Skip to main content

Project Centennial desktop-to-UWP app converter now available for download

At Build, Microsoft demoed a tool dubbed Project Centennial that lets developers convert desktop (Win32) apps to the UWP (AppX) platform, making it convenient to publish traditional apps to the Windows Store. Microsoft has now made the tool available for download in preview to those running build 14316 or newer.

From Microsoft:

Desktop App Converter allows developers to bring their desktop apps to UWP. It converts a desktop Windows installer such as MSI or exe to an AppX package that can be deployed to a Windows 10 desktop. The software may collect information about you and your use of the software and send that to Microsoft.

Apps ported using Project Centennial will be able to leverage the functionality of the Universal Windows API, including Live Tiles, Cortana integration, Action Center, and more. The utility is Microsoft's latest bid to make it easier for developers to push content to the Windows Store, with the vendor also working on porting iOS apps through Project Islandwood.

Download Desktop App Converter Preview

Thanks Tony for the tip!

  • I hope many developers use this. Sent from Windows Central app for Hololens
  • windows central app for HoloLens? I wonder if there's a Holo-Rubino in it...
  • Is it posible to say, grab a PC indie game and use these tools to make it a UWP. Of course I know that would be stealing, but I'm not saying I would post it and make it buyable. I mean a free indie game and only have it as a sideload app. Also what would we need to add, the mobile control interface and what else?
  • it would only work on desktop win 10
  • No, I think it can work anywhere, it probably requires some additional work, but Centennial apps aren't limited to PC only AFAIK.
  • Centennial apps are limited to PC after conversion, if you want to run it on mobile you need to remove all win32 calls from it and use the new UWP APIs instead. In other words the bridge just converts the "envelope" but you still need to port the app code manually if you want to deploy it to ARMs for example.
  • Then how it becames UWP?
  • @PrithwishDas
    It doesn't. This article's title is just wrong.
  • Not true, UWP doesn't mean automatically works on all platforms.
  • It's truly sad that your dumbass can't comprehend it. For all those that are curious, here's the text from msdn Windows 10 introduces the Universal Windows Platform (UWP), which further evolves the Windows Runtime model and brings it into the Windows 10 unified core. As part of the core, the UWP now provides a common app platform available on every device that runs Windows 10. With this evolution, apps that target the UWP can call not only the WinRT APIs that are common to all devices, but also APIs (including Win32 and .NET APIs) that are specific to the device family the app is running on. The UWP provides a guaranteed core API layer across devices. This means you can create a single app package that can be installed onto a wide range of devices. And, with that single app package, the Windows Store provides a unified distribution channel to reach all the device types your app can run on.
  • Thanks for proving how ignorant to the whole idea you truly are.
  • Actually I confirmed nothing except you still don't know what you're talking about. Hopefully, just hopefully, I can educate you. I will be a rudamentry as possible so no technical jargon gets in the way.   UWP stands for Universal Windows Platform, which basically means all Windows 10 devices understand the instructions given. Lets say you give every English speaking person a dictionary, that's UWP. You can get give them instructions (if worded coherently) and they will understand. I can say "Drive to work" and everyone will understand what I mean, but some won't be able to execute because they don't know how to drive. So the ones that can drive are full PC's and the ones that can't are mobile devices. I can also word my instructions, travel to work. Everyone understands that, and can get to work, so we would then have an app that runs on all devices. Our only limitation there, would be those that don't work. That could be considered a device limitation, such as a PC that doens't have a webcam or a mobile device that doesn't have enough RAM. So UWP Apps can absolutely be run on all Windows 10 devices, if coded properly, but all UWP apps do NOT have to be able to run on all devices to be considered UWP. You're putting the word Universal in the wrong context, and then illogically applying it to every situation. It's similar to saying every square is a rectangle, but not every rectangle is a sqare.    tl:dr You're wrong, and if after that you still don't get it, there's no hope and you should stop commenting on subjects like this.
  • "An excellent explanation that confirms there is no such thing as "universal" apps. " I still can't get if you are trolling or really can't understand... easy explanation: UWP is a platform that enables developers to create Universal Apps. These apps CAN, but don't have to, run on any Windows device. As simple as that. If you don't want to call "Universal" that subset of apps that, while being based on the Universal Platform, were only realeased to a part of the supported devices you are welcome to do that.
