just said that it has proven to be secure? Doesn't this quote tell you the exact opposite?   "With w32 MS has no control. " Which is the whole point. That's literally Tim Sweeney's criticism summed up. His whole complaint comes down to one thing: MS has control. "Heck you could have a rootkit running on your system and you would never know because of how they conceal themselves and control your virus scanners.  That can't happen with UWP.  " Actually, why wouldn't that be able to be concealed on the app store? Doesn't the exact same thing apply here? Or are we now assuming Microsoft has superpowers that can magically detect every little thing?  You literally have no guarantee on security with UWP. Unless you think Microsoft telling you it's okay is a guarantee.         
  • Yes that link you posted was due to what I mentioned.  It was fixed already as all apps were pulled, including from users. UWP can't gain root access because it is self contained in a virtualized container that uses random memory allocation.  It would require figuring out the memory space and then escaping the contained jail.     And yes Tim is worried about that, but that's the point the majority of people aren't.  They prefer MS takes control and keeps them secure.   "I'd rather decide for myself if an app is safe or not rather than putting blind trust in someone doing it for me."   That's where you mention taking chances.  Your decision isn't always the correct one as you do not have any idea what the software is doing.  You just install it with elevated access and that's that.  It can then fetch more code to execute and take over your PC all without your knowledge.     Anyways, this is just going to keep going.  Fact is it's happening.  And it is safer, no doubt about it.  
  • "Yes that link you posted was due to what I mentioned.  It was fixed already as all apps were pulled, including from users." So? Still doesn't mean it's guaranteed to always be malware free. Yes, the problem was fixed, but the issue here is that it could happen in the first place. "UWP can't gain root access because it is self contained in a virtualized container that uses random memory allocation.  It would require figuring out the memory space and then escaping the contained jail.  "   Which I'm certain can be done. " "I'd rather decide for myself if an app is safe or not rather than putting blind trust in someone doing it for me."   That's where you mention taking chances. "   Nope I did not. Taking chances would we quite a lot different. I don't randomly guess if this .exe is okay or not. "Your decision isn't always the correct one as you do not have any idea what the software is doing." Actually, taking a good look at what you are actually downloading and attempting to run goes a very far way. UAC is a really great help here.   " You just install it with elevated access and that's that. " If you roam the internet with no brain, maybe. But those same people will find themselves in problems with Apps from the store. "It can then fetch more code to execute and take over your PC all without your knowledge.  " So could a UWP app. "And it is safer, no doubt about it.  " If you believe someone's word, which you can in no way reproduce nor validate, then sure. And there is the main problem; You got absolutely no clue whatsoever how Microsoft checks the apps and got no clue of the results either. So whatever app you download is as much more of a guess than an executable you downloaded and checked yourself.          
  • Malware too can find it's way to an App Store.
  • Better yet allow them to be updated and maybe downloadable from verified businesses and game companies. Like Ubisoft, Activision, squareenix, etc
  • Exactly sort of like the xb1 original drm model
  • [FIND] UWP
    [REPLACE] UWP (just like Apple and Google)
     
  • HEY TIM Go AWAY.... next time it is not GO AWAY... it is GO TO .....
  • There are no Win32 apps. Most apps use DirectX to render.
  • He is 100% right.
    Microsoft should allow dev to distribute their apps as they see fit. That's is the model with Win32 apps.
    ----
    Furthermore, Microsoft should drop any fees for new UWP apps uploaded to store.
    -----
    Lack of apps is serious issue that is hurting the ecosystem. Situation is pretty desperate and requires bold measures. MS must make every effort to attract dev back.
  • And of what benefit is that to Microsoft when they are already moving away from having sales of Windows as their main money maker? Clearly the fees aren't hurting developers that much since the store is currently growing at a nice pace. MS is not a charity and it costs money to keep things running.
  • Thats why they have msdn subscription
  • Yes, and...?  That doesn't explain why MS shouldn't take a cut that is in line with the industry standard on app sales.  MS is still a business and either app developers want to get their product in front of a lot of eyes or they don't.  It's one of the costs of doing business and every single software store has it's price.
  • So why the need for app store then? Posted via the Windows Central App for Android
  • No MS is trying to fix the nightmare w32 created. MS approves the app, big deal. Only people with nefarious intentions may not like that process. You can still download the app from the web after MS approves it. I don't get the issue.
  •  Only people with nefarious intentions may not like that process.
    Reminds me of the "only people with something to hide should worry about government surveillence" fascists. You probably think Apple should be forced to unlock the iPhone. 
  • Of course not. But this is not a comparable scenario. If you want your app to be UWP, then you need to follow the guidelines and not complain, otherwise make a w32 app. We all know that windows is just filled with none-stop malware and viruses being offered all over the place. So yah these people wouldn't embrace UWP. This is for the average person, not for techies. Do you know that the majority of people who own windows computers are not techies. Yah.. Having an app store is great for them.
  • Sure, because iOS is all open source.
  • How is this even remotely comparable? Why would you want to hide your code from Microsoft? Furthermore, how is your code any safer with .exe files? o_O
  • What makes you think that would increase the amount of apps in the store? There are much much higher fees for iOS. The only thing you're going to get more if is security issues.
  • Devs can distribute their apps as they see fit. Its called Win32 apps. Want to make it for a tablet? Make it touch centered but still a win32 app. Boom, done. Want it in the store? Make a UWP.
  • They can distribute it as they see fit. They just need to get it signed off by Microsoft. Because when a computer get a virus or other malware, users don't blame their own stupidy, they blame Microsoft and their OS.
  • Tim Sweeney is completely missing the point of UWP. UWP was created and geared toward the normal people, not tech guru like him. Where people don't have to worry about how reliable the publisher is and if I download the software is it going to screw up my computer. UWP is a one click install and one click uninstall simple platform which simplifies a lot of things for the normal user for them to enjoy the app rather than having to worry about the technical side of the apps. Having it open like he describes just adds more uncontrolled variables to the whole process and security risks. Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • If you do not need to overload default APIs behaviour (eg: create your own core GUI like adobe applications) or do dirty things (eg: hooks), UWP delivers quite everything you need to build an application. There are some exception: legacy API support, and some feature concerning interaction with DirectX Graphics (most of them will be fixed probably in Redstone).
