Minecraft Will Not be Certified for Windows 8

^^^^

mWPzz.jpg
 
octoberasian said:
Watch, if Windows 9 forces developers to distribute their software and games through the Windows Store as a requirement before it can install and run on your computer then the computer freedom we've had for decades is over. Sooner or later, Microsoft will be the gatekeeper of what gets installed and not installed on your computer, and where you buy them from. There are many reasons for Microsoft to be scared because their competitors are making significant amounts of money from it already.

It's just starting now, but we do not know for sure if this is Microsoft's TRUE intentions at the moment. Currently, Microsoft is facing stiff competition in the mobile space from both Android and iOS. Apple is one of their bigger competitors and their ecosystem, as closed off as it is, depends a lot on iTunes Store to sell and distribute books and textbooks, music, movies, games, and apps to Apple-related devices and hardware. Microsoft wants a piece of the action, too. Who doesn't? Android has Google Play and Apps Marketplace, plus Youtube. Amazon has, well, Amazon.com obviously and Amazon Instant Video and MP3 Store. Microsoft is late to the game having just announced the Xbox Music service but nothing yet for movies since Zune didn't take off as planned. They still have Xbox Live and Xbox Live Arcade, and soon Windows Store to cover apps for all of their Microsoft-related devices-- Windows 8 RT tablets and Windows Phone 8 smartphones.

Then, there is the behemoth for game distribution called Steam. EA and Nexon have both wanted to buy out Steam without any success for $1 billion and $900 million, respectively. EA's Origin service is the next competitor down, then Gamefly and GoG. Onlive is literally somewhere on the bottom. Then, there is Desura for open source gamers on Linux-based distributions (primarily). However, none has been able to top Valve's Steam software service. And, get this: Valve is intending to get Steam in the livingroom and plans on selling programs through Steam and apps through mobile Steam in the future. Linux is the next place Steam wants to make its mark and hope to find success there. Valve, too, fears Microsoft is heading in a direction it knows isn't right at all for many Windows software developers.

These are literally billion dollar industries and Microsoft is not gaining market share (to my knowledge at this time) or having a significant headway into it. By locking software developers, who many primarily use Visual Studio to develop them, into a single ecosystem like Amazon, Google, and Apple have done already, they can take a piece of the action as well. Microsoft has already started with Windows Store-- 30% cut of each purchase made of every app sold there, which is the same amount Apple charges developers. Next is the mobile space by locking down Windows 8 RT-based ARM devices to only Microsoft-related products through requesting Secure Boot from OEMs building these devices. Only programs and games bought and sold on the Windows Store can be installed on these tablets as well. That is a complete opposite of what Windows-based computers have allowed you to do on your own desktop computers for decades going as far back as DOS.

What's next after Windows 8 now? Does Microsoft truly intend to lock down the Microsoft-based ecosystem to only what they want?

That's the fear many developers are having. Many believe Microsoft wants only Windows software be sold and installed from something like Windows Store, where Microsoft decides if their program meets or doesn't meet the requirements for certification and approval to be sold on there. Will Microsoft make Secure Boot a requirement on future computers by asking that be an option by default from OEM motherboard manufacturers? Who knows?

It is literally a lot of things to be worried about for desktop computing. And, the worry is justifiable. Many computer users are used to the freedom we have now-- install what you want and run what you want on your own Windows-based computers. Developers enjoy that freedom as well when they make and develop software. They can develop their own software and games, and sell them on their own website, online retailer, or brick-and-mortar store of choice. If Windows Store becomes the requirement for software distribution on future Windows operating systems, then it is definitely something any software developer should be worried about. Sure, it'll make software distribution easy, but if requiring only programs bought and sold there be the only way it can be installed on your computer is a general fear many have right now. That's the control that's being talked about. Microsoft looks as if it wants to control their own ecosystem with an iron grip, and make money out of it at the same time. That's what many believe right now is starting to happen with Windows Store and Windows 8 RT on tablets.