  • At this point, it's safe to assume he'll never get it. He seems to think that because a dev can write an app that doesn't work everywhere then the platform isn't universal. He doesn't understand programming, or fragmentation apparently. I gave it one last try, but I guess you just can't fix stupid.
  • Actually the article doesn't say it becomes a universal app. It says it converts the program into the universal windows app platform. No one, who knows what they're talking about, ever said you can take centennial and make an app run everywhere. UWP's intention wasn't to automatically make everything run everywhere, it was to give a platform to start with so you CAN make everything run everywhere if you decide to do so. Not every programmer knows how, not every app makes sense to do so. The fact is, you CAN code once and run on all windows 10 devices, or you can code once for each device. You can also use a bridging tool to get you started and work to finish your app so it runs everywhere. If you can find anything that says otherwise, from anyone reputable, then you have an argument.
  • Yeah and? No one is saying you can't do that. It requires more work is all. The bridges change the platform. Nothings says or has ever said put your app in here and magically it'll just work with everything. Even islandwood says you may need to make code changes. So please just stop. You've proven many times you don't know what you're talking about.
  • No you did not show me that. Learn to read. A bridge between classic win32 and universal does not say turns your win32 app into a universal app magically without any work. If you're too dumb to get it, that's on you at this point.
  • You like to argue and it's ok. Please go on. Everyone has understood how this works. If you want to continue nitpicking and be ridiculous go on.
  • LOL
  • The sad part is he's using this as a basis for there being no such thing as a universal app when there are plenty of code once run on all windows 10 platforms apps out there.
  • The main flaw in your logic is that while your examples may not be universal apps, it doesn't disprove the existence of universal apps. It's very simple, candy crush is universal, tiny troopers would be another. Hell the calculator app is universal. I could go on to list them all but simply providing one example disproves your theory that a universal app can't exist. By the way, your band argument is wrong since the band doesn't run Windows 10. Either way, hardware requirements also do not disprove the existence of a universal app. My PC doesn't have a webcam, it can still run software that uses a webcam. All the instructions are recognized by my PC, and it will execute them, but the nonexistent webcam won't turn on. That is absolutely NOT a software limitation. It does NOT make an app not universal. The fact you think so only further shows you don't even know how a computer works. At this point I'm done replying to your stupid logic. Do yourself a favor, educate yourself on how a computer actually works. You obviously have a lot to learn about operating systems and CPUs.
  • LOL you should really go back to basic logics, start with "necessary conditions", "sufficient conditions", "necessary and sufficient condition". Then study something basic about software, understanding what he means when he says "instructions are recognized" would avoid the meaningless answer. Anyway this discussion between you two was very funny you should go on, please!
  • The proper explanation is that they are UWP apps but they can work only for PC for example. Paolo Ferrazza explains above what needs modified for app to work on ARM as well. But it's still less work for devs to do apps for all devices
  • I explained this. The app becomes universal as in "it can be sold via store and you can add live tiles and all other things". As we know, being universal doesn't mean it will run everywhere, in this case it can't run on phones until you remove all legacy (win32) api calls and use UWP api instead. Look at bridge documentation if you want a more in depth explanation, the bridge just creates a package for your app that will be tested when put on the store, it just creates an envelope it doesn't do any magic, there is no emulator or anything that translates win32 to UWP apis at runtime neither at compile time.
  • @Paul If having the ability to be distributed through the Windows Store is the sole thing determining whether software deserves to be called a universal app, then that would be correct. I don't think that's a reasonable definition. I think having the ability to also use the WinRT API is the best argument one could make for legitimately calling such Project Centennial treated piece of software a UWP app. I guess the question is whether calling something a UWP app means that the software uses the WinRT API exclusively. IMHO it should be.