  • I agree. I think most will be fixed in Redstone. And they have the OneCore set of APIs now so more and more will be added over time.
  • He's right, just as he was with his earlier comments. Happy to see most of the gaming industry and audience agreeing with him, too. It goes to show how much of a bubble the Win central readers are. Sad to see so many people suddenly think PCs should adopt an iOS-like methodology. I use Windows PCs because I hate how Apple does things.
  • Gee attack windows central readers just so you can sound right.  But it's actually you who doesn't even understand the whole concept of UWP nor W32.  These are just APIs both which can be used at your own whim.  Having UWP doesn't stop you from having an open windows.  It's there for the techie people who can handle it.  But the majority of people will be using UWP.  And again, Sweeney argues that he needs to have it approved by MS.  Ok, then don't get it approved and just make a w32 game.  That's your own choice.  The approval is not something that will destroy his business.  It's a weak argument.     And the majority of gamers are rejecting it?  Well, Steam sure as hell shows the majority of gamers are embracing windows 10.  And, the features that UWP can bring along with DX12 would make gaming even better.  It's a new api that has the future in mind with features that can make things way easier on developers from a coding perspective.  And again there are no limitations.  Steam can bring a UWP app of their service and sell Steam games through it that are UWP.  People don't understand things and start crying.  This is for the majority of the world who are not techies.     How can we know that a publishers website hasn't been infected?  Take ubuntu who was giving away malware/virus ridden versions of ubuntu because their website got hacked.  So now, if publishers website gets hacked, you can still download a UWP and know it wasn't touched because it was signed by MS.  
  • So you can't download w32 software from the internet? It's not like they lock you down completely. It's purely the universal apps. I don't really understand the whole argument. Why do Universal apps need to go on steam? You can publish a full blown w32 game on steam as it is, why would you then want to be able to publish something that's more restricted to a different store. If I want a universal app, I get it from the store securely. If I wasn't anything else, I go straight to the developer/publisher. Nothing has changed
  • Umm there is no restriction that you speak of. The game will get access the game needs. You mean reading other programs files and being able to manipulate stuff that doesn't belong to the game. Why? The calls are there that are needed and even more features for developers for easier coding. Furthermore, there is a more open uwp api available for oems and enterprises. Gabe you actually looked through the api?
  • Windows store is about as bad as it was when Win10 launched. Stop peddling this BS about it growing at a nice pace when that's simply not the case.  More notable apps have been abandoned than introduced. Rest is filled with copy cat and clone apps. Wrong. Something like WoW or Skyrim would lose the ability to use Add-Ons if they were universal. Exclusive full screen support would be broken. Universal is terrible for games unless you're porting mobile games to a PC. No AAA games will use it esp in its current state. It's that bad.  There are tons of restrictions that would break games or hobble them if they were universal. These are things the developers literally cannot work around. It also forces them to cede a ton of their revenue to Microsoft.  It completely disrupts the economic model of PC software development.  Stop comparing this to iOS App Store. Compare to Mac App Store that many developers abandoned for similar reasons. And apps are less locked down there than with the UWP.  Game developers don't care about tablets and phones. At least, not the PC game developers developing titles like Doom and The Witcher series. They aren't going to port that to an iPhone or Tablet form factor, so it's no selling point to them and they rightfully don't GAF about it. 
  • Where have you been? A lot of apps have been updated lately and lots of new ones too. Continuum is getting more and more functional.
  • I don't know what hole you've been hiding in for the past couple of years but add-ons for skyrim for example work simply nicely for the steam version through steam workshop and there is nothing stopping Microsoft from allowing that as well if there is a need for that. So maybe stop spouting nonsense?
  • Again you don't understand the API.  Games can be made to be proper full screen. See the way games are developed is that they go full screen when you pick the native resolution.  Pick a non-native resolution on some of your steam games and they will go windowed.  Some may stretch it and look horrible and offer a windowed option.     1 Game was released with a Vsync issue.  That's something that can easily be fixed.  Again this is new and can be made way better than the old outdated api.   And it's not about tablets or phones, it's about any device capable of running the game, whether it be an xbox, a laptop or some console released by an OEM.   Console gaming makes way more than PC.  Developers often have to develop separately for all the consoles and for pc.  Now they need to only do one to target both PC and xbox.  And it will happen.  MS will work with developers to enhance the API even more.  It's what they do.   Even mods like enbseries would work with UWP apps.  Although hooks for mod developers can be added even easier than building a separate system.  It could all be done at the API level so all devs can expose a modding layer if they choose.  Today devs create separate modding tools or games are reverse engineered at times which is bad for the dev.  Anyways, you can argue all you want.  It's happening. :) You just don't understand it.  And you always fear what you don't understand.
  • Because some developer would have the universal app already made for Xbox One and Windows 10 and don't want to re-do everything just to publish on Steam.
  • Most game engines just let you republish for the different platforms with minimal work
  • More on the 2 way bridge coming in Build. I hope Sweeney gets pie on his face for this one. He has a ridiculas argument with no sound logic in it. Sure, it sounds good until you look at the fact that Steam is DRM and takes a nice cut of the money from devs too. The thing he wants is to be able to not have to pay a fee and to target XB1 with his apps as well. But MS said more to come on this 2 way bridge come Build. Which probably means, you can take a UWP app and export it as a Win32 app, an APK, and a whatever-iOS-uses app, and target everything. Thats the new goal I think. :)
  • Lol yep. Metro still has its Green Behind the Ears problems that requires sometimes to get down & dirty and use power shell to clean install apps that just wont die
  • The World is moving... Tim must move too... We need Windows Store for secure/virus free apps. Also microsoft need it for there vision "Universal App".
