Microsoft Will Make Steam "Progressively Worse" With Windows 10 Patches

rezerekted said:
Trust you to show up with your "yes man" attitude.

I am the voice of reason, never trust Microsoft or anyone that relentlessly defends them.
Click to expand...

Defend them from breaking Steam on Windows 10 that happens to run perfectly on Windows 10? And the games? There's nothing in this case to defend. Steam works fine on Windows 10 and has since release almost a year ago.
 
BHenry said:
Yep, I am glad that day is dead and gone.
Click to expand...

Why? you could so easily get no-cd patches, create a ISO and mount it but the most important part was you physically owned the game.
With steam you are basically borrowing the game and they allow you to.
 
heatlesssun said:
Even if this were the case, I don't see developers quickly porting games over to a platform that Steam says consistently month after month with its survey has virtually no users.
Click to expand...
A devs start to use Vulkan/universal APIs there isn't a need to port. It should just run.
 
ClariorHincHonos said:
A devs start to use Vulkan/universal APIs there isn't a need to port. It should just run.
Click to expand...

OGL was the same. You still have to build, test and support each executable. If there's not enough people for that platform to buy the game to support those costs you're not getting anywhere financially.
 
sadsteve said:
I don't know. I check for patches on my Win 7 systems every week and they all take hours to find the patches (3 machines). This seemed to start 6 or 7 months ago for me.
Click to expand...
SCCM downloads via WSUS, and then distributes and installs them on lots of systems (in my case about 10k+). If this process took hours people would lose their minds. Perhaps there is something up on your systems that is causing the delay? Or slow ISP?
 
heatlesssun said:
OGL was the same. You still have to build, test and support each executable. If there's not enough people for that platform to buy the game to support those costs you're not getting anywhere financially.
Click to expand...
Ah, but now we have an environment that if you have a universal API that provides decent performance on mobile/PC/console in one shot...very worth the time. And that is more the case these days with consoles being x86.
 
ClariorHincHonos said:
Ah, but now we have an environment that if you have a universal API that provides decent performance on mobile/PC/console in one shot...very worth the time. And that is more the case these days with consoles being x86.
Click to expand...

But it's still not one shot. For mobile you'd have to have a touch UI, consoles you'd have to optimize, PCs create options that scale to hardware. I find it interesting that people that have said Windows 8/10 doesn't work because you can't create an OS for both desktop and mobile seem to think that creating a large, complex game is easy to port across multiple platforms and input types.
 
heatlesssun said:
What current OS supports as many applications that ran on prior versions as does Windows 10? Windows 10 wins that one easily simply because of its enormous software library.
Click to expand...

I can still run python 2.7 apps on OSX 10.11, just fine. I daily run ancient utilities on my Linux kernel 4.4.2 based server. Unless there is some definitive proof for your statement we can carry on presenting examples from our own experience. How do you define 'enormous'?
 
heatlesssun said:
But it's still not one shot. For mobile you'd have to have a touch UI, consoles you'd have to optimize, PCs create options that scale to hardware. I find it interesting that people that have said Windows 8/10 doesn't work because you can't create an OS for both desktop and mobile seem to think that creating a large, complex game is easy to port across multiple platforms and input types.
Click to expand...
You are comparing in game UI development to the underlying code. They've had to do multiple UI's for a long time now. What I'm talking about is the same underlying code for all systems - something that has not been used as of yet to my knowledge. Up until the current gen consoles, you'd have 3 different APIs to use if understand correctly (Xbox, PS3/Sony, PC). Xbox may have been a bit easier, but still not the same as PC.
 
Vyedmic said:
I can still run python 2.7 apps on OSX 10.11, just fine. I daily run ancient utilities on my Linux kernel 4.4.2 based server. Unless there is some definitive proof for your statement we can carry on presenting examples from our own experience. How do you define 'enormous'?
Click to expand...