  • 6 months ago, I'd agree with you, but MS now refers to Centennial apps as "Universal"
  • @Jas00555 At least technically it's BS. Such BS has real affects on how the technology is percieved however. If it really would turn Win32 apps into UWP apps, it would make complete sense to imagine you could then just add an optimized phone UI to such an app and then run it on Windows Mobile. That's how many here perceive it, and that's completely reasonable considering the claims of them being UWP apps. It's just wrong. I think it's fine to call Project Centennial a UWP bridge, as it allows developers to use the WinRT API from a Win32 application (that's all I've ever seen MS say). It's wrong to say it converts Win32 software into UWP apps (which I have not seen MS say). Those are two different things which some people are confusing. MS has proven over and over again that they completely suck at communications. If MS insists on using the later BS definition, then this would just be another example of them sucking, as it implies something that isn't true.
  • @Jas00555 I think you're misunderstanding somethign here Jas00555. This is the first scentence in that article: "Prepare your Windows desktop application (like Win32, WPF, and Windows Forms) for conversion to a Universal Windows Platform (UWP) app by using the Desktop Conversion extensions." That I agree with. This blogger isn't saying that Project Centennial converts your Win32/WPF/whatever app into a UWP app. He is saying Project Centennial prepares your app for conversion to UWP.  Preparing software for conversion to a UWP app is not the same as converting it outright. You're making the same mistake the WCentral staff is.
  • I think the entire communication about this makes no sense. For example, here's a part from the second sentence, " is a bridge that enables you to convert your classic desktop application (like Win32, Windows Forms, and WPF) or game to a Universal Windows Platform (UWP) app or game" If they're not calling these apps UWP apps, then they're trying as hard as they can to make no sense in their communication.
  • @Jas00555 Yes, I mostly agree. I don't think this guy is trying as hard as he can to not make sense though. He just isn't doing a great job. No doubt he also isn't anticipating that non-software-developers would read blog posts like his. That second scentence makes sense to me too, but only in the context of the first scentence which clearly states it's all about preparing an app for conversion. Once you've prepared an app for conversion, you can obviously go ahead and start converting it more easily than if you hadn't prepared it. That's all I take away from that. In the third scentence, he goes on to say: "After conversion, your classic desktop app is packaged, serviced, and deployed in the form of a UWP app package (an .appx or an .appxbundle) targeting Windows 10 Desktop." I think he's rather clear that the app is "only" packaged, serviced and deployed as if it were a UWP app (that's what allows it to be distributed through the Windows Store). Nowhere does he say that it actually is/becomes a UWP app!
  • I don't know, MS definition is kinda vague "", actually they shouldn't even care about explaining this to consumers. While to me and and you and other IT experts this definition is more than enough. It's when we try and explain this to consumers that it becomes difficult so it needs some semplification... To me saying that this is a special UWP (since it ticks many boxes of the MS definition page) that can be converted to fully UWP with more work is good enough :)   The original sin is the U in UWP, if they called this EWP extended windows platform or something like that it would not create these problems to consumers, the word Universal is misleading to many.
  • @Paolo I agree it's somewhat vague. However, in the link you posted to MS does say this "At the core of UWP apps is the idea that users want their experiences to be mobile across ALL their devices" This is the thing... a Win32 app that underwent the PC (Project Centenial) treatment isn't yet mobile accross all devices. If that's the core of UWP, like MS states, then I thinks it's absolutely fair to say that the PC treatment doesn't result in UWP app, because such apps aren't mobile accross devices at all. They could eventually become mobile accross devices, but depending on the size, complexity and technologies used by the app, that could still require a boatload of work (basically a complete re-write). Project Centennial doesn't notably reduce the amount of work we'd have to do to convert a Win32 app into a real UWP app. It does allow us to break that work down into smaller steps and get their gradually over time however, and that's a very good thing. That's of course in addition to enabling distribution through the Windows Store. Again, just to be clear, I don't want people to think I'm dissing Project Centennial. I think it's great! It's just not what some think it is. That's all I'm trying to clarify here.