  • Agreed, my only wish for UWP is for a more fully robust program like what can be done in Win32 so we can do away with Win32 all together. The only problem right now, is these "apps" are lacking many features the Win32 counterparts have. Like in gaming, the UWP games are nowhere near as good as Win32 games atm. Also, I'd like to see the apps in the Programs folder instead of hidden away like they currently are. For the common user, UWP is great, but I like backing up my personal data in programs. I always refresh my system every 6 months to a year to clear the footprint and clean the drives. I keep a shadow copy of a fresh install to make it a quick, 1 step process short of the personal data, but that's easy with Win32 apps. I can just copy the files back into place, like game mods/save/etc.
  • Lol I agree its worse enough they keep locking areas like prog. files but this is just archaic
  • If you use UWP apps (and soon Project-C) there's no need for refresh the system...
  • Universal Apps are not dependent on the Windows Store.
  • But it seems like alot of MS philosophy is requiring their devs to also use azure
  • Sweeny should look at Android first before blabbering in modern context and yes win32 is obviouse example. Remember download.com adding bunch of junk in the exe packages installing adwares, not to mention bunch of exe's floating around with malwares.
  • mAAA PC game developers don't care about Android, and shouldn't. Telling them to look at it displays a fundamental cluelessness of the subject being discussed. It comes across as fanboying and trolling. Android is a non factor in this discussion.   
  • Agree to disagree :)
     
  • When he stares worrying about steam being totally open, he can get back to me.
  • he wants someting like android ecosystem, a piracy and malware heaven. 
  •  android ecosystem
    An ecosystem that actually has users? 
  • Android is not where it is because of the ecosystem. Android is where it is because it became the new "Brew OS" dump it on any cheap handset and ship it.
  • As a Windows fanboy you'd do well not to accuse other platforms of relying on "cheap handsets." It's because of cheap stuff like the 520 and 635 that WP's pathetic 1.8% marketshare is as "high" as it is.
  • Yeah, that was not my point. My point is that it became the "default" OS replacing Brew OS. Normal users do not walk in the store wanting an Android handset. They walk out with one because that is really their only option other than iPhone. You and I both know that....
  • That was probably the case back in 2010/11, but ever since the GSIII Android has established itself well enough on its own. I like it. Using it reminds me of what Windows used to be. In fact it feels a lot more "Windows" than WP does.
  • And android growth didn't excel to where it is today back in 2011? It surpassed iPhone around 2011... I am not trying to dog on Android and you are making it sound like I am. That was not my point. My point was people didn't flock to it for the ecosystem. Most Android users don't even know their Gmail password if they even have one.
  • And windows doesn't? We have 200 million users now so let the ancient comparisons die already...
  • With all the same complaints people used to have about Windows 95/98/98SE/ME/2K/XP/... And, UWP does have users. Win10 had like 10 million installs in the first week. God knows what it's at now. The biggest problem with phones is people don't know they exist. Just the ther day, i was making a delivery. customer had a question so i had to call the office and pulled my phone out. he saw microsoft on it and asked, "that's a Microsoft phone?!?!? I never seen one."
  • Maybe 0.5% of those 200 million Windows 10 users use the Store.
  • Keep dreaming, tablets are the future and Win32 apps suck on a tablet. I have Win32 apps on my desktop when touch input is not needed and productivity is more important, but use UWP apps on my tablet (Dell Latitude 13 7350 w/upgrade 1TB SSD and LTE card with T-Mobile USA frequencies)/phone (Lumia 950XL). Well a combination of the 2 on the tablet as it's a 2 in 1, but anytime I'm using it touch only, I go for my UWP apps for their ease of use. tech people need to start learning we are NOT the norm. Mass consumers look for what's easy to use, not feature rich and complex. Gave my roomamte my old tablet (Dell Venue 11 Pro 7130) and first thing he did was install a youtube app.
  • Can you please, please, please stop pulling "facts" out of your butt. 0.5% of 200+ million people does not result in well over a billion visits to the store. Just because you are a tech elitist, that doesn't mean the majority of PC users are.
  • I love UWP, being able to install the same app on my desktop/tablet/phone is great. Some even sync data like Package Tracker. I enter the package and it shows up on all devices also instantaniously.
  • Me too. I love the unification between devices and I really love the clean install/uninstall of apps without worrying about my registry or having to go over the installation instructions with a fine-toothed comb to avoid unwanted additional software installations, or having my search engine/browser changed.
  • Oh, I hate that ****, uncheck this box, don't agree with this ToS, etc. for 10 bullshit apps just to get the 1 app you downloaded. I think 7zip and BitTorrent does that.
  • Quit making claims you can't, and won't, back up with facts.
  • Users who want a closed and "safe" ecosystem have iOS, while Android has Microsoft's old position as the open, dominant OS. Why would anyone want Windows UWP?  It lacks the openness of Android, the security of iOS, and is bereft of useful apps.
  • Xbox One and Windows PC targeting, not to mention future cool products like HoloLens... THAT is why.
  • XBox One is barely a factor in gaming, in a distant second place; Windows PCs are dead except as enterprise workstations; and HoloLens is vaporware from a company that has had NUMEROUS failed "revolutionary products" the last ten years.
  • You are wrong on all points. Just because Xbox is behind PlayStation, that doesn't mean it is failing and isn't a factor, you are using a false dichotomy. Also false is that Windows PCs are dead outside of enterprise otherwise Steam wouldn't exist and thrive. For both Xbox and PC logic should dictate that if there are no users than gaming companies would not continue to produce games and content for either. As for Hololens, it's been used and shown off at multiple events by people at MS, tested by the tech press and now the devkits are being sold and it's being actively used by people on the International Space Station. That does not fit the definition of vaporware.
  • Sideload apps are enable by default since TH2, this mean that everyone can deliver UWP apps without passing via Microsoft Store. Tim Sweeney should think fixing its application code first. Moreover, most of UWP APIs can be used on Win32 application. Deploying an application on both UWP and Win32 enviornments requires very few code changes.