Python 2.7 is current and multi-platform and runs on Windows 10 so those apps should run fine on Windows 10. Some of those ancient utilities might even run on Windows 10 Anniversary Update with the Linux Subsystem. 12 year old versions of Photoshop aren't running natively on Linux, not with WINE or something else. Nor 12 year old games that were never ported to Linux. I think arguing over perhaps the greatest strength of Windows, its long and well documented history of backwards compatibility with 3rd party software, is a little strange.
 
ClariorHincHonos said:
You are comparing in game UI development to the underlying code. They've had to do multiple UI's for a long time now. What I'm talking about is the same underlying code for all systems - something that has not been used as of yet to my knowledge. Up until the current gen consoles, you'd have 3 different APIs to use if understand correctly (Xbox, PS3/Sony, PC). Xbox may have been a bit easier, but still not the same as PC.
Click to expand...

How does Vulkan make it anymore the same underlying code as OGL? There's a difference between the same code and a cross platform API.
 
crusty_juggler said:
Can we get a sub-forum where heatlesssun, myself and the rest of the Windows Defense Force just argue with Linux gaming enthusiasts all day?

I'd pay a subscription fee for that.
Click to expand...

I have to admit it, this is entertaining. Even if we've been down this road many, many times with accusations of Microsoft sabotaging just about every app in the universe. It's amazing that for all of that sabotage just how well Steam and pretty much all of my games in Steam still run. There is one that's a pain, Timeshift, but that's not Windows 10, that's because the game freaks out on machines beyond quad core.
 
heatlesssun said:
I have to admit it, this is entertaining. Even if we've been down this road many, many times with accusations of Microsoft sabotaging just about every app in the universe. It's amazing that for all of that sabotage just how well Steam and pretty much all of my games in Steam still run. There is one that's a pain, Timeshift, but that's not Windows 10, that's because the game freaks out on machines beyond quad core.
Click to expand...

does not look like much help TimeShift | PCGamingWiki
 
ep0x73 said:
Why? you could so easily get no-cd patches, create a ISO and mount it but the most important part was you physically owned the game.
With steam you are basically borrowing the game and they allow you to.
Click to expand...

Easy, I got sick of messing with CDs and finding patches that allowed me to play without them. Owning hundreds of games makes storage a bit of a pain. Also, a few years ago I lost most of my physical disk games and PC in a robbery, so all that remained were my Steam games.
 
Derangel said:
No new problems with Chrome on Windows 10 versus any other OS. Outside of the annoying memory leak, which Chrome has had since the damn browser was in beta. It is most likely an issue with the browser itself. Chrome has always been horrible with resource management. Doesn't matter what OS it's on or what version you're running. I've been using Chrome since Google released the first public beta. Program compatibility issues happen with every OS. Major updates cause things to break. It would be nice if it didn't happen, but it's the developer's job to make sure their shit works.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm crazy to assume MS could handle a kernel update that didn't always break the competitions software. I can't remember the last time I had to futz with any software after upgrading a Linux Kernel.

You have pretty much pointed out the basic MS defense here. "Its not our fault their software is buggy" This is exactly what Sweeney is getting at. MS updates lately seem to mess with the very way third party software interacts with the OS... and to top it off MS does obviously malicious things on purpose (such as forcing chrome to run in compatibility mode after an "upgrade"). Its not that Google or Valve can't roll with the punches and update over and over again to side step MSs hurdles. Still in the end it is MS who is punishing their end users for not running MS software.

Every time someone does some Win 10 Update they shouldn't expect to have to wait a few weeks for their non MS software to be running properly. For the majority of average computer users MS hope is they will just go back to using the "less buggy" Microsoft stuff. All the little issues that have cropped up with every major Win 10 update leads me to believe its an evolution of the same MS anti competition practices that keep getting them in trouble.
 
ManofGod said:
Just did just now, it is working fine. In fact, I am posting this reply in Chrome right this instant. Sounds like you have an issue on your own computer, may need to try it fix that problem.
Click to expand...

