
Tim Sweeney: Microsoft wants to monopolise games development on PC - saint-loup
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/04/microsoft-monopolise-pc-games-development-epic-games-gears-of-war
======
optimiz3
This is pretty one-sided. UWP is nice for users because it sandboxes apps that
are built for it.

Some benefits:

1\. I know the game won't dump save and log files in my Documents folder (that
place is mine, GTFO).

2\. I know there won't be garbage files or side effects in the registry when I
uninstall the app.

3\. The game can't install rootkit-like spyware to inspect other processes on
my system (hello Warden).

It would be nice if there was a way to distribute UWP apps outside the Windows
Store, but UWP apps are way easier to trust than Win32 apps.

~~~
sametmax
Plus (and while I really dislike app stores in general), it solves the biggest
security problem : the user. It prevents it tfrom installing a load of
crapwares just because he or she clicks everywhere without reading.

Now, it's logical from those vendors to lock in installation on their
plateform. It's theirs. They built it. Like you build a car so it's easier for
you to sell your replacement pieces and control what's going to be plug to it.

Bottom line, if you don't like it, don't use windows. Or if you use windows
because it has value to you, you have to play by MS rule or hack around. Like
with cars.

I dislike these rules, I don't use Window as my main system. I use a system
that doesn't lock me in.

If you are using Windows (or any other system locking your in), if you have
been using it for the last 10 years, you knew this. You are half responsible
for your situation.

Don't tell me "I have to use it because 'work|busines|whatever'". You choose
to keep this work/business/whatever. It's more important to you than playing
by MS rules. Well, you made a choice. You don't like it. But you did. You
never fought it, you never did anything to prevent this from hapening. You had
time. And solutions. This didn't happen by surprise or on one week. People
warned you about this for 20 years, and provided alternatives, and you didn't
use it.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> Like with cars.

Except that cars don't work like that. You can take your Ford to Valvoline and
they don't have to use Ford-brand motor oil.

~~~
mywittyname
Lots of cars lock you into using specialized fluids. For example, GM has lots
of DEX* fluids that must be used in their vehicles or the owner risks
permanent damage. VW brands and Nissan do this too.

Sometimes these things are interchangeable, but sometimes they aren't.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
Prestone et al make DEX-COOL compatible antifreeze etc. The analogous thing in
Windows is programs that use the WIN32 API. To be compatible you have to do
something platform-specific but you don't need anybody's permission to do it.

There is nothing about cars that says you can't use aftermarket parts. And to
the extent that there is, they got the stupid idea from Apple and Microsoft,
not the other way around, and there ought to be a law against it (if it isn't
already an antitrust violation).

~~~
zardo
It's illegal to invalidate a warranty for using aftermarket parts for repairs.
Even critical emissions and safety components can be replaced with
substantially similar aftermarket parts.

------
ewzimm
It seems strange to be so vocal about it with such a weak argument. The three
points he says it needs are: 1. Being able to install from the web. 2. Being
able to integrate with other stores. 3. Not locking it down in the future.

According to Microsoft, 2 was always possible, 1 was fixed in November (it was
previously possible but required bypassing some things), so that leaves only
3, promising to never lock it down in the future.

This idea that Microsoft could lock down its platform in the future is nothing
new, and part of the nature of having a proprietary platform. It really isn't
up to them to fix this problem. It's up to developers to make their software
available on free and open platforms where they know that no future lockdown
is possible.

------
throwaway13337
Looks like Microsoft finally found a way to eat Valve's lunch - release a
windows API that forces you to only publish via their app store.

I'm surprised this is the first they've done this. In a way, Valve has been
reaping the same benefits of Apple and Google without supporting an OS.

It's too bad things are headed completely in this direction. Rent seeking app
stores have shown that there is little resistance from developers even with
ridiculous margins (30% of revenue!).

~~~
vacri
> _Rent seeking app stores_

App stores are _not_ rent seeking. They created a market (and in some cases a
platform) for you to sell to. Being able to sell your product with only 30%
overhead is something previously unheard of in retail.

If you want to get 100% of the money, then you're welcome to build your own
sales system and generate trust with it, deal with bad creditors yourself,
deal with maintenance and artefact distribution in a secure, scaled manner...
the list goes on and on.