  • No, that's not possible, because you also need access to the installer. It's the installer that Project Centennial "converts". Changes made to the program itself are very minor. In some cases (when devs did things they shouldn't have), devs will also have to make slight adjustments to their software's source code themselves. The program itself remains laregely unchanged, i.e. calling it a UWP app is missleading. It's still a Win32 desktop application, but one that gets a new installer and some runtime-support services that allows it to be distributed through the Windows Store. That's "all" this is. Such an app can't run on anything except Windows Desktops. Converting it to a real UWP app still requires a from-the-ground-up rewrite. The best thing about Project Centennial is that it provides the capability for software to access both the older Win32 and the newer WinRT APIs simultaneously, whereas previously software could only access either one or the other. The benefit of this capability is that software can gradually migrate away from Win32 and, piece by piece, be converted to a real UWP app without it having to occur in one fell swoop. At the end of the day though, this still amounts to a complete rewrete of the entire software. That is a huge task, but it helps to be able to do that in smaller steps. I'm not dissing the technology here. I think it's a great thing. What it does is just being explained very poorly, or at least things are being implied that aren't true (as usual when WCentral reports on issues that are actually technical)
  • In a nutshell, it's like converting a Win32 program into a Windows 8 Store App. A Win8/8.1 app will run on a desktop but that same app won't show up in the Windows Phone 8/8.1 Store. The difference is that Apps in the Desktop Store for Win8 would run on WinRT, but here in reality only these Win32 apps will run on Win10 for x86 & x64 systems without some modifications by the dev. The benefit for the dev here is that their app can be visible in the Store instead of having to rely on people coming to your web site or other sites to download and install.... And if you need to update, put the update automatically through the store rather than adding a whole update checker function in your Win32 program or waiting for users to manually update on their own. From WC W10M App on a 950XL
  • This is the exact issue I just highlighted directly to Microsoft. Project Centennial is going to make it so easy for some dodgy developers to steal others property. Taking a pre-existing Win32 app and converting it a a desktop-targetted UWP app is now a piece of cake. Some people will steal others property, and publish it in the Windows Store. Big name apps / games will be noticed by MS of course, and will be taken down pretty quickly, but there really is nothing to stop me taking Photoshop, converting it to an Appx, and publishing it in the Windows Store. The Windows Store is not heavily curated, and in the name of speed, if an app passed the Certification tests it is auto-published in the store. Any human checks are made after the app has actually been published. Small apps, games, and utilies are going to be the main titles that will be stolen and re-published in the Windows Store, either for free, or worse for a free where that dodgy dev makes a quick buck! Microsoft are going to have a real problem here. They will have to figure this out, as otherwise the Windows Store will be pirate heaven!! By the way for those not aware, and I've heard this from some people, a UWP doesn't necessarily run on all Windows 10 devices e.g. PC, Tablet, Xbox, Phone, Hololens, IOT etc. UWP apps can be targetted for specific device types. For Centennial converted apps, the UWP Appx is targetted to desktop x86 / x64 only. Centennial apps are UWP apps but they will not run on phone, Xbox, or an IOT device. They might however, run on a Hololens, as a Hololens runs a 32-bit build of Windows 10, so is basically a PC. Xbox whilst x86 based, cannot run Win32 desktop apps, and Phone's use an ARM processor so are architecturally different  
  • Steal what? You would still need license, serial number. This doesn't allow you ty bypass that, nor does it offer a way to do that. I think you are confused.
  • You mis-understand me. Of course there are a large number of games and apps/utilities that are "protected" by a license / serial number, but there are many more apps and utilities that are not protected, and are free to download and use. Its those apps I'm most worried about. Anyone can grab say, Paint.Net, which is a free to download, free to use application. They can convert Paint.Net to an APPX, and publish it in the store for a fee. Someone can make cash from converting apps / utils they do not own That's still stealing someone elses property, even if that property was offered for free in the usual Win32 installer contact. Surely it's wrong to take that "free" app, convert it, and sell it in the Windows Store when that app is not yours Glenn
  • Looking at the efforts MS is making for the developers, I think a short notice to them will suffice to start an investigation. I don't believe that MS didn't thought of this anyway, as they have quite some free programs themselves.
  • Heard of signed installers? I think MS said something about requiring the developer to show the original certificate used to package the x86 installer before it can be put on the app store.
  • The requirement for the appx to be signed by a trusted root certificate is only if you want the Appx to be side-loaded / sold outside of the Windows Store. All Appx's submitted to the Windows Store for publication are unsigned. The Windows Store signs them with a store certification before publication. I certainly don't remember them saying the install has to be signed, but do remember the appx has to be signed for sideloading, but not store submission. I work as a dev at Microsoft, so have asked for clarification on these issues internally.