To be honest I haven't tested it in weeks its possible one of the latest google updates have fixed the issue... frankly when I'm done with what ever game I rebooted for I just reboot back to Linux. Thankfully these days the only reasons I ever have to touch that crap OS are for a couple of MMOs. Damn my weak self, I am going to ween myself off those games yet. haha ;)
 
ChadD said:
You have pretty much pointed out the basic MS defense here. "Its not our fault their software is buggy" This is exactly what Sweeney is getting at. MS updates lately seem to mess with the very way third party software interacts with the OS... and to top it off MS does obviously malicious things on purpose (such as forcing chrome to run in compatibility mode after an "upgrade").
Click to expand...

The defense is "Where is the problem?" Steam runs fine on my Windows 10 devices, all of the games I've installed and tried, around 100 in the last year on 10, with few exceptions have all worked, some required setting OS compatibly. The one I remember is Timeshift because I just tried it last week and that's an issue with support for machines with more than quad core CPUs. Just about every major review site, including [H] uses Steam games on 10 for benchmarking GPUs now. Chrome 64 bit works fine, even with touch on Microsoft's own Surface devices no less. LibreOffice works fine. GIMP works fine. The list goes on and on with software I've tried under Windows 10. I'm not saying there are no issues. But this notion that Microsoft is intentionally breaking stuff flies in the face of almost everything working fine that I've tried.
 
ChadD said:
To be honest I haven't tested it in weeks its possible one of the latest google updates have fixed the issue... frankly when I'm done with what ever game I rebooted for I just reboot back to Linux. Thankfully these days the only reasons I ever have to touch that crap OS are for a couple of MMOs. Damn my weak self, I am going to ween myself off those games yet. haha ;)
Click to expand...

I personally do not think of any OS to be crap and like them all. I just prefer Windows 10 as my primary host OS on all my computers. I have no issues with what someone else wants to use, I just have issues with someone coming online and spreading bull which you know is not true. (You have not done this and that is ok.) As a host desktop OS, I find Linux to be too limiting in what it can do. I personally do not like to just sit and customize my desktop or play around like I did back in my Amiga and OS/2 Warp 3 days.

On topic though, no, Microsoft is not intentionally going to break Steam from working or working well. The guy seems to be simply bitter and something of a narcissists with absolutely no prove of his accusations at all.

ChadD said:
I guess I'm crazy to assume MS could handle a kernel update that didn't always break the competitions software. I can't remember the last time I had to futz with any software after upgrading a Linux Kernel.

You have pretty much pointed out the basic MS defense here. "Its not our fault their software is buggy" This is exactly what Sweeney is getting at. MS updates lately seem to mess with the very way third party software interacts with the OS... and to top it off MS does obviously malicious things on purpose (such as forcing chrome to run in compatibility mode after an "upgrade"). Its not that Google or Valve can't roll with the punches and update over and over again to side step MSs hurdles. Still in the end it is MS who is punishing their end users for not running MS software.

Every time someone does some Win 10 Update they shouldn't expect to have to wait a few weeks for their non MS software to be running properly. For the majority of average computer users MS hope is they will just go back to using the "less buggy" Microsoft stuff. All the little issues that have cropped up with every major Win 10 update leads me to believe its an evolution of the same MS anti competition practices that keep getting them in trouble.
Click to expand...

Then I see you post stuff like this and clearly have to rethink what I said about you not spreading fud, which is clearly what this above is doing. Sheez, you just simply cannot help yourself, eh? ;)
 
heatlesssun said:
What current OS supports as many applications that ran on prior versions as does Windows 10? Windows 10 wins that one easily simply because of its enormous software library.
Click to expand...
You keep saying this, but to play devil's advocate, it's been my experience that every new version of Windows means there are LESS legacy games I can run, it's always a crapshoot. Windows XP / 2000 wouldn't run some games that ran on 95 / 98 (though the extra stability was worth it). Vista ditched Directsound3D and introduced more games that wouldn't run. Windows 8 / 10 made many games that used older copy protection unplayable (though that one I actually think was justified, since that stuff was so invasive). Also I still need to confirm it, but I read that Windows 8 / 10 made it so that DirectX 6 / 7 games are much more difficult to run properly due to some code it changed (if anyone knows specifically what I'm talking about, please let me know. I read this a week or so ago while trying to troubleshoot an old game). I've been meaning to do a test sometime where I try to install a bunch of legacy games on a Windows 7 machine, then repeat the experiment and see how many still make it on Windows 10. My guess is it wouldn't be an insignificant number (if you enjoy older games).