  • I do not agree with him either. It is more complicated for developers as it is now but the current security issues are always related to the old win32 system and not with the new UWP system. There is need to improve the UWP system more but not to revert it back to the old system with all its flaws.
  • http://www.businessinsider.com/app-store-market-is-changing-2016-3 That applies. It's all about money.
  • Guy just needs to stop crying.
  • Here's what I find amusing. If Apple were to lock down their ecosystem tight on Mac there'd be no uproar. Apple iOS is locked down tight. People don't mind. There's no uproar. Microsoft tries to secure their users and everyone loses their mind. There's a double standard held against Microsoft. I hope MS stick to their guns and keep UWP locked down tight.
  • No, its people wanting to keep PCs open and free. People concerned with that never used Macs to begin with. We avoided Apple stuff precisely because of that fact.
  • Sideload signed apps. He still does not mention that they are enabled by default.
  • Yet people want a secure one stop shop for their apps. By all means downvote me to -1 octodecillion. Hell by all means hire a hitman to murder me. It doesn't change the end users wish. I do keep track of this stuff and you can see that's what people want. The non techy NEED that secure one stop shop for their safety. It'll prevent complications due to viruses. And if you're a power user that knows your way around a PC well and knows about security etc, you can allow sideloading. I have developer mode enabled myself as I work with Visual Studio.
  • Nice well said.
  • @Daniel Ratcliffe, plus Win32 won't be going anytime soon either. This whole hulabaloo is about AAA games imo and nothing else.
  • Lol
  • Well, he made some good points...
  • Why is my comment removed? Just because I called him a tool?
  • That's fine if he doesn't like it, but don't point to Steam as some paragon of DRM-free or being open, that's just self-contradiction. If I go buy a game on Steam, I can't just install it anywhere, I have to use it through Steam. Why he isn't railing on the UWP and then saying "put it on Steam, be open" is beyond simple logic. He's not wrong that MS has a process now that isn't open. That can be a detriment to those who like the freedom to use software in numerous ways, but it can be a benefit to those who want to minimize malware threats as well, so it's not like Microsoft is just throwing up something that hurts people just to hurt them.
  • i've gotten multiple completely new machines and have had all my steam games install and play just fine on all of them
  • You had to download/install steam, log-in, get the verification e-mail, enter the code, than you can download and install the games...
  • and if i had a physical copy of a disk i'd have to physically put it in and install on any machine i want to play on
  • Lol, nice try, I install non steam games on a second partition. Reinstall the OS and the game is still there, no need to re-install it. A steam game, I still have to "register it." Than, the Steam app still verifies the files before I can play. I know, i have both and have reinstalled Steam, using my custom directory to hold the games and it always verifies the games.
  • cool
  • What the heck does that matter? You're still having your content tied to Steam with that. What you described is what the UWP allows, and it's what Sweeney is getting uppity about.
  • cool
  • That all you got when you come in and spew blatant ignorance? COOL
  • double cool
  • also, everything i stated was fact and i never said i agreed with Sweeney nor that disagreed with you
  • Steam is a choice for Win32 games. They can completely bypass it. For UWP, there really is no such choice. Developer options aren't really an excuse for this, either. 
  • @Keith Wallace, i guess the thinking is that file permissions are open for game installs... so it must be "open", right? :P
  • While Steam does have DRM, it is optional. There are many games that are not locked to Steam. Mostly indie games but the point is that the choice in the end to lock the game to Steam is in the hands of the Dev. To test this, pick a game you have installed, close down the Steam client and run the executable for the game. If it launches the game without the Steam client, the Steam DRM wasn't implemented by the Dev. While I understand your view that this still isn't as open as GOG where you can download and install the game yourself, it is far more open than UWP is in its current form as the user is also free to backup and modify the game files manually as they wish. However, if you modify a game with VAC (also the choice of the Dev) you will have to face the consequences.
  •  
  • Going to the CA authorities is still a middleman. Why not go to MS then? It's still an extra step.
  • He clearly made his first statement without knowing that with MS certification an app can be sold on any store and installed like a normal exe without advanced settings. Then someone made him notice his ignorance and now he is trying to look smart saying that having more than one CA (i.e. Microsoft) would be better, his point is now empty but he can't admit he was completely wrong. Poor man :)
  • Sweeney is an idiot. You can sign your own UWP app with your own certificate and then publish it through your own store as long as that store is using a certificate that is trusted by the device. This is how line of business apps Windows 10 are managed. It is fundamentally identical to how this is managed for Windows 8, iOS and Android. Typically speaking, this is managed through MDM when you install the agent. Seriously, he is an idiot.
  • I used to work for Apple there system is pretty locked down aside from that if I am purchasing a new phone/device I want something smooth responsive and android personally for me is like a kids toy. And I don't dig iPhone so windows was a perfect candidate and I have never looked back, and its only getting better with the release of W10 Mobile coming. 640~
  • I agree with Sweeney. Anybody should be able to write UWP apps and be able to publish them on their own Web site.
  • And that's how it already works, so you do not agree with Sweeney :)
  • Does want to discontinue win32 programs anyway in favor of uwp
  • Bullshit! Why cant he bash ios? Thing is, if it becomes that opened, the rate and frequency of malware apps will increase. MS need to ensure security first over some irrelevant opinions. It's open as it is. If you create, let's verify before you distribute. That way MS is still in control.
    Dear MS please ignore that man's opinion. Why is apple never bullied same way MS is?
  • because he makes video games and the video game market is mainly consoles and windows comuters?
  • That being said the consoles are locked down tight too. I daresay tighter than UWP.
  • i agree
  • This verification is important. UWP os not just for PC. Its also for other device families. All sorts of stuff can happen if you try to install apps into different devices.
  • He won't be bashing ios bcoz it's not the platform of his profession. Windows and Linux are his target market.