  • I may have misunderstood this in that case, but it would be a way for microsoft to be sure the original user is uploading the freeware (or pay-ware as well)
  • you also have to keep in mind they're making a big point about collecting information about the user, the software, and the pc and sending it back to microsoft when you use this tool. they'll probably say its for metrics & testing, but i bet if pressed, they'll also note it can be used to track this kind of stuff.
  • microsoft are no fools when it comes to software, they are already aware of this problem before coming out with this ideal, believe me they have a solution for it which u dont even know.;
  • Microsoft has mentioned that you need to get your appx certified by a trusted root, otherwise you can't submit it to the store.
  • I remember them talking about the trusted root certificate, but believe that was only if you want to side-load, and sell outside of the windows store. Appx packages submitted to the Windows Store are not signed. The Windows Store signs them as part of the store ingestion process. ​So even the trusted root thing isn't going to prevent this
  • I will pay upto ₹500($8) for aoe2 without thinking second time....
  • With xbox achs
  • This converted Desktop to UWP-app can not be run on mobile devices?
  • That's my question too
  • I doubt that it will run on mobile.. Hadware specification are way to powerfull of desktops.. Thought small apps like converter.. Browsers etc should work
  • It can't and never will... at least not in the form such software takes after being put through the "Project Centennial treatment". See my comment above for more details.
  • It can't yet. There's rumor of Microsoft producing a Surface phone that uses an Intel processor so that it may become possible... But those are just rumors for now.
  • no. it doesnt convert binaries, just installer packaging and adds manifest for live tile/etc. and your mobile devices arent win32 and x86 compatible.
  • So technically, it's not really universal... Or windows mobile isn't really truly windows 10...
  • nobody said it was universal... that's something WPCentral is saying but I think they mean UWP as platform, as store, but not as an universal app. like gigantic and many apps and games that are released through store but won't make it to phones because they are not universal apps meant to run on ARM. as you can see on the text from microsoft: ​"converts a desktop installed such as MSI or exe and convert it to an Appx package" they don't mention universal anywhere.   It doesn't even create live tiles automatically but it's something devs can do easy. so yeah it's just a repackaging so it will be installed on windowsapp on program files through the store and be in a sandbox so they will be safe and won't create many registry entries that are not necessary like happens with many software still today.    
  • You're absolutely right. It's not a UWP app and shouldn't be called that... unless the defining property of a UWP app is the ability to be distributed through the store (hint: it isn't). WCentral is very poor when it comes to reporting on things that are actually technical (like software development). See my first answer above for more details.
  • Because it can't run on mobile doesn't mean it is UWP. There are many uwp apps in the store that are x86 only. Look at all of the recent games for example.
  • @Xsled "Because it can't run on mobile doesn't mean it is (not?) UWP" is completely rediculous. If you forget the word "not" in that scentence then I'd agree, but you'd not be contradicting anything I've said. BTW: I'm a software engineer with a lot of experience in these areas. It's unlikely you can tell me something I don't already know.
  • No. Windows 10 Mobile is NOT real Windows 10. It shares common base cores with it but it's still a separate OS. Just like Windows RT shared with Windows 8. They call it Windows 10 Mobile for marketing. That's why I keep referring to it as Windows Phone 10. Because that's what it is. The apps on the WP10 Windows Store still have to be at least prepared for mobile. Developers have to intervene so that their Windows 10 apps are also available on WP10. Having a "UWP" doesn't make the app automatically available on WP10. Posted via the Windows Central App for Android
  • See my answer above.
  • Almost wish I started building WPF/Win32 applications and did this. Can't wait to see how many companies do this Zachary Bowling - ZAD Apps
  • I can not install it.... I'm trying to follo the instructions but didn't work
  • Will give this a try today at work, hopefully it can handle complex projects.
  • It can handle anything but it just changes the "envelope", you still need to remove all win32 calls to make it run on mobile for example. It's a good start anyway.
  • According to the instructions, you need Win 10 Enterprise build 14316 or later to install.
  • oh sh*t.... I have only Windows 10 pro (Surface Pro 3).