Go and ask some farmers if they'd feel hard done by if they got 70% of the
final purchase price of their produce.

~~~
oblio
Physical retail and digital retail are wildly different.

~~~
vacri
My second paragraph was crafted just for you, then!

Really, it's not all that different. You have the same groups - a distributor
and a shopfront. Sometimes these are the same (apple's app store) sometimes
not (a games publisher managing your game on steam). You generate the primary
product, and it goes through a middleman or two on the way to the end-user.

And just like a farmer, you can sell your own product yourself and walk away
with 100% of the cash. But like the farmer's shack by the side of the road,
you don't get as much market penetration with your product on your own website
- people have to come to you or stumble across you, instead of just get your
stuff at the supermarket where they usually shop.

Yes, there are differences, but no, they're not wildly different. You make
something and want to sell it. People offer services to help you sell it. You
give them some of the money in order to sell more product. 30% is really low
overhead.

------
frik
Windows 10 Mobile is dead, 1.1% market share of all Windows Phone version in
Q4 2015, see IDC:
[https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS40980416](https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS40980416)
(or a critical non-advertisement article
[http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/28/10864034/windows-phone-
is-...](http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/28/10864034/windows-phone-is-dead) )

And what Microsoft does to force Windows 7 users to 10 is shaddy. Welcome to
the old new Microsoft, with their evil tactics and nowadays also with software
that spy's on you. So mean, shame on them. So sad, I really like Microsoft
products from the 1995-2010 timeframe, and now have to replace all the legacy,
though I have time until at least 2020.

~~~
whitegrape
As someone who only uses Windows for gaming, the only potential reason I have
to upgrade to 10 is for DirectX 12. But with Vulkan, I don't even need that.
I'm hoping that by the time security updates for 7 are ended sometime in the
2020s they'll have released a new OS that is actually worth upgrading to...

~~~
randyrand
Will vulkan be able to run games that were coded with DX12?

No. Youll still need windows 10 to run them. So im not sure how Vulkan makes
you not need DX12. If youre developing games, sure. But as a gamer you have no
way to make DX12 games run on vulkan.

~~~
whitegrape
I think there's a misunderstanding here. Will OpenGl be able to run games that
were coded in DX? No.

Vulkan's existence means I don't need DX12, and I don't need Windows 10,
because game devs that care about me (and my 35% brethren) will have a Vulkan
port, in the same way that game devs that care about any other non-Windows
platforms have an OpenGL port (or are already using an engine that does the
porting for them). Technically you're right that Vulkan won't help me run a
game that uses only DX12, I doubt there will be many of those games though
because of many bad incentives to do that.

~~~
pjmlp
I guess you missed the part that most AAA studios don't care about APIs just
platform vendor support and tooling.

The same things that make them prefer DX and games consoles, when given a
choice.

Of course with the amount of nice indie games, you are free to ignore those
studios.

------
mdip
Maybe I missed it in reading the article but what, specifically, is not
available to developers if they choose to write the application against the
typical Win32 APIs?

Are they, for instance, making certain hardware accelerated APIs only
available for UWP apps? If so, are these APIs designed in such a way as to
prevent someone from creating an API that runs on top of Win32 that exposes
the capabilities (i.e. by requiring drivers be locked down in such a way as to
disallow interaction outside of UWP)?

I can't see a way outside of driver feature lock-out that the OS could
effectively _prevent_ game developers from developing games the way they have
been in the past. I'm guessing this has a lot to do with their "Write it for
Xbox One and it'll work on Windows 10, too" goals, but that feels more like a
_convenience_ than a lock-in -- games are a constant exercise of porting to
get them on each platform, so getting them onto a non-UWP target would be
another platform (which many developers would simply skip since UWP would be
theoretically easier).

~~~
Tepix
This is the key question. If Microsoft decides one day to offer the next
DirectX version only for UWP then the developers will either have to eat
humble pie or leave the platform.

~~~
ZenoArrow
Can't they use Vulkan instead of DX12? I would've thought Vulkan would be
supported on the Windows platform.

~~~
KirinDave
It is not clear they would want to though. Developers are heavily invested in
DX.

~~~
ZenoArrow
My understanding (and this could be false) is that many games are based on
externally developed game engines, such as Unreal and Unity. If these game
engines make use of Vulkan (which they are almost bound to do so, