

MS kills Xbox 360/PC cross-platform development - evo_9
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/147289-microsoft-kills-xbox-360pc-cross-platform-development-declares-directx-no-longer-evolving

======
xradionut
When you work with the Microsoft stack, except for a few core technologies,
you have no idea if the "hot" API or current solution Redmond is pushing will
be supported or abandoned in a couple of years. Combine that with stapling
Metro, a tablet/phone API to the side of the desktop in Windows 8, many
developers I know are tired of being thrashed and burned.

As a developer/analyst/admin that works primary in the MS application/data
realms, I'm bummed out that MS can't communicate with developers and seems
very disfunctional vision-wise. But as someone who also uses OSS software and
OSS OSes, I'm not tied to their whims. Neither are a growing number of my
clients...

~~~
FireBeyond
What are your alternatives? OSX, where Apple has no qualms about abandoning
technology, hardware or software, within a matter of years (the iPad 1 was
EOL'ed just shy of two years old, I believe).

XCode and (Snow) Leopard? No such luck.

Now, you do mention the Linux alternatives, which seem to be the most
stable... if you can get around any infighting of QT... Gnome/KDE... etc et
al.

But it doesn't seem particularly "fair" to imply that this is something of a
risk when you choose Microsoft.

~~~
rplacd
The Apple situation's slightly more complex than that: they're certainly
ruthless with their hardware, but it's a bit of a stretch to claim they have
commitment issues with their software technologies - ObjC, Foundation and
AppKit's been around since the late 1980s from NeXT without serious
architectural changes; UIKit'll be around for a while yet; let nothing come
between them and their investment in the Apple Compiler Group. (The upshot is
that they've sufficiently abstracted hardware away anyway, so hardware changes
aren't showstoppers.) If anything, they're more conservative with tossing out
the SDKs than most: OpenGL support, for example, is still absurdly piss-poor,
even if they're getting better with their GPU driver support. But it _does_
net you compatibility all the way down their HCL - at the bottom end, for
example, is the mid-'07 iMac with the ATi 2600 PRO.

They _do_ give not-so-subtle hints to hand over to them the cha-ching, though,
when they EOL old versions of XCode - but that's usually the most you're going
to encounter. So works Apple in general.

~~~
chc
> _The Apple situation's slightly more complex than that: they're certainly
> ruthless with their hardware, but it's a bit of a stretch to claim they have
> commitment issues with their software technologies - ObjC, Foundation and
> AppKit's been around since the late 1980s from NeXT without serious
> architectural changes_

And if you happened to bet on those technologies instead of Carbon, you're
probably very happy with that. Well, unless you were writing Cocoa apps with
Java, which was pushed as a peer to Objective-C in much the same way that
Carbon was presented as a peer to Foundation and AppKit. Those technologies
all got killed pretty viciously, even though Apple at various points actually
seemed to be promoting them _over_ Objective-C/Cocoa.

Apple axes stuff faster than Microsoft is even capable of moving. Looking
directly back from their current technology stack, it looks like mostly smooth
sailing, but that's because you're not looking at the wreckage to the left and
right.

(Bonus points: Remember when Apple were all about Garbage-Collected
Objective-C until they weren't and suddenly ARC was the new hotness?)

------
cobrausn
From a better article ([http://ventspace.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/directxxna-
phase-o...](http://ventspace.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/directxxna-phase-out-
continues/)):

 _This email was sent out to DirectX/XNA MVPs today:_

    
    
      The XNA/DirectX expertise was created to recognize 
      community leaders who focused on XNA Game Studio and/or
      DirectX development. Presently the XNA Game Studio is not in
      active development and DirectX is no longer evolving as a 
      technology. Given the status within each technology, further
      value and engagement cannot be offered to the MVP community. 
      As a result, effective April 1, 2014 XNA/DirectX will be
      fully retired from the MVP Award Program.
    

_There’s actually a fair bit of information packed in there, and I think some
of it is poorly worded. The most stunning part of it was this: “DirectX is no
longer evolving as a technology.” That is a phrase I did not expect to hear
from Microsoft. Before going to “the sky is falling” proclamations, I don’t
think this is a death sentence for DirectX, per se. It conveys two things.
Number one, DirectX outside of Direct3D is completely dead. I hope this is not
a shock to you. Number two, it’s a reminder that Direct3D has been absorbed
into Windows core, and thus is no more a “technology” than GDI or Winsock._