Granted, MS has a lot of backwards compatibility, but as time marches on it never ENSURES it via emulation or something else. There are always small things that break with new updates and especially with OS changes, it's constantly chipping away and it's a dice toss as to whether your favorite games will run on the updated version. As a legacy gamer, I can say having no certainty in this stuff blows. That's why I was saying if MS tries to transition to UWP, it will be over many years, with Win32 slowly becoming more and more buggy. After 2 years, maybe only 5% of programs are affected, then after 4, it's 20%, etc. It has nothing to do with how realistic this is, it has everything to do with if that's what MS wants to do or not.
 
Another me too; it's cool to hate Windows 10 article...

Whatever... New Intel hardware isn't even going to the supported on Windows 7 by the end of the year, early next year anyhow with the Skylake refresh to Kaby Lake (Intel has already shipped processors etc. to OEMs)... If Microsoft truly screws everything up as much as this guy says, everyone will have moved to another OS with RDS hosts running business apps that can't run natively on the OS of choice.

There is more to computing than video games and lots of the things that allow business applications to run, also allow games to run. Business PC sales account for the majority of PC sales again according to an article that was posted just a couple of days ago...

The major attack seems to be on UWP which I can appreciate but UWP doesn't have to mean Windows App store... This is what we have right now if you would like to load a UWP application on Windows 10 without the App store.
Enable your device for development

With Windows 10 enterprise you can side load apps using trusted certs etc. via SCCM and supposedly other MDM products as well.

Give it time for this to get more popular and it seems like there is a chance we will see automated installers or competing App stores on Windows 10, maybe even Steam... Maybe I'm completely wrong but really only time will tell.

Change is hard...
 
ManofGod said:
I personally do not think of any OS to be crap and like them all. I just prefer Windows 10 as my primary host OS on all my computers. I have no issues with what someone else wants to use, I just have issues with someone coming online and spreading bull which you know is not true. (You have not done this and that is ok.) As a host desktop OS, I find Linux to be too limiting in what it can do. I personally do not like to just sit and customize my desktop or play around like I did back in my Amiga and OS/2 Warp 3 days.

On topic though, no, Microsoft is not intentionally going to break Steam from working or working well. The guy seems to be simply bitter and something of a narcissists with absolutely no prove of his accusations at all.
Click to expand...

There really isn't any limit on what you can do on Linux. Yes there is more to do then just play with your desktop... of course you hear about that still plenty as there are 1001 options there for better or worse. lol

I know for plenty of people I have convinced to switch they find many of the software they where using under windows was linux software anyway. Things like VLC UMS Calibre 7zip ect ect are Linux fist and tend to run (at least in my experience I admit) better under Linux. Of course there is still a handful of Windows software like the photoshops and drafting software that would preclude some folks from ever really switching to Linux unless something major changed. For most of us though... there are games and that's about it making it worth keeping windows around. Anyway doesn't sound like I'm going to convert you in a couple forum paragraphs... if your system is working smooth, that's the main thing.