    I'm so disappointed.
    I waited this tool and I was so excited to have it... :(
  • Sonos, please use this!!!
  • No, Sonos please release a UWP app that'll also work on mobile. Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • Yep converted from 32 should work on mobile as well.
  • Yes, converted (read: completely rewritten as UWP) will work on mobile as well. Simply running the existing Windows app thru this "converter" won't do anything but allow the Sonos app in the store. Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • So would we need the source code of the .exe file or else just the .exe file will do, Just like project Astoria ?
  • the source code, of course !
  • In the MS quote they didn't say anything about the source code "MSI or EXE to AppX"
  • Just pin the normal exe to start if you don't have the code it doesn't make any sense. It's not like converting an app without doing the extra work to remove win32 calls and/or add livetiles, cortana etcetc will change anything.
  • It will allow the app to be submitted to and sold via the store. That's the while point of this. Lightroom for example, can be bought and installed from the store. Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • Look what argument I'm answering to before answering to me :) To someone that wants to convert someone else .exe to use it on his system the bridge is as useless as pinning the normal exe to start.
  • neither. you need the installer. and if you want it on the store, you'd need the installer certificate as well i *think*. moreover, astoria emulated android. this is more like sandboxing the application installation.
  • This is brilliant now port some steam games with xbox ach support
  • I wish MS release Project Astoria tool just like centennial, so we would be able to run whatever APK just directly in W10 PC without the BlueStaks thing
  • Project Astoria was removed last year.
  • It really is too bad they didn't try to FIX Project Astoria, It really made the missing apps available for us...
  • this is not the same as astoria. remember, all the apps that get packaged can already run on the desktop. this isn't emulation. its just changing the way they're packaged so they can be sold through the store. this is an economical move to help push developers to utilize the store for win32 apps.
  • Sonos and Spotify... please take note!
  • I think people don't see the full light on this project. It's also about converting packages that are now currently used/deployed in SCCM environment. It is a good incentive for a company to upgrade to Windows 10, knowing it can have its apps in the store. This can also be combined with a BYOD project. Users will be able from their own device to install company apps through the Windows 10 store. I will investigate to what extent Centennial can be used for a company.
  • That's more of what it's for, easier device management and guarantees of no fake software being installed.
  • Once the store issues are addressed (vsync, overlays, sli ect) I think UWP will eventually be very popular with developers over win32 for 1 main reason... piracy. Sideloading store apps requires signed certificates approved by Microsoft. Windows store exclusives Gears of war & Quantum break are nowhere to be found on torrent sites. This is without the use of expensive Denuvo anti tamper protection which has become popular with big publishes to stop piracy. However for continuum to take off with consumers, Microsoft needs one of the following to happen... 1. Cloud hosted win32 apps accessible via any windows client 2. x86 emulation for arm processors similar to what Apple did with power pc when they switched to intel. 3. Intel based mobile cpu The problem with option 3 is that the Atom x5 & x7 are not competitive at the high end and I personally think that is Intel's choice. There is a very good reason Atom performance has flatlined over the past 2 years... Good enough computing is a massive threat to intel's revenues. Nvidia X1, Apple A9x & Qualcomms 820 are $35-45 chips that are very close to $200+ core i3 performance. In order for Intel to win in mobile they would have to sacrice their entry level core i3 revenue for an equal performace $30-40 Atom processor. Not going to happen!  
  • Would be great if such programs could update from the Store like any other Store app. Currently, if a Win32 program has an update then it'll redirect us to its website to download the latest package. Some Win32 programs, however, have in-built updating function but most don't. So, it would be awesome if these ported Win32 programs could update directly from the Store.
  • That's what this is all about. When a developer keeps putting updates to the store, it will allow the app to be updated from the store, even if it was a converted desktop app and is still a win32 app. Another great feature will be that the app will be "wrapped up" in its own container like other store apps, which means no danger of spreading viruses. Safe to use.  If you have to restore your system, a "backup" can restore your apps from the store. It's a lot less fuss than dealing with having to reinstall a bunch of software from different places, etc. I'd like to see everything convert to this in the near future. It would be great for everyone. Plus, the more Win32 apps get ported like this, the more popular the store itself will become, hence it will attract more UWP developers to the platform.  In the long run, it's a win, win for all, as long as it all works the way it should.