  • He needs to stop. No one needs to mod every game that freaking comes out on pc. It's not that serious. Even if a dev wanted you to mod just like Ori you can put your game in steam with Xbox integration. That's pretty open Eco to me. This win32 thing is how it USE to be before steam came along. I remember just installing a game without needing a digital store front. Why do I have to have all this bs on my pc to play a game? Origin, steam, ubiplay etc..? At least the store comes with the OS and is not extra crap. So instead of complaining how bout people go to the fools that started it all? I bought tomb raider in the store and have no complaints. Steam is cool but it's no fun when your buddies have Xbox or ps4. At least now they can see what games I actually play.
  • Sadly the tradeoff is that modding games can change a lot. Someone can make a ****** but super moddable game and it sells a lot because folks can do a lot with it. On the other hand, one can make a real stinker that can't be modded, and it's just bad. That's most trash nowadays. Since it's all just a bunch of asstastic console ports, there's no actual consideration for PC players because EA and Activision execs don't understand the difference. While I'm a UWP fan, I definitely understand the fear of losing the ability to openly modify games. I'm still leery of Steam since it even enforces a tiny bit of DRM. That's the tradeoff we have to make though, since smallminded businessmen are calling the shots.
  • They could still buy from the stream store that will connect to Windows store for download using a store to store API
  • Those of you who agree with him should try getting Shadow Complex or the very latest version of Unreal Tournament from Steam, Origin or the Windows Store.
  • Tim Sweeney obviously has no idea how the Windows Store works.   With UWP, your app is compiled and stored as bytecode.  When the app is requested by the device, a .NET Native compilation is requested where the code is then compiled to a platform specific binary for that device / resource set / processor architecture. This means much smaller download packages in UWP vs Windows Runtime apps of Windows 8/8.1. Tim's suggestion would require a deployment more akin to Apple's Rosetta technology.
  • On one hand i do agree with Mr. Sweeney. And on the other i can see Microsoft point. Where as in the past windows was more or less hackorama. And i believe that they are trying realky hard to tighten that up. Perhaps a middle road solution would be that certified developers would have the abilty to develop without all the red tape. Yet having Microsoft with the abilty to test at random. Posted via the Windows Central App for Android
  • And he won't agree with this solution, because he want MS to stay away from the release path. ____________________________________
    Twitter : @YashHarf
    Instagram : @YashHarf
  • The point being, I should be able to download AGE OF EMPIRE to pendrive, install it to some other PC's and login with my own account to play. Which is not the case now.
  • The point being, making Windows SAFE.. ____________________________________
    Twitter : @YashHarf
    Instagram : @YashHarf
  • Windows UWP is already "safe" in that nobody -- even malware authors -- are coding for it.  
  • Sorry?
  • Just pointing out the BS in "safer Windows next-gen" arguments. UWP is classic security-through-obscurity.
  • BS!! UWP is not security through obscurity. Go and learn what that means or check W10's installed base.
  • So you want draconian DRM that everyone complained about for Xbox one?
  • I like uwp, because 1: It is a lot more safe, 2: It makes it more likely for a windows phone app as well and 3: Every OS has a closed app eco system. Why should MS open theres to the world with viruses?
  • The sooner people stop the emotional attachment to their dead platform, the sooner they'll actually understand the subject matter.  I think mobile app envy is the only reason why people are trolling Sweeney. In fact, I'm pretty sure that drives 90% of the negative replies here.   
  • Lol not a dead platform, but hey, stick to the popular memes.
  • In fact, I'm pretty sure 138% of your post is trolling Posted from WC 920, 1520, 920, 635, 640 950XL
  • So to be frank.. He don't want MS to make Windows safe from viruses.. Such a dumb person.. Nobody is forcing him to make Universal Apps.. If he wish to make W32 apps.. shut the Fukk up and do it.. Who's stopping him...? ____________________________________
    Twitter : @YashHarf
    Instagram : @YashHarf
  • I just went to epicgames.com looking for the direct download for Infinity Blade so I can install it directly to an iPad. Weird, I can't find it.
  • This is the world apple created. If you don't like it, boycott iOS
  • We should thank Apple for making this world safe..
    I still remember the days when I used to play pirated games during my childhood.. I didn't knew that I was doing something wrong...
    ..
    With UWP, I'm pretty sure developers will make more money than the .exe version , by reducing the chances of piracy by 100%.. ____________________________________
    Twitter : @YashHarf
    Instagram : @YashHarf
  • I'm a fan of UWP. I really like the way that Microsoft has managed to bring together the phone, desktop, tablet and IoT devices into a single platform for developers. In the iteration from Windows 8.x to Windows 10 I now see UWP as the best way to target the Windows platform for a rich interactive app, whether it is a game or something else.   My understanding is that you can in fact distribute  UWP app to any device, its just that the device needs to first trust the source that has signed the UWP package. When you think about it , this behaviour is necessary not only for developers who will build, deploy and debug their apps several hundred times a day, but also for enterprises. Prior to Windows 10, and the enterprise Windows 10 store, organisations who managed a fleet of Windows 8.x devices had to deploy the *.appx bundles using a mobile device management platform. This implies that technically, a third party distribution model for UWP is possible. My advice? Watch this space. I wouldn't be surprised if we started seeing the UWP distribution model opened to channels like Steam in the future. There are also efforts underway to allow the packaging of existing Win32-based apps for distribution through the store.
  • Yeah, I too think this is the ideal way to distribute apps, for many reasons.
  • The users of this site are pathetic. I'm so glad to be transitioning away from MS's failed ecosystems.  
  • Yet you stick around to argue. Interesting. The motivations of people online are ridiculous. Just insult, no debate.
  • Pathetic like naming yourself after some irrelevant (c)rap artist?
  • I'm not against for the store apps to be more closed than win32 executables. I get why he makes all this fuss and throws a tantrum, it must clearly be bad for his business. But I don't think he has a right to tell Microsoft what to do against their own interest.
  • I stand for freedom
  • You're in the minority around here.
