Coffeehouse Thread

40 posts

Alright, the Windows 8 appstore is a non-starter (except for fart-apps)

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • wastingtime​withforums

    Since Metro sucks for anything non-touchy anyway, at least until it hits version 3 or something, the only interesting tidbit about the appstore was the rumour that desktop apps would be listed too.

    Taking 30% profits from devs is sucky of course, but as far as I know, freeware is hosted for free, and the appstore could FINALLY solve the age-old problem of maintaining gazillion of updaters for Flash, Adobe Reader and Java. You know, all the stuff that is installed on just about EVERY damn PC and is usually freeware.

    I could totally see Oracle and Adobe listing their readers and runtimes in the appstore, so that at least Windows 8 users could finally use an integrated updater mechanism. Alas, as usual, Win 8 disappoints:

     

    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/11/14/minimizing-restarts-after-automatic-updating-in-windows-update.aspx

    Lastly but not the least, I want to address the feedback from users who would like WU to update their 3rd-party applications. People clearly find the experience with multiple updaters on the system less than optimal (and we agree!) ....  However, as we discussed at the //build/ conference, the new Windows Store will provide a one-stop shop for (free and paid-for) Metro style apps, with an integrated update service to help ensure apps are maintained in a consistent manner

    Huh, what about desktop apps? Oh, right:

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/239994/windows_8_app_store_what_we_know_so_far.html

    The Windows Store is supposed to be an easy way for you to purchase touch-centric apps built with the new Windows 8 Metro-style interface in mind. But Microsoft said you will also see traditional desktop apps listed in the Windows Store.

    During the demo, the company showed the Windows Store listing for popular finance program Quicken, including a link to the Quicken website to purchase the product. Microsoft said it doesn't want to require established programs to rewrite their licensing models and payment systems just to fit into Microsoft's new Windows store--a comment clearly aimed at Apple's Mac App Store. Instead, it will provide what is basically a free listings service for non-Metro apps.

    "We love the ecosystem that's around Windows applications," said Steven Sinofsky, Microsoft's president of Windows and Windows Live. "And we want to make sure that it [the old Windows ecosystem] blossoms in this world as well."

     

    Yeah, right! Seriously, fix your newspeak already, it just sucks.So basically the "appstore" for Windows 8 is just a glorified Windows Marketplace or download.com, yay, that's what the world is waiting for! Sheesh, allowing desktop apps into the appstore would fix an age old problem, but I guess that would make too much sense. And the excuse sucks - so what if some developers won't use AppX or whatever? Those who don't want to use it, just keep them as a mere links, and those who will write an installer that can be used with the appstore will get the full appstore treatment. Problem solved. The 30% tax for metros is bad enough, but this cripples it completely.

    Verdict: Together with Metro, the Fartstore can be canned just as well.

    And can the fanboys please tell me Metro how in its current form will be suitable for anything remotely business- and professional related? I just can't imagine something like Quicken or Cubase in Metro, unless either Quicken/Cubase or Metro get completely bastardized from what they are now. Given that people make money with those programs and Metro is a shiny, headache inducing toy (for now at least) I can already see who gets the shaft at the end. My guess: Metro in Windows 12 will be so bloated and extended that you won't notice the difference in looks to a classical Win32/Winforms/WPF app. Which kinda negates the whole point, doesn't it?

    Given all this, Windows 8 is only interesting for tablets and/or if you just need to run your favourite farts on the desktop too. Everyone else should wait until Metro gets raped enough until apps written for it can look like Win32 and the porting of desktop apps to Metro will begin.

    MS probably realizes it too and and just goes with it to capture as much tablet marketshare as possible with *shiny* in the meantime.

    And now comes again the worst part of Windows 8 facing these circumstances: Metro is useless for productivity workers, the appstore is completely useless just as well for them, and despite this, the mutant OS forces Metro on everyone. Just separate these two worlds completely for now and everyone would be happy.

    Looks like Windows 7 will have a looong shelf-life.

  • cbae

    Have you ever seen a Metro-styled business application? No? Have you even bothered to look at VS11 to see what kind of capabilities Metro-styled apps can have? No?