  • If it wont run on mobile its not right to call uwp
  • Somebody down voted you but I don't know why. You are right, it shouldn't be called UWP, since it's not universal. It would just enable the MSI/EXE file to be converted into an .APPX for Store import. That is all.
  • You said it like it is not a big deal but actually it is. With this you can publish your win32 application thought the store and target the same customers you did before but in a modern way. I don't want to use Paint.NET on my phone but I would like to install it on desktop through the store. It's more secure and appx are sand boxed so they cannot leave garbage after they are uninstalled. Also, companies that want to use private stores for new application now can convert old one and distribute it the same way.  I see no reason to run HoloLens app on 2D screen. UWP is universal because all win10 devices share the same API, not because every app should work on every device. Still, running legacy app on x86 phone in continuum would be great feature. Even possible one.
  • It's not big deal because this is targeted for Windows Enterprise. Companies still tend to use SCCM for deploying .appx if needed.
  • Guys, read the full story. This is desktop only. Also, if the article is read, it says MS will collect data, so I guess any 'irresponsible' behaviour could be picked up fairly quickly if any erroneous behaviour occurred. I can't see them releasing this tools without any caveats or system checks. It is good news though, especially for the smaller dev community
  • Is photoshop cc can be converted by adobe to uwp?
  • It seems the UWP here is misleading the article. It converts the installer so that you can have the app in Windows Store. Behind the installer is the same application. There for it won't work/install on a mobile platform.
  • What if Android app that written in c++ can be converted..
  • This is the big question is the tool only able to be used on build 143xx or later or is the created app only able to be used on a build 143xx or later? Posted from Windows Central for Windows 10
  • Can't wait for people to convert other developers' win32 apps and claim them as their own!
  • Wish everyone would just convert their win32 apps now...would make it a much better platform
  • Converts will pay 30% tax.
  • When my motherboard of my gaming PC comes back from service (out to MSI service for over 3 weeks), I'll give this a shot on a few MSI's I have...
  • Quick, someone legitimately port VS2015 to a universal app. ----------
    I am someone, of the 2639th variety.
  • :D
  • One thing you forget... Devs who decide to "port" their win32 apps into Windows Store, will earn 30% less because of Store tax... NOT A SMALL THING! Microsoft need to reduce it!!!
  • This is a total money and power grab for Microsoft .  Microsoft can remove your software from the store and your device at anytime they choose.  Stick to normal Win32 installers to keep some control even if there identical software is in the store one day.
  • After Quantum Break fiasco? No, thank you.
  • Ok guys, this is not good news. I work for Microsoft, and asked the question about what Microsoft will be doing to protect peoples work i.e. what's to stop an dodgy dev from using the Desktop App Converter to convert an application / game they don't own, and publishing it to the Windows Store. There are  a couple of scenarios for a converted Appx. To be side-loaded i.e. installed from another store, or installed from the desktop by double-clicking the Appx, the Appx package must be signed with a root certificate. To be published to the store, an unsigned Appx package is uploaded to the Store, where the Store perform some certification checks, and when passed, the Appx is Store signed ready for publication. There's technically nothing to stop me taking my favourite utility app, converting it to an Appx, and publishing it to the Store to be Store signed and published to the world :-) Except there is, which is good news. Otherwise people would rip off others work. However there's a downside too :-( So this is the answer I got from a member of the Project Centennial team: "Publishing a modern desktop app to the Store requires a restricted capability, which is only given to publishers that Microsoft trusts" In a nutshell, if your a big name publisher like Adobe etc, then no problem. Microsoft will trust the big name publishers, but as for small studios, or indie devs that self publish their Win32/WPF apps, utilities etc, then sorry, but you will not be "Centennial" trusted as a publisher, and won't get the "restricted capability" required to be able to publish Centennial apps to the Windows Store. So good news that software IP and copyright will be protected by establishing a publisher trust, however that means that most people hoping to get the Win32/WPF apps in the store can't. Glenn
  • so this is neither universal, nor for the store (for the majority of tools), and requires a special version of windows what exactly is it for?  I'll pass :)