What happens if Microsoft moves this concept to Windows 9 and beyond? Would that mark the end of desktop computing? It may sound like a paranoid fear, but it has hints popping up here and there.

Microsoft is not winning the war against Google's, Amazon's and Apple's ecosystems of devices and software and media tie-ins. It hasn't established a large enough foothold outside of their Xbox 360 console and their operating systems and productivity software like Office and Windows. Microsoft would definitely want more than just that. If a company can control what you can install, run and buy on your computer or handheld device, then they can do whatever they want and tell you what you can and cannot do on it.

And, that is what one should worry about Microsoft after Windows 8.
Click to expand...

WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF!!!!!
 
^^
exactly no one in microsoft says or hints very much to things like that.

Yet for some reason because it's micro$oft they are going to do that speculation and now we should act like the speculation is true and not only that they are doing a horrible thing, doing things that every other company people like already do.

Zeesh tin-foil hats all around apparently.
 
OldPueblo said:
^^^^
Click to expand...

Not really the same thing (unless you are talking about WP8, which doesn't have x86). 1. Phone. 2. Phone. 3. Not phone, and thats kind of misinformed. You cannot sell/install desktop applications (or non metro) from the Store. The chart should have been:

1. No choice but Jailbreak and it's just a phone. So ill have use it.
2. No other choice but Sideload and it's just a phone. So ill have to use it.
3. Other choice and it's not a phone. So I wont use it. :p
 
DeathPrincess said:
Not really the same thing (unless you are talking about WP8, which doesn't have x86). 1. Phone. 2. Phone. 3. Not phone, and thats kind of misinformed. You cannot sell/install desktop applications (or non metro) from the Store. The chart should have been:

1. No choice but Jailbreak and it's just a phone. So ill have use it.
2. No other choice but Sideload and it's just a phone. So ill have to use it.
3. Other choice and it's not a phone. So I wont use it. :p
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about phones in this thread, these are tablets.
 
It may be big "What if...?" questions, but isn't it normal to worry about what happens to technology within ten years from now? Twenty years?

Will companies have the same attitudes towards their consumers they have now in the future?

Sadly, money drives the world and consumer attitudes decides where the market goes. And, wherever the market goes, companies will follow in order to make that next million or billion dollars in revenue. Money can change a company's attitude once they realize they're missing out on a piece of it. Only companies with integrity (Hahahaha) may not let money sway their decisions in the future. (Who am I kidding? Money always sways their decisions.)

Maybe a realistic question to ask is: Does Microsoft want to be left behind when their competitors are making money out of these mobile markets and exclusive app, media and game distribution stores?

No. Absolutely not.

Then, the next question to ask is: Is the money that can be made from those markets worth the risk of making stupid or costly decisions? Worth another anti-trust lawsuit for locking out competitors so people would be forced to buy through you?

We'll see what Ballmer decides for the company within the next ten years; Windows 9 will probably be out within four to five years. It may be all speculation right now, but things can change between now and then.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Still you cannot buy x86 applications from the store. So the whole point is null and void.
Click to expand...

No Notch's point is null and void. He rants about MS limiting options when they've actually introduced an additional option. How about he just not release it for Metro at all and just leave it for x86 if he wants to be a baby about it? Who is forcing him to make a Metro Minecraft app? It's disingenuous to say "Windows 8 is bad across the board for everything!" because he doesn't want to make a metro app.
 
"According to gaming blog Kotaku, which was first to report on Persson's tweets and spoke to him after they were sent out, he takes issue with Microsoft effectively closing off its Windows operating system, making the software unfriendly to independent developers."

Boy I bet he threw a huge fit about Windows 7 then since you know it's the same desktop basically. It's just another Metro fit.
 
OldPueblo said:
"According to gaming blog Kotaku, which was first to report on Persson's tweets and spoke to him after they were sent out, he takes issue with Microsoft effectively closing off its Windows operating system, making the software unfriendly to independent developers."