    Then you have NO CLUE about whether or not Metro is "useless for productivity workers". Seriously, tone down the hyperbolic rhetoric.

    AFAIK, "productivity workers" are used to applications that have textboxes, buttons, comboboxes, listviews, radiobuttons, checkboxes, grids, lists, richtextblocks, etc. Guess what. Metro-style apps can have all of those controls and more. The only difference is that application windows have no chrome.

    I personally don't like full-screened applications. I don't even like the tabbed UI paradigm. However, that doesn't mean that most other people are like me. 

  • Dr Herbie

    @cbae: Our application runs full-screen using a browser-style page stack (with back and forward buttons).  This is now our customers asked for it to work; they will be more than comfortable with Metro-style business applications.

    Herbie

  • Craig_​Matthews

    This is a serious question -- I'm not joking or trying to be flippant:

    Does this mean

    1. Select a picture and copy it.
    2. Swipe 4, 7, 10 or however many times horizontally until full screen PowerPoint is on my desktop.
    3. Paste my picture.

    Is going to become the norm for working with multiple apps? 

    (That split screen thing they showed on YouTube where you can have -- oh boy -- TWO apps on the screen at once doesn't really help here).

     

  • Harlequin

    , Craig_​Matthews wrote

    2. Swipe 4, 7, 10 or however many times horizontally until full screen PowerPoint is on my desktop.

    Remember there's swipe gestures....don't have to swipe 14 times to go over there --->. Just need to make some gestures to bring up thumbs of the apps quickly and click the app you want. The more you do it the faster you'll get.

  • contextfree`

    Is this with touch only or with keyboard/mouse? If you have a keyboard, note the normal keyboard shortcuts for getting around in Windows still work everywhere, even if you're on the start screen or in a Metro style app. You can alt-tab to see thumbnails of all your windows (both desktop and Metro style, and the Aero Peek previews on mouseover still work for both), use win-D to go directly to the desktop or win-T to the taskbar, and even the win-[number] shortcuts for starting/switching to programs pinned to your taskbar still work everywhere, even when the taskbar isn't visible.

    About the swipe from the left thing ... if you're using a mouse, you don't actually have to swipe/drag at all to cycle through the top-level windows, you can just throw the pointer to the left side of the screen then click, click, click.

    Also, for sharing data between Metro style apps I think the Share/Picker contracts are ultimately intended as the preferred way.

  • magicalclick

    My question is, can I make an wpf .net app running in desktop, and still implement the appstore installer? Or can I make a win32 high profile game and can be installed and updated through appstore? I mean, don't tell me it cannot even compete with steam. I hope this is all a lie.

     

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • DeathBy​VisualStudio

    @magicalclick:

    I don't think so. It's my understanding that your app has to be WinRT/Metro app to be installed & updated via the app store. At best Microsoft will allow you to promote your non-WinRT/Metro app by providing you a means to list your app in the store but the listing will be nothing more than a re-direct to your web site where they can purchase the app.

    I think it's pretty clear that it's go WinRT/Metro or go home. Despite Microsoft's allusions to the desktop being a viable option for developing apps they are killing it with a thousand little cuts with moves like this. I just wish they'd come out and say it: their investment in desktop technologies is over. The desktop is your backwards compatibility box and that's about it.

    I love this double-speak too:

    Lastly but not the least, I want to address the feedback from users who would like WU to update their 3rd-party applications. People clearly find the experience with multiple updaters on the system less than optimal (and we agree!) ....  However, as we discussed at the //build/ conference, the new Windows Store will provide a one-stop shop for (free and paid-for) Metro style apps, with an integrated update service to help ensure apps are maintained in a consistent manner

    Summary: We know having multiple 3rd party app installers suck. Instead of addressing the problem we'll leverage our app store to try and get developers to write Metro apps in order to take advantage of the apps store's update services.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • AndyC

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    I love this double-speak too:.