~~~
ecaron
And the follow-up to that even-better article
([http://ventspace.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/follow-up-on-
direc...](http://ventspace.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/follow-up-on-
directxxna/)):

    
    
        The message said “DirectX is no longer evolving as a technology.”
        That is definitely not true in any way, shape or form. 
        Microsoft is actively investing in DirectX as the unified
        graphics foundation for our key platforms, including Xbox
        360, Windows Phone and Windows. DirectX is evolving and 
        will continue to evolve. For instance, right now we’re 
        investing in some very cool graphics code authorizing 
        [sic] technology in Visual Studio. We have absolutely no 
        intention of stopping innovation with DirectX,
        and you can quote me on that.

------
dangero
Can someone change the title? This is written at the bottom of the article:

Updated: Microsoft has emailed Promit Roy to say that the first email was in
error, and that “DirectX is evolving and will continue to evolve.” Like Roy,
though, we’re still musing as to why it took a leaked email for Microsoft to
clarify its stance on DX and XNA.

------
jordoh
The writing has been on the wall for a while about the end of XNA development
by MS - none of the development tools for XNA have been updated to work in
Visual Studio 2012. Fortunately, there's an open source replacement that run
on a much broader range of platforms: <https://github.com/mono/MonoGame>

------
Glowbox
DirectX is fine.
[http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-02-01-microsoft-w...](http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-02-01-microsoft-
were-not-phasing-out-directx-but-no-new-xna-is-coming)

------
fnordfnordfnord
This news explains a lot about St. Gaben's new found love for Linux. Combine
Microsoft's attempt to embrace and extend* into reselling software on its
platform, with MS not keeping DirectX ahead of OpenGL; and it is no wonder
Gaben jumped into Linux development the way he did.

*gobble up and monopolize

------
jarjoura
XNA was a POS and honestly, DOA. Microsoft tried to simplify game development
on top of C# but even indie-developers opt'd to go the C++ route with a 3rd
party cross-platform engine.

Plus as a game developer, if your game is successful enough to need to build a
bigger engine, wouldn't it make sense to just rewrite it on top of
C++/Direct3D anyway?

Otherwise a few fixes here and there to a game you've written in XNA will
still continue to run on Windows/Xbox. I mean, you can still run VB6 apps for
example and that runtime DLL is almost 15 years old :-).

~~~
gamblor956
Many popular games have been built on XNA.

The Dishwasher, Elysium [EDIT: actually called Dust: An Elysian Tale],
Eufloria (the first version), Terraria, Magicka, Skulls of the Shogun,
Bastion, Breath of Death VII, Weapon of Choice, Fez, Sol Survivor, and The
Harvest, to name ones that I can remember off the top of my head.

This doesn't include games in the pipeline that are being built in XNA.

EDIT: Forgot Penny Arcade's On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness 3 and 4
(forthcoming).

------
RyanMcGreal
For a narrow definition of "cross platform":

> XNA was Microsoft’s toolset for cross-platform game development between the
> Xbox 360, Zune (when applicable), Windows Phone 7, and PC titles.

~~~
freehunter
Well the title does say "Xbox 360/PC cross-platform". One way to read that
(and the way I read that) is cross-platform between the two platforms.

------
landr0id
OT: anyone else on a mobile device notice how this site's mobile site
feels/looks nice? Almost feels like a native app

<http://i.imgur.com/zJ7YsY1.jpg>

------
lifeguard
Woa. DirectX used to be the most oft updated MS product. I never got into it,
but I thought the Xbox cross-platform dev and community vetting of games was
cool.

------
Shorel
Afraid of Steam much?

------
bvcqw
Xbox 720 will run windows 8 then?