Boy I bet he threw a huge fit about Windows 7 then since you know it's the same desktop basically. It's just another Metro fit.
Click to expand...

Why is Microsoft more unfriendly to independent developers than Apple or Google ... Apple has just as restrictive an environment (they approve every app on their store) ... this didn't prevent him from releasing a Minecraft app there ... Google gives the developers freedom to load whatever they want but then leaves them hanging after that with limited support ... what about MS makes them unfriendly to independent developers vs the other players?
 
kbrickley said:
Why is Microsoft more unfriendly to independent developers than Apple or Google ... Apple has just as restrictive an environment (they approve every app on their store) ... this didn't prevent him from releasing a Minecraft app there ... Google gives the developers freedom to load whatever they want but then leaves them hanging after that with limited support ... what about MS makes them unfriendly to independent developers vs the other players?
Click to expand...

I've heard the exact opposite so I guess it just depends on the dev and what they want to do. In Notch's case he's just throwing a fit and spreading FUD.
 
Why do applications need Microsoft's certificate to run on PC platform anyway?

I don't recall seeing any games being Windows 7 certified. So why the need for a certification now?
 
OldPueblo said:
I've heard the exact opposite so I guess it just depends on the dev and what they want to do. In Notch's case he's just throwing a fit and spreading FUD.
Click to expand...

How far away is Notch's new project ... maybe he is just using this opportunity to get a little free publicity to help the launch of his next game ... at MS expense ;)
 
Hornet said:
Why do applications need Microsoft's certificate to run on PC platform anyway?

I don't recall seeing any games being Windows 7 certified. So why the need for a certification now?
Click to expand...

They need certification to get on the Metro/Microsoft app store thing. If you don't certify it, you can't use the software on Metro-only Windows 8 devices.
 
Hornet said:
Why do applications need Microsoft's certificate to run on PC platform anyway?

I don't recall seeing any games being Windows 7 certified. So why the need for a certification now?
Click to expand...

Because, Notch is thinking about the Average Windows User and not [H]ardcore users.

-The Windows Store is built in and shoved in your face.
-The Windows Store is the only place for PC versions of your WinRT apps/applications.
-Buying outside the Windows Store is implied to be insecure and dangerous.

If this gives Microsoft even 20-25% lock on the retail market, they will have more behind the scenes influence in the sales arena than before because of their distribution control.

For publishers
-Add a block of consumers that will use the Windows Store only through laziness or being uninformed or scared
-WinRT is the 'new' API for Windows, (at least the new .NET) risking eventual obsolescence of the old API.
-Live Tiles and other integrations with Metro interface is via WinRT. You're EA and Activision has live tile flashing scrolling or whatever and your tile is static because its not a WinRT launcher. That's a Marketing department nightmare on its own. How long before EA realizes they can advertise BF4 on your BF3 tile as well. By going through the Windows Store, publishers can gain better real estate on your desktop possibly used for ads as well.

You're not required to use the Windows Store. But there is an unmistakable pull/push in that direction.
 
I never thought I'd see the day where even Hard|Forum is full of Metrovangelists and Windows 8 fanboys insulting and belittling other members just to defend Microsoft's moronic decisions.


You people don't belong here.
 
I might actually listen to what this guy has to say if his programs didn't run like a pile of dog poo.
 
jpm100 said:
Because, Notch is thinking about the Average Windows User and not [H]ardcore users.

-The Windows Store is built in and shoved in your face.
-The Windows Store is the only place for PC versions of your WinRT apps/applications.
-Buying outside the Windows Store is implied to be insecure and dangerous.

If this gives Microsoft even 20-25% lock on the retail market, they will have more behind the scenes influence in the sales arena than before because of their distribution control.