Anyway your right I can't help arguing this stuff... some of us have to much fun arguing back and forth over OSs. OSs are supposed to be boring and stay out of our way. Well in a perfect world anyway... of course that will never happen as long as companies drive the OS. (that knock goes further then MS of course as Apple and Google play their own games at times) Perhaps Sweeney and Gabe are a bit nuts... and perhaps they are just defending their own turf for their own reasons. I would simply say if there is zero truth to what they have been saying... then MS has to do a lot better job handling updates of their own OS. Its getting to a point where you almost want to shut any auto update off as standard practice and just do manual updates when you are sure they aren't going to cause w32 , account, or driver issues for your most used software.
 
tetris42 said:
You keep saying this, but to play devil's advocate, it's been my experience that every new version of Windows means there are LESS legacy games I can run, it's always a crapshoot. Windows XP / 2000 wouldn't run some games that ran on 95 / 98 (though the extra stability was worth it). Vista ditched Directsound3D and introduced more games that wouldn't run. Windows 8 / 10 made many games that used older copy protection unplayable (though that one I actually think was justified, since that stuff was so invasive). Also I still need to confirm it, but I read that Windows 8 / 10 made it so that DirectX 6 / 7 games are much more difficult to run properly due to some code it changed (if anyone knows specifically what I'm talking about, please let me know. I read this a week or so ago while trying to troubleshoot an old game). I've been meaning to do a test sometime where I try to install a bunch of legacy games on a Windows 7 machine, then repeat the experiment and see how many still make it on Windows 10. My guess is it wouldn't be an insignificant number (if you enjoy older games).

Granted, MS has a lot of backwards compatibility, but as time marches on it never ENSURES it via emulation or something else. There are always small things that break with new updates and especially with OS changes, it's constantly chipping away and it's a dice toss as to whether your favorite games will run on the updated version. As a legacy gamer, I can say having no certainty in this stuff blows. That's why I was saying if MS tries to transition to UWP, it will be over many years, with Win32 slowly becoming more and more buggy. After 2 years, maybe only 5% of programs are affected, then after 4, it's 20%, etc. It has nothing to do with how realistic this is, it has everything to do with if that's what MS wants to do or not.
Click to expand...

You are just looking at games, that's a very narrow way of looking at it. MS could kill off it's entire gaming division tomorrow and the only major bottom line impact would be the cost of severance packages. Win32 is used by basically every piece of software on your computer. Games are not all that important in this situation. MS would need to get every business and enterprise developer on board with UWP on top of convincing every business currently running Win10 to convert to using the Windows Store. That will not happen. MS would kill themselves trying to forcefully phase out Win32. They can not let Win32 become bad over time, it would be suicide for them as businesses and software developers would simply cease support of Win10 and continue working on 7, 8, or Linux. What MS would like to happen is irrelevant, MS can wish all it wants but unless they want to attempt corporate suicide they're pretty much stuck supporting Win32 for a long time.
 
I can see M$ doing this.....slowly....it's just how they operate being a billion dollar company. What doesn't make sense is, Steam pushes the newest titles. What titles? Well DX12 titles, which M$ wants to push and sell alongside win10. So makes no sense to cut off the Steam supply yet, when it's a boon for selling DX12 / Win10.
 
tetris42 said:
Granted, MS has a lot of backwards compatibility, but as time marches on it never ENSURES it via emulation or something else. There are always small things that break with new updates and especially with OS changes, it's constantly chipping away and it's a dice toss as to whether your favorite games will run on the updated version. As a legacy gamer, I can say having no certainty in this stuff blows. That's why I was saying if MS tries to transition to UWP, it will be over many years, with Win32 slowly becoming more and more buggy. After 2 years, maybe only 5% of programs are affected, then after 4, it's 20%, etc. It has nothing to do with how realistic this is, it has everything to do with if that's what MS wants to do or not.
Click to expand...

I think GOG makes plenty of money selling old games updated to run on new versions of Windows. At least one company is profiting. :)

It is true anything that goes back more then one version of windows... is going to require MS compatibility mode which may or may not work, or a recompile with some changes. It is funny that many older games run better on linux under wine.
 