  • This comes down to a couple things: 1. MS must prove Tim is mistaken by laying out how UWP works and how developers can use it. That includes ways to port Win32 apps (Project Centennial). They have handled it well so far, acknowledging the concerns and giving useful facts. Phil Spencer pointed to Build for more info at the end of March.
    2. MS must fight against the double standard created by legacy users that would keep MS from creating better options for different types of users. MS is not allowed to have a walled garden of any kind compared to it's competitors, so MS is forced to walk a tight rope. Create that more secure, easier to use walled garden for the average user, while still offering the existing environment for the 'power user'.
  • Does Microsoft really have to prove anything to some guy?
  • I don't like or agree with this guy's arguement.  I like the idea of the Windows 10 store being the "one stop shop" with music, video, games, apps, and I liked the idea of old win32 programs eventually being converted to run as a universal app.  I also like the idea of the Windows Store being safe and secure.  This guy just wants to live in the past.  Why would anyone want to hunt around on random websites for Windows apps rather than knowing you can find everything easily in one secure place?
  • Oh, I dunno... what if you write an app that's critical of Microsoft?  Or an app that has a political viewpoint? In the brave new Apple-lite world of NeoWindows, you won't be releasing any product with a viewpoint Microsoft wants censored. It won't be on the closed UWP store. That's Soviet-style computing.  Even the claim that the censorship "keeps you safe" sounds like something from Pravda in the 1980s.
  • You make a valid point, but are taking things to an unrealistic extreme.  See, this is why we can never have nice things, because people immediately look at an unlikely, unrealistic worst case scenario, and begin spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt.  If a developer is "anti-Microsoft", why would they be developing for the Windows platform?  The best thing someone critical of Microsoft can do, is not offer their services to the Windows platform (such as Google, Snapchat, etc). This isn't "soviet-style computing".  :p
  • Microsoft's response is the equivalent of dropping the microphone. Furthermore, if Microsoft rejects it, it can be side loaded on any Windows 10 device. Also, the ability to install from sites would be insane for malware unless Microsoft forces each user to approve/reject permissions for every app.
  • After his post last week. I couldn't care less what he thinks. The guy didn't even know what he was talking about in his rant. It was pure FUD and almost all of it was false.
  • Microsoft is evil. We must fight microsoft.
  • If their evil we should fight. But if u find uwp stratergy evil then better don't use any smartphone bcoz system is locked down to them. There's a reason today wr have app store. Ppl come to know wust kind of apps are there in the store and can safely download application. Sure open nature is required but then it involves malware sites to attack your PCs too. If Microsoft succeeds on keeping the open nature and security both then hats off to them.
  • It's really simple. MSFT saw that AAPL and GOOG were making 30% of app sales and noticed that they made 0% of the larger Win32 software market (many billions of $$ per year), so they created their own walled garden in an attempt to make $$$ off the backs of Win32 ISVs. It didn't work. The WinRT app model is significantly inferior to Win32 and required rewriting existing code. MSFT could have defined a new Win32 subset that was secure and compatible with existing code (keyloggers and other system-level crap excluded). Enforce security at the kernel level instead of through "brokers" (that would have been hacked anyway if WinRT had taken off). My Win32 reseller, a small company, takes only 6% of sales. MSFT could have charged more for their Store services, say 10%, and I wouldn't complain ... but 30% is ridiculous. How would I explain to my customers that they're going to pay more for Windows Store versions of my programs (to make up for the 30% MSFT fee) and suffer with reduced functionality due to the WinRT restrictions? WinRT was DOA.  
  • With Centennial, Win32 apps can be packaged for the store and run in a sandboxed environment on the machine that promotes security and does not require code to be rewritten which is exactly what you are asking for. Glad you agree with what Microsoft did! You should read up on the platform... Sent from my Lumia 950 running Windows 10 Mobile
  • Centennial hasn't even been released so we don't know exactly how it'll work. In addition, it doesn't work with Windows 7 which is what the majority of my customers use. Finally, there's the 30% sales grab which is a deal breaker.
  • Yaaa
  • Perhaps Sweeney knows something we don't? Most probably, but everything can change last minute. Maybe Sweeney, is trying to influence something? Time will tell. If there is nothing and his just afraid. Win32 is not going away and won't be for a long time. Sure UWP's are locked down and for good reason. Granted the only thing that is impacted greatly are the AAA games and the modding community. But right now, there are so many store fronts, if you want win32 installs your spoilt for choice. Personally I sure as heck don't want people injecting code into UWPs like they can do with Win32 .exe's. Heck the store will prevent installers bundling adware, toolbars etc. Furthermore most Win32 installers leave alot of crap every where from the registry to hidden folders, redundant .msi files in the installer cache etc etc. Since UWP's run on the hololens aswell, i wouldn't want malicious code infiltrating something a person has strapped to their forehead. Honestly, this ludditesque thinking is progress prohibitive. We are at a point that CPU's have become so efficient and capable that we are seeing ULV cpu's in most ultrabooks and 2in1's. Combined with an efficient code base it's much better in the long run especially since battery tech hasn't kept up. I get it that there is a chance that developers won't release Win32 installs anymore. But given that people aren't going to transition that quickly to 10 (the end of life for 7 and 8 are still a few years away). It's not going to happen over night. Not to mention DVD based media will take a few years to dwindle. In that time guys like us will be the old dinosaurs and the app-centric toddlers will have grown up. For that generation an app-centric world makes sense.
  • I think this is actually a very encouraging sign for Microsoft. It means that UWP are something with getting on if Epic wants in on the game. I think Sweeney wants to be able to target XB1, PC, and HoloLens with one UWP and, as a business, doesnt want to have to pay 30% to MS for any reason. This is encouraging to see. Hold strong MS! And keep improving :D!
  • That is one delusional man.
  • Well, from the comments I'm reading here, Sweeny just stepped on his own penis. I have to agree, I'd like even more rigorous measures to reduce malware infections. If going through certification is a way, bring it on. If requiring selling on the Windows store, then by god, do it. Sweeney' barking up the wrong tree. Stay the course Microsoft.