For publishers
-Add a block of consumers that will use the Windows Store only through laziness or being uninformed or scared
-WinRT is the 'new' API for Windows, (at least the new .NET) risking eventual obsolescence of the old API.
-Live Tiles and other integrations with Metro interface is via WinRT. You're EA and Activision has live tile flashing scrolling or whatever and your tile is static because its not a WinRT launcher. That's a Marketing department nightmare on its own. How long before EA realizes they can advertise BF4 on your BF3 tile as well. By going through the Windows Store, publishers can gain better real estate on your desktop possibly used for ads as well.

You're not required to use the Windows Store. But there is an unmistakable pull/push in that direction.
Click to expand...

Ofc there is a pull in the direction of an App store from Microsofts side. They are a company they want to make money.

What people for some rather annoying reason seem to forget is this

windows 8 x86/x64 is NOT windowsRT

Yes, windowsRT will not have a desktop and it hasnt stopped a single user from using their (whatever brand) tablet that they own right now.
 
pelo said:
There's a very good reason why so many game studios have been bitching. Microsoft wants 30% of their profits.
Click to expand...

Stores that you buy games from and Steam take a similar cut. So who cares?
 
Does anybody else see the irony in MS trying to certify a Java app given their history (1997) with Java? They don't like java at all - I would think they would not certify the whole Java platform. And their implementation of Java (MSJVM) was not certifiable by Sun.

How can they certify an app that runs in a virtual machine anyhow? This would be the same as them certifying Linux apps because you can run Linux through a VM in Windows too.
 
GaryJohnson said:
Does anybody else see the irony in MS trying to certify a Java app given their history (1997) with Java? They don't like java at all - I would think they would not certify the whole Java platform. And their implementation of Java (MSJVM) was not certifiable by Sun.

How can they certify an app that runs in a virtual machine anyhow? This would be the same as them certifying Linux apps because you can run Linux through a VM in Windows too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the funny part-- asking a Java applet to be certified. It doesn't make sense.

It would have to be Java's JRE that would need the certification, not Minecraft's .JAR file. All those requirements for certification for a Windows Store app falls on Oracle's responsibility, not Mojang.

That's unless they port the code over to C#/C++/.NET Framework or port the 360 game over. An uninstall/install program would simply be just creating or deleting the directory .minecraft. The DEP flag and other stuff that someone else mentioned can't be done in Java, that's done on the Java's binary file that invokes the JRE for the applet to run in.

Yeah, it's funny for Microsoft to think that they want a Java applet to be certified. How about other Java-only games? Or Java-only programs? Do they want those certified too?

It makes no sense, honestly.

(Stupid as it sounds but does that mean or hint that the 360 XBLA version of Minecraft and any subsequent XBLA game is backwards compatible now and is compatible in Windows Store and Windows 8? Maybe that is why it's asking for certifcation?)
 
xBanzai89 said:
Stores that you buy games from and Steam take a similar cut. So who cares?
Click to expand...
Yup blame it in apple they set the bar of taking exactly 30% cut, which irrc it's just a bit over the normal % cut distribution gets or atleast got before apple put out their istores or w.e.

People bought and sold shit on apple's stores, every other company followed suit.
 
Unknown-One said:
I'm sorry, but what? :confused:

Windows 8 runs exactly the same applications and handles exactly the same installation scenarios as Windows 7, nothing has been taken away, so I'm not sure how this is a step towards a closed platform.

They added an additional means to get a new type of application, but that doesn't detract from the above.
Click to expand...

Windows 8 RT would disagree with you. Windows 8 RT on ARM only allows applications from the app store, which means Microsoft forces you to lose 30% of sales to them. The x86 side is still totally like how Windows has always worked.

Certainly shows the direction Microsoft is moving the Windows platform.
 
xBanzai89 said:
Stores that you buy games from and Steam take a similar cut. So who cares?
Click to expand...

Cause people like the creators of Minecraft have their own method of dealing with purchases. Blizzard, Valve, and EA have their own ways for consumers to purchase their products. Windows 8 RT on ARM 'ONLY' allows an application to be installed through the APP store. Which means developers have 3 choices on how to go about this.