    That's some heavy duty creative editing you've done there, essentially snipping out the entire paragraph that ends with "The wide variety of delivery mechanisms, installation tools, and overall approaches to updates across the full breadth of applications makes it impossible to push all updates through this mechanism.  As frustrating as this might be, it is also an important part of the ecosystem that we cannot just revisit for the installed base of software." Just a tad skewing the point on your part, don't you think?

     

  • PaoloM

    Hey, don't try to inject facts into some well thought out conspiracy theory!

  • DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , AndyC wrote

    *snip*

    That's some heavy duty creative editing you've done there, essentially snipping out the entire paragraph that ends with "The wide variety of delivery mechanisms, installation tools, and overall approaches to updates across the full breadth of applications makes it impossible to push all updates through this mechanism.  As frustrating as this might be, it is also an important part of the ecosystem that we cannot just revisit for the installed base of software." Just a tad skewing the point on your part, don't you think?

    I disagree. They could provide an AppX implementation for "legacy" apps that streamlined installation (like ClickOnce) and let devs convert to it but they chose not to provide that option. IMO they purposely chose this path in order to "encourage" the development of WinRT/Metro apps.

    A thousand little cuts...

  • figuerres

    Problem is as i see it is that MS seems to not care what we say or what we want.

    in some respects i understand this but i also see the impact this impresssion can have.

    i see that more than a few developers and tech folks are starting to walk away from the "Microsoft" camp and if this trend keeps up MS may find that they do not matter.

  • wastingtime​withforums

    , AndyC wrote

    *snip*

    That's some heavy duty creative editing you've done there, essentially snipping out the entire paragraph that ends with "The wide variety of delivery mechanisms, installation tools, and overall approaches to updates across the full breadth of applications makes it impossible to push all updates through this mechanism.  As frustrating as this might be, it is also an important part of the ecosystem that we cannot just revisit for the installed base of software."

    And you haven't read an entire paragraph in my opening post:

    And the excuse sucks - so what if some developers won't use AppX or whatever? Those who don't want to use it, just keep them as a mere links, and those who will write an installer that can be used with the appstore will get the full appstore treatment. Problem solved

    Don't tell me it would be rocket science to allow opening up the appstore for "traditonal" types of programs. Steam proves it can be done just fine even on Windows, and the games there are nothing more than just good old Win32 applications.

    I understand there's another reason: The sandboxing that WinRT provides. But it's not as if there isn't a way to provide non-WinRT applications and still be safe. This problem could be solved by a verification system: Vendors who want to publish desktop apps need to provide their full name, adress, website URL and their credit card number, MS charges 0.1 cent from the card and the vendor then needs to enter the code that was is listed in the bill. Lots of pay systems have similiar verifications. Again, no rocket science for a multi-billion dollar company.

    At the very least, why not allowing companies that can be 100% trusted, like Oracle, Adobe etc. and this way solving the third party update troubles for 99% of all users?

  • Blue Ink

    Can you imagine the lawsuit fest that would arise about who gets to be "100% trusted" and who doesn't?

  • wastingtime​withforums

    , Blue Ink wrote

    Can you imagine the lawsuit fest that would arise about who gets to be "100% trusted" and who doesn't?

    This fanboyism cracks me up. If Apple and Valve managed to do it for "desktop applications":

    http://developer.apple.com/appstore/guidelines.html
    http://steampowered.com/steamworks/FAQ.php

    Then MS could surely do it too if they wanted. Stop searching for dumb excuses.


    So, anyway, is there any good reason to upgrade to Win 8 on the desktop now? I don't see any. Oh, wait, yes, faster boot and some lowered system specs.. but you get the forced 1.0 Metro annoyingness in return... raw deal.

  • Blue Ink

    @wastingtimewithforums: sure they can, how dumb of me. Windows N and the browser ballot screen (just to mention a few) must be a figment of my overactive fanboyist imagination.

  • magicalclick

    IMO, if I cannot buy/install/update awesome DX11 native games through the appstore. I am not sure why I would want to use the appstore anymore. I really hope those implications are just speculations.

     

     

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • AndyC

    @magicalclick: And who says you won't be able to? It's perfectly possible to write a full C++/DirectX game within the WinRT framework and the full screen behaviour is perfectly suited to games.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.