  • That's why Project Centennial is so important. Moving Win32 apps into the store as well which not only would mean the code is scanned to reduce malware but it also means the app is contained in a virtual world with no access to the full registery or the full file system. Insalling software from obscure sites is risky, the same exact software with a container is much safer and that will result in more downloads (and better discoverability) so everyone wins (except those who want to spread malware)
  • Are you implying he has a huge penis? That's my take away from that ;) Posted from WC 920, 1520, 920, 635, 640 950XL
  • I don't think Microsoft should change anything about UWP. The current system is designed well and has sound security and integrity, which would be compromised, if Sweeney's suggestions are taken seriously. Microsoft is not forcing UWP down anyone's throat, so Sweeney can take a chill pill and stick to Win32 if he has such a huge problem with UWP. Posted from the Windows Central app Built for Windows 10
  • An analogy that I have used when I talked about app stores in an article written in HomeNetworking01.info (http://homenetworking01.info/2015/08/regular-operating-systems-and-their...) about the same direction Mac OS X and Windows are heading to harden their platforms was to refer to these platform-integral app stores in the same vein as a suburban shopping mall where the landlord can exercise control over the kind of tenants that can set up shop in that mall. It is although there are the likes of Steam which are essentially app stores or electronic distribution platforms and these app stores do exercise some control over what is being sold through them; and they exist alongside developers who "self-publish" their Windows and Mac OS X software by selling it through their own online storefront or making free titles available from their Website.      
  • Sweeney doesn't have much cred with me given his own bias towards NVidia hardware and their closed box Gameworks. Microsoft carries very a large responsibility with their app store and keeping it secure. Is no different for apple, android or steam.
  • Sense. This man makes none.
  • Security is more important!! A clean platform may bring the smoother user experience I guess!!
  • WTF.....why is that Microsoft always has to be open. Can he argues the same about Apple and Google.
  • This guy is crazy, right? You don't need an MS account and Microsoft don't need to certificate your app. You can create your own certificate... Almost the same way: http://www.windowscentral.com/mytube-windows-81-arrives-beta-everyone
  • Having games available for purchase on a more secured platform makes sense. And it is fair to both parties - if they make use of the Windows platform to earn money, it is reasonable that Microsoft also earns some money.  This is business. Having a centralized place (Windows Store) is what most customers want.  This encourages positive competition between game producers.  And it makes purchase of games much simpler than ever. Why doesn't he blame Apple Store and Android market?
  • I am not sure which prospect I like more. Having a much higehr degree of safety and not having to worry about spy/ad/male-ware, or having a trully open platform, which would bring some additional diveristy and possibly functionality.   I suppose ideally maybe apps coauld be branded or something as "approved by microsoft" (like the Nintendo seal of quality) if you get them outside of the store. Than I could simply tell to everybody that asks me if this is safe to donwload "just see that ot has the seal".
  • Great idea to bring antivirus apps for Windows Phone that is missing now.
  • Microsoft could allow to sell on any site a "ticket" for downloading from the store. For example: Buy in steam, receive a "promo code" insert on the store and download the app without paying the store.
    But maybe this man want their game cracked because is the only way allows big usage!
  • I have an idea. How about Microsoft ignores this guy and chooses not to sacrifice security of the future API. This is the same whine that Gabe Newell threw a hissy fit over when 8 came out and guess what? People still turn to Steam to buy their games. He didn't try to be more competitive either. Offer refunds? Frak that. Only "bad guys" EA will give you your money back. I honestly don't think that the Store will ever be a major contender for AAA game sales. Contender, yes. Big-time? No. Steam and to a lesser extent Origin are there and kinda eat it up. Of course none of it matters much to me since I'm coming back to gaming after a decade-plus hiatus and finding that games that cost more than about $25 start to become questionable in their quality, and the most expensive ones are often the shittiest from a coding standpoint. In other words, I don't give a rat's ass. The indie devs will go where the users are, and that's all that matters.
  • But their Games are not UWP, nor are they getting to that point. If Game devs getting accustomed yo circumventing UWP, how will they ever get gaming traction in the mobile space?
  • If Msft gets to decide what's nefarious, we have lost a lot of freedom of movement. We have a lot of self-developed, self-signed and self-deployed apps, if we'd loose any of those abilities, we would change horses. This is also true for a lot of OSS. That said, I'm currently really not sure if that's the case. Can I "install" and app that is 100% UWP by copy-paste? If not, we won't convert to UWP.
  • The store downloads are so unreliable:
    - they fail 60% of the time
    - the store does not give you any indication about the current downloading speed
    - they can not be resumed after a restart so you must download it all in one try imagine downloading a 30 GB game and the download fails at 70-80% and you have to start it again
    and think about all the poor kids who live on pirated games
  • While it's nice to have the option to install any software from any website or source it's also a huge problem and the source of most malware. No one is being forced to use UWP, you can still build your apps or games with other technologies. So if you want to make your software available on your website that's fine. I'll probably still continue to install apps like that myself but I'd really prefer it if my mom didn't have to install apps/games that way.  People who aren't so tech savvy (so most of Windows' user base) can use the Windows Store to install apps that passed some code screening to make sure the code is relatively safe and that can be removed remotely if something is discovered later on. And when Win32 apps (courtesy of the "UWP" bridge) will be installed that way too, without access to the registery and without leaving lots of crap around I won't have to "fix" anyone's computer again. I prefer that to UWP apps coming from other sources. I'm ok with the apps outside the store using other technologies
  • UWP and Centennial apps are sandboxed. So, maybe you get a malware, but to a very limited effect.
  • The store will prevent his precious games to be pirated, and at the same time the store protects the OS from viruses, and he`s against it because MS will ask for a % of his sales. That`s his main issue with the Store
  • He's statement is completely false! you do not need to register as a developer with microsoft to sideload apps and you do not need to submit apps to do it either. It. Is. Completely. False.