#1 Ignore the Windows 8 RT users, but watch as the sheep get angry that their machine doesn't have access to their favorite software. Which would piss off a lot of customers.

#2 Support Windows 8 RT and deal with losing 30% of sales. Though this means that consumers expect the regular x86 version of Windows 8 to have the app in the store as well. Which just automatically migrates everyone to lose 30% of sales.

#3 Find a loop hole around the Windows app store.

You can see that developers are put into a very tight corner. Microsoft says, "we monopolize the OS market so hard that we're willing to be you have no choice but to go along with it". Hence why Valve is supporting Linux with Steam, cause nobody likes extortion.
 
Semantics said:
Yup blame it in apple they set the bar of taking exactly 30% cut, which irrc it's just a bit over the normal % cut distribution gets or atleast got before apple put out their istores or w.e.

People bought and sold shit on apple's stores, every other company followed suit.
Click to expand...

Considering Apple doesn't seem to make a profit off the downloads the 30% value might be about right ... Amazon actually was charging more than 30% for awhile on ebooks and actually lowered it once Apple entered that market ... most of the companies offering the app support (iTunes, Amazon, Google, Valve) are offering hosting and credit card processing with that fee ... any company that charges nothing for their app essentially gets the hosting for free ... I have never seen an analysis of what the right percentage should be but there doesn't seem to be a wholesale rebellion against it (it is just factored into the cost of the software) ... also, what are the licensing fees for the consoles ... developers can't release games for those systems (online or otherwise) without paying a licensing fee (and they don't even get the benefit of hosting or credit card processing)
 
Here's their big problem. The store is mainly for their other devices push, but windows tablets are garbage. They can't be competitive on the hardware side due to the licensing costs, and they lack the innovation that google/apple has brought. Windows Phone may be critically well-received but no one wants it. As an ecosystem it's just not very good. The licensing costs and microsoft's unwillingness to partner fairly make its growth unviable. Unlike android-based media playing devices, android-enabled tvs, apple tv, phones, etc you won't see Windows RT or Windows Phone in a smart TV, on a media player or in other appliances any time soon. This lack of foresight is crippling.

So now they have a situation where they've put all this work into a platform that is more likely than not to basically fail.

I understand people boycotting it - as technologists we don't really want this competing ecosystem. It's closed, limited, has high licensing costs, and doesn't bring much new to the table (speaking about RT).

x86 Win 8 may be OK but it's siamese twin is this insidious ecosystem they're trying to build.
 
Ashbringer said:
Windows 8 RT would disagree with you. Windows 8 RT on ARM only allows applications from the app store, which means Microsoft forces you to lose 30% of sales to them. The x86 side is still totally like how Windows has always worked.

Certainly shows the direction Microsoft is moving the Windows platform.
Click to expand...

No it shows that MS is adding the same option as the already well-established stores on the other mobile platforms. When Win8 launches is everyone magically going to be converted over to WinRT? Use it or don't, it's still our choice.

Ashbringer said:
Cause people like the creators of Minecraft have their own method of dealing with purchases. Blizzard, Valve, and EA have their own ways for consumers to purchase their products. Windows 8 RT on ARM 'ONLY' allows an application to be installed through the APP store. Which means developers have 3 choices on how to go about this.

#1 Ignore the Windows 8 RT users, but watch as the sheep get angry that their machine doesn't have access to their favorite software. Which would piss off a lot of customers.

#2 Support Windows 8 RT and deal with losing 30% of sales. Though this means that consumers expect the regular x86 version of Windows 8 to have the app in the store as well. Which just automatically migrates everyone to lose 30% of sales.

#3 Find a loop hole around the Windows app store.

You can see that developers are put into a very tight corner. Microsoft says, "we monopolize the OS market so hard that we're willing to be you have no choice but to go along with it". Hence why Valve is supporting Linux with Steam, cause nobody likes extortion.
Click to expand...

So basically the distribution model that has made so many developers successful they want to use for free without any security or safety behind it? How many android or iOS apps have made a lot of money by doing all of their own promotion and having to be found separately on a website and then side-loaded? The market is there to give developers the chance to shove their apps in front of people and make a killing if it's good. Apple already charges these prices so MS isn't setting any precedent, and I'm pretty sure minecraft is already available in Google Play and iOS. So basically, there's no real argument here.

If Notch wants to throw a hypocritical fit, then he can just keep developing Minecraft to work on the desktop as usual. If the industry decides to move away from x86 to a store only environment then the people have spoken. MS can't force that shift, they can only provide the options. Consumers will make the choice (make Win8 fail) and Notch wants to make money he will have to just move along with everyone else.
 
InternationalHat said:
Here's their big problem. The store is mainly for their other devices push, but windows tablets are garbage. They can't be competitive on the hardware side due to the licensing costs, and they lack the innovation that google/apple has brought. Windows Phone may be critically well-received but no one wants it. As an ecosystem it's just not very good. The licensing costs and microsoft's unwillingness to partner fairly make its growth unviable. Unlike android-based media playing devices, android-enabled tvs, apple tv, phones, etc you won't see Windows RT or Windows Phone in a smart TV, on a media player or in other appliances any time soon. This lack of foresight is crippling.

So now they have a situation where they've put all this work into a platform that is more likely than not to basically fail.

I understand people boycotting it - as technologists we don't really want this competing ecosystem. It's closed, limited, has high licensing costs, and doesn't bring much new to the table (speaking about RT).

x86 Win 8 may be OK but it's siamese twin is this insidious ecosystem they're trying to build.
Click to expand...

That's a ridiculous train of thought. You very likely already use Google Play and/or iOS and download apps all day and love the convenience, but then turn around and say MS also having a store is a dumb idea? Because you think their hardware is going to fail and it hasn't even launched yet? I can list about twenty people I know dying for Win8 tablets to hit the market. This "technologist" wants it badly along with every other "technologist" I know. Speak for yourself.
 
InternationalHat said:
Here's their big problem. The store is mainly for their other devices push, but windows tablets are garbage. They can't be competitive on the hardware side due to the licensing costs, and they lack the innovation that google/apple has brought. Windows Phone may be critically well-received but no one wants it. As an ecosystem it's just not very good. The licensing costs and microsoft's unwillingness to partner fairly make its growth unviable. Unlike android-based media playing devices, android-enabled tvs, apple tv, phones, etc you won't see Windows RT or Windows Phone in a smart TV, on a media player or in other appliances any time soon. This lack of foresight is crippling.

So now they have a situation where they've put all this work into a platform that is more likely than not to basically fail.

I understand people boycotting it - as technologists we don't really want this competing ecosystem. It's closed, limited, has high licensing costs, and doesn't bring much new to the table (speaking about RT).

x86 Win 8 may be OK but it's siamese twin is this insidious ecosystem they're trying to build.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where your information comes from, but it seems faulty.

There are no Windows 8 tablets released yet, and existing Windows tablets are fine and getting better. Check out the Samsung tablets in a Microsoft store to see some pretty slick tech.

Most people I know, including myself, want Windows Phones but the only thing holding them back has been the app availability. Microsofts push to better phone APIs and a unified development platform across all devices should help fix this problem in a big way.

Android devices in general are more buggy and less compatible with each other than iPhones, Windows Phones, and Windows desktop OSs.

I use Windows 8 on my TV daily and Windows tablets are just as good as Androids if not better at media playing.

WinRT is no more insidious than IOS and Android ecosystems and the fact that it's coupled with the full blown Windows desktop on x86 machines (ie all existing Windows tablets and many announced future ones) means its actually better in many ways because you have access to Apps and the largest catalogue of existing programs in existence.
 
I looked over the list of things required to be Windows 8 certified and I see nothing that he shouldn't want. Being Windows certified is actually a good thing.
 
OldPueblo said:
That's a ridiculous train of thought. You very likely already use Google Play and/or iOS and download apps all day and love the convenience, but then turn around and say MS also having a store is a dumb idea? Because you think their hardware is going to fail and it hasn't even launched yet? I can list about twenty people I know dying for Win8 tablets to hit the market. This "technologist" wants it badly along with every other "technologist" I know. Speak for yourself.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand. I don't think their hardware is going to fail. Their licensing costs will make their hardware uncompetitive. RT is being reported at $80-95 per device

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...ve-already-lost-the-war-and-its-marbles?print

The Google licensing cost structure is a lot better than what MS does. MS collects licensing fees from even google for android though!

The issue is not their apps it's that to use Windows RT manufacturers will be forced to raise prices on goods. http://www.androidauthority.com/windows-8-tablets-not-price-competitive-86919/
I want cheap electronics and TVs with embedded android that don't raise the price of everything connected $80-90. What happens if there's an android toaster not that I want one? $30? vs $110 or something for the Windows RT version? Why do I want that ecosystem to succeed at all especially if it starts relatively raising the price of TVs and other goods?
 
wonderfield said:
Well, no, you can buy x86 applications from the store. You just can't buy non-Metro, classic applications from the store.
Click to expand...

While you can't buy x86 desktop apps in the Windows Store, x86 desktop apps can be listed in the store with a link to buy the app outside of the store. There is no cut to Microsoft for this other than the developer fee.
 
InternationalHat said:
You misunderstand. I don't think their hardware is going to fail. Their licensing costs will make their hardware uncompetitive. RT is being reported at $80-95 per device

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...ve-already-lost-the-war-and-its-marbles?print

The Google licensing cost structure is a lot better than what MS does. MS collects licensing fees from even google for android though!

The issue is not their apps it's that to use Windows RT manufacturers will be forced to raise prices on goods. http://www.androidauthority.com/windows-8-tablets-not-price-competitive-86919/
I want cheap electronics and TVs with embedded android that don't raise the price of everything connected $80-90. What happens if there's an android toaster not that I want one? $30? vs $110 or something for the Windows RT version? Why do I want that ecosystem to succeed at all especially if it starts relatively raising the price of TVs and other goods?
Click to expand...

There's NO WAY Microsoft is charing $80+ dollars for Windows RT, that's more than x86 Windows. I don't deny that cost is probably going to be a challenge for Windows 8/RT tablets at least initially but I don't think it's going to be anywhere near the chasm that some are thinking. And let's also consider that cheap doesn't necessarily mean profitable. Besides Samsung, is anyone really making money on Android tablets?

And you really can't compare Windows 8 tablets with Android devices are the iPad, Windows 8 tablets are much more functional.
 
We should be thankful it took MS about 20 years to start this. Surely, it's the beginning of something awful which means we have time at least until Windows 9.

Funny thing is, Apple and Google forced MS this path. In a way they are now unleashing the old MS from the 90s. I have zero doubt MS would've been the first to pull this off but oh well, they were pretty strong back then and are now free to make it happen when there's finally some real competition.

Good times for Linux I guess.
 
xBanzai89 said:
Stores that you buy games from and Steam take a similar cut. So who cares?
Click to expand...

Because they dictate what you can and can't install. Only MS "certified" applications are available. Also, they have other censors, such as a parental censor where you can't get applications that are rated M -- or even games. It's akin to Apple blocking Hustler or Playboy because they consider it too controversial. It's someone else making the decision for you as to what you should and shouldn't be able to see and do. Apparently, a considerable portion of the idiots here are quite fine with that. I'm not. I wish them luck with their defense of Win9 when Microsoft completely locks everything down on the OS level and bars you from installing anything that isn't from the Microsoft store. Right now on WinRT that's already in place, the next logical step is the desktop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top