Derangel said:
You are just looking at games, that's a very narrow way of looking at it. MS could kill off it's entire gaming division tomorrow and the only major bottom line impact would be the cost of severance packages. Win32 is used by basically every piece of software on your computer. Games are not all that important in this situation. MS would need to get every business and enterprise developer on board with UWP on top of convincing every business currently running Win10 to convert to using the Windows Store. That will not happen. MS would kill themselves trying to forcefully phase out Win32. They can not let Win32 become bad over time, it would be suicide for them as businesses and software developers would simply cease support of Win10 and continue working on 7, 8, or Linux. What MS would like to happen is irrelevant, MS can wish all it wants but unless they want to attempt corporate suicide they're pretty much stuck supporting Win32 for a long time.
Click to expand...
Well I have two counterpoints to that:

1. You say MS would be committing suicide, but I would have argued that forcing desktop users on a partially functional tablet interface by default was a "questionable" move for Windows 8. I would also say that trying to get everyone on board with automatic forced updating and aggressive upgrades to Windows 10, regardless of how it might affect a system is too risky a move also, but I'm being proved wrong. In my opinion, the way they handled Windows 10 updates on 7 / 8 alone borders on lawsuit material, it's what I would expect of malware.

2. It doesn't have to play out exactly as he states to achieve the same effect. Fine, let's say MS continues supporting Win32 for Enterprises, then that's it, everyone goes the stagnation route. Or hey, let's say DirectX 13 requires UWP applications and won't work on Win32, that way they're targeting games, but not most other consumer programs. There's more than one way to skin a cat on this.

ChadD said:
I think GOG makes plenty of money selling old games updated to run on new versions of Windows. At least one company is profiting. :)

It is true anything that goes back more then one version of windows... is going to require MS compatibility mode which may or may not work, or a recompile with some changes. It is funny that many older games run better on linux under wine.
Click to expand...
That's an excellent point, GOG's business model was originally formed because so many games don't work on modern Windows.
 
Canon said:
Give it time for this to get more popular and it seems like there is a chance we will see automated installers or competing App stores on Windows 10, maybe even Steam... Maybe I'm completely wrong but really only time will tell.
Click to expand...

Ha! Competing app stores.... Yes, just like on Xbox!

Change is hard...
Click to expand...

When it's change for the sake of change and doesn't improve upon what it's replacing, and in the case of Metro/UWA is actually a massive regression compared to Win32, then it's going to be hard to get people on board.
 
tetris42 said:
You keep saying this, but to play devil's advocate, it's been my experience that every new version of Windows means there are LESS legacy games I can run, it's always a crapshoot. Windows XP / 2000 wouldn't run some games that ran on 95 / 98 (though the extra stability was worth it). Vista ditched Directsound3D and introduced more games that wouldn't run. Windows 8 / 10 made many games that used older copy protection unplayable (though that one I actually think was justified, since that stuff was so invasive). Also I still need to confirm it, but I read that Windows 8 / 10 made it so that DirectX 6 / 7 games are much more difficult to run properly due to some code it changed (if anyone knows specifically what I'm talking about, please let me know. I read this a week or so ago while trying to troubleshoot an old game). I've been meaning to do a test sometime where I try to install a bunch of legacy games on a Windows 7 machine, then repeat the experiment and see how many still make it on Windows 10. My guess is it wouldn't be an insignificant number (if you enjoy older games).
Click to expand...

Sometimes that is the apps fault. I'm not saying backwards compatibility in Windows perfect and I was specifically referring to the compatibility of games I have on Steam, which is kind of the topic here. I have like 220 games on Steam and I've not touched most of them in years. But I've tested about 1/2 of them in the last year just to see how many would run in 10 and the results have been very good.

tetris42 said:
Granted, MS has a lot of backwards compatibility, but as time marches on it never ENSURES it via emulation or something else.
Click to expand...

Hyper-V helps.

tetris42 said:
There are always small things that break with new updates and especially with OS changes, it's constantly chipping away and it's a dice toss as to whether your favorite games will run on the updated version. As a legacy gamer, I can say having no certainty in this stuff blows. That's why I was saying if MS tries to transition to UWP, it will be over many years, with Win32 slowly becoming more and more buggy. After 2 years, maybe only 5% of programs are affected, then after 4, it's 20%, etc. It has nothing to do with how realistic this is, it has everything to do with if that's what MS wants to do or not.
Click to expand...

UWA and Win32 aren't that disconnected. If you break Win32 you're going to break UWA as well.
 
ChadD said:
Its getting to a point where you almost want to shut any auto update off as standard practice and just do manual updates when you are sure they aren't going to cause w32 , account, or driver issues for your most used software.
Click to expand...

I've done 4 Insider Preview updates on the sig with about 40 Steam games installed now. Not one has broken in that process. Neither have Chrome, LibreOffice or GIMP. Heck even CPU-Z which was having issues with the Threshold 2 update in November last year is coming across fine. I'm not saying everything is fine but you're acting as though the process is completely broken.
 
heatlesssun said:
Sometimes that is the apps fault. I'm not saying backwards compatibility in Windows perfect and I was specifically referring to the compatibility of games I have on Steam, which is kind of the topic here. I have like 220 games on Steam and I've not touched most of them in years. But I've tested about 1/2 of them in the last year just to see how many would run in 10 and the results have been very good.
Click to expand...
See if you're talking about real backwards compatibility, if a game is already ON Steam, that means it's probably a low risk case. I'm talking original games from late 90s to early 2000s that never got the Steam or GOG treatment.

Hyper-V helps.
Click to expand...
Come on, don't get patronizing. Of course it does, but you want bastard cases, less popular 3D accelerated Win9x games or even early XP ones can still throw enough wrenches in the works that VMware either can't run them, or else you've lost functionality you would have had at the time. Want to turn on AA through VMware for 3D games of that time, or really ANY game that doesn't have it through its own software? Not gonna happen. Like someone else said, it can sometimes be easier running older games on WINE than native Windows. I'm not trying to discount how much old software still does run on Windows, but you see great compatibility, I see landmines and dice tosses. I've just had too much experience trying to get old shit to work.
 
I honestly think it's true. Microsoft is done with games, and they want that whole segment gone. How many users are on Steam? Microsoft wants to lose those as customers.

Sounds pretty ridiculous to me. Even going to UWA over Win32, you're going to lose a lot of people. Win32 is huge for Windows. Dropping or gimping that support would drop a lot of Windows users. Or at the least have them fall on legacy OS's.
 
tetris42 said:
Well I have two counterpoints to that:

1. You say MS would be committing suicide, but I would have argued that forcing desktop users on a partially functional tablet interface by default was a "questionable" move for Windows 8. I would also say that trying to get everyone on board with automatic forced updating and aggressive upgrades to Windows 10, regardless of how it might affect a system is too risky a move also, but I'm being proved wrong. In my opinion, the way they handled Windows 10 updates on 7 / 8 alone borders on lawsuit material, it's what I would expect of malware.

2. It doesn't have to play out exactly as he states to achieve the same effect. Fine, let's say MS continues supporting Win32 for Enterprises, then that's it, everyone goes the stagnation route. Or hey, let's say DirectX 13 requires UWP applications and won't work on Win32, that way they're targeting games, but not most other consumer programs. There's more than one way to skin a cat on this.

That's an excellent point, GOG's business model was originally formed because so many games don't work on modern Windows.
Click to expand...

1. There is a world of difference between forcing automatic updates (something a majority of Windows users were already used to as it's been the default option since Vista) and forcing an API change after the previous one has been around since Windows 1.0. In this instances what consumers do is irrelevant. We don't matter at all in this discussion. It is entirely about developers. Without them supporting the change MS is fucked, plain and simple. MS isn't going to force a change without developers willing to go along with it.

2. That won't work. Big publishers aren't going to support the Windows Store right now. The only ones that are are MS themselves and any studio MS pays to support it. The only reason Rise of the Tomb Raider was on the Windows Store is due to MS paying for it. EA sure as hell isn't going to give up Origin nor will Ubisoft abandon Uplay (unfortunately). Obviously Valve and Epic wouldn't be playing ball either. Activision might, if they felt it would be worth the money. Though Blizzard won't do it, they're happy with their own launcher. Then there are the major Chinese publishers like Perfect World and Tencent (who own Riot and almost half of Epic) that definitely won't fall into line. Bethesda seems to be gearing up to open their own digital storefront so they're not likely to want to give that up either. MS' first party simply isn't strong enough to force the change to happen in the PC game market on it's own.
 
tetris42 said:
See if you're talking about real backwards compatibility, if a game is already ON Steam, that means it's probably a low risk case. I'm talking original games from late 90s to early 2000s that never got the Steam or GOG treatment.
Click to expand...

A lot of software from that time period broke through different versions of Windows particularly was Windows security improved. Tons of stuff broke from XP to Vista/7 over this. I was confining what I was saying as it relates to Steam and compatibility with 10, which again I've found to be excellent.

tetris42 said:
Come on, don't get patronizing. Of course it does, but you want bastard cases, less popular 3D accelerated Win9x games or even early XP ones can still throw enough cogs in the works that VMware either can't run them, or else you've lost functionality you would have had at the time. Want to turn on AA through VMware for 3D games of the time? Not gonna happen. Like someone else said, it can sometimes be easier running older games on WINE than native Windows. I'm not trying to discount how much old software still does run on Windows, but you see great compatibility, I see landmines and dice tosses. I've just had too much experience trying to get old shit to work.
Click to expand...

How much 20 year old Linux or OS X software are people trying to run today on current versions? It's not just Windows that's the problem here. Like I said, I can't get one game to run because it freaks out over a 10 core CPU. The same game runs fine on my Surface Book. We could go on and on about why older software breaks.
 
Derangel said:
2. That won't work. Big publishers aren't going to support the Windows Store right now. The only ones that are are MS themselves and any studio MS pays to support it. The only reason Rise of the Tomb Raider was on the Windows Store is due to MS paying for it. EA sure as hell isn't going to give up Origin nor will Ubisoft abandon Uplay (unfortunately). Obviously Valve and Epic wouldn't be playing ball either. Activision might, if they felt it would be worth the money. Though Blizzard won't do it, they're happy with their own launcher. Then there are the major Chinese publishers like Perfect World and Tencent (who own Riot and almost half of Epic) that definitely won't fall into line. Bethesda seems to be gearing up to open their own digital storefront so they're not likely to want to give that up either. MS' first party simply isn't strong enough to force the change to happen in the PC game market on it's own.
Click to expand...

But here's the thing about the Windows Store. Microsoft doesn't need desktop PC games in the Windows Store neatly as much as it needs things like Periscope or Pokémon GO or Snapchat. Sure the desktop games are cool and Microsoft does seem to leveraging some as Windows 10 exclusives to promote Windows 10. It's not an either or situation but a both and.
 
heatlesssun said:
I've done 4 Insider Preview updates on the sig with about 40 Steam games installed now. Not one has broken in that process. Neither have Chrome, LibreOffice or GIMP. Heck even CPU-Z which was having issues with the Threshold 2 update in November last year is coming across fine. I'm not saying everything is fine but you're acting as though the process is completely broken.
Click to expand...

That hasn't been my experience, not has it been the experience of many people out there. A quick search can prove that. Yes of course a handful are user error more then MS error... but many are plain the fault of MS. Most if not all get fixed up at some point, which is why I say screw the MS auto update you can't be sure your not going to wake up to a new OS. ;) half kidden there... really it is no fun having to deal with stupid issues all the time, and I have. Glad you haven't had any issues, perhaps its because you admit you use MS own hardware and use things like edge... I'm sure they tested their own stuff that isn't the issue.
 
ChadD said:
That hasn't been my experience, not has it been the experience of many people out there. A quick search can prove that.
Click to expand...

You can't do a quick web search and know the experience of hundreds of millions of folks in each and every situation. You're typically only going to hear from people that have problems anyway and never hear from those that don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top