  • I think too many are not understanding his point and I agree with him. He is asking that you are allowed to sideload universal apps without the need to sign, like android. You should only need signed if on ms own store
  • No, he wants a legally binding clarification, if he can sign, distribute and install UWP apps independently from MSFT. And I too think he/we should be able to do this. For MSFT, this would have the benefit of making a lot of games Windows-only, ie. Not running on SteamOS.
  • Side loading is possible.
  • My comment not appearing
  • Requiring a 3rd party to approve your work is basically censorship. Would the store allow any app? Strip poker? Or a game where bill gates is the antagonist? Or anything else generally considered in bad taste to an extreme? An intern at MS would never flick the on switch for any of those. Id like two types of uwp apps. Those tested and curated by ms. In the store. And those tested by a third party or automated tools or something, to ensure their technical quality. Perhaps "built for windows 10" for the store and "tested for 10/10"
    for other releases.
  • This guy is crazy as.... He really want to continue the trend of consumers downloading tonnes of on wanted app? If you are not smart enough to un-tick additional apps agreement or use custom installation, your PC will be full of virus, malware Trojan ect. Plus there is the opportunity of buying apps for free from MS Windows store if you used Bing. What this shows me is that the Windows store is making grounds that's why it's getting a fight from this stupid man who don't care about consumers security.
  • As I said last time…you people sure missed the point or don’t know what you’re talking about. (to you few people who do, thanks! This doesn’t apply to you)   Let me list off some restrictions that are in the UWP (as of right now): -Your game/app MUST run borderless windowed mode. This means there is no feasible way to run it in full screen. -Your FPS MUST be 60 FPS maximum. This means that your 144hz monitor with gsync and setup that runs games at 90+ FPS….NOPE! - Vsync HAS to be turned on. If you don’t know why this is relevant, this topic doesn’t apply to you, and you don’t know how many issues turning OFF VSync has fixed for games.   On top of it, all game files are encrypted and cannot be changed in ANY WAY…so this means NO MODS or hot fixes without going through MS certifications. Which…when was the last time you had a AAA ship day one and not need a day 1 patch or hot fix (The fact that you HAVE to think about it says it all)? SLI/Crossfire support is STILL broken as heck. So this aligns with the SAME thing valve said before that seems to align with MS’ tactic that the Windows 8/10 store is a “Direct attempt to create a walled garden for PC” which seems to fit into MS’ strategy of Adopting standards, adding proprietary standards, then using said standards to disadvantage the competition. Even IF this isn’t the case, MS is saying the UWP is open when…that sounds pretty darn closed off to me.  It seems as if that the goal is to lock down a market (i.e. PCs) to achieve simplicity like the consoles, but PC’s HAVE NO STANDARDS because they change every month! No two PC’s are the same, and you can’t force a platform like that to a standard. Clearly people forgot about games for windows live. Oh and why certain software can’t be sold on disc with windows discs because the courts checked them on it.   Let’s take an example: Tomb Raider. Currently on Steam and Windows Store. Patches, add-ons and updates come out later on the UWP version. Probably because they need to pass certs on UWP. With the average person looking at reviews online and advice, there is NO reason to get it from UWP than Steam for that reason.   Do your research people and stop gun jumping in defense of MS. Let’s also take note: If Sweeney actually didn’t want to see this succeed, why would he offer advice and suggestions?
  • I'm really glad Tim Sweeney is pushing this issue. I work for a company that develops a Win32 app that, at low volumes, sells for $15,000 per seat. We have our own sales teams worldwide. I would love to move off of Win32 to a modern Windows app dev platform like UWP, but there is not a snowball's chance in Hades we will ever do that if we have to submit our application to Microsoft to get their approval, and we are certainly never going to give Microsoft a 2% cut of revenue, let alone 20% or 30%. The application development framework and delivery models need to be separate.  Using UWP should not pidgen-hole me into a particular delivery model.  If I want the advantages of the Windows Store model, I should be able to tap in, at the cost of giving Microsoft a cut.  If I don't, I shouldn't have to.  Our customers can decide if they trust us enough to install our software. And, unbelievably, the Windows Central comment box is still horrifyingly poor, dropping characters constantly.  What a joke!
  • This is a very well informed comment.
    The pole jockery for an issue that people don't know the in-depth details of is strong in this comment section. It frustrates me to no end.
  • I thought the reason it you couldn't just go to a website and download an app was to help make it harder to make apps with virus' and such.  Right now before I download an app I never heard of I check out reviews and such to make sure I'm not downloading something that will be harmful for my system.  I've had clients download programs that have had malware and virus' in them.  If the app is coming from the app store you can be more sure its safe (sure something may get through but less likely).  If Microsoft lets people download apps from anywhere then we're back to where we are now.  I am all for being able to download Microsoft apps from any well known app store like Steam, Humble Bundle and GOG.  That would be great, because maybe with Steams sale you can get a game cheaper than you can on the Microsoft's store.
  • We're still were we are, when nobody really adopts UWP. If nobody adopts UWP, we will never get sandbox-only environments, which is what's needed.
  • UWP is getting wide attention, and many apps are being developed for that
  • We'll see... all I see after 8 months of W10 is the same crap in the store and virtually no big names.
  • He's talking about developing games. Apps are a side thought. Despite what you think, App and Game development are two TOTALLY different things.
  • They are trying to make a business deal with potential developers. I think it's great. It's funny how Microsoft just did all the other platforms a huge favor, and they are mad about it? Lol! Can't wait to see how open the ecosystem becomes.
  • Define favors.
  • Lol, "it would be foolish for the worlds major developers to accept this technology". Hello, McFly! They aren't targeting those companies. They pretty much give all the software, tools, knowledgebase to make UWP apps. It's clear who and what they are looking for.
  • Actually, no major developer sells through the Windows store. No major company is converting their LOB apps to UWP. To have no major makes it virtually impossible to make small companies jump. To give 30% of your revenue makes it practically a no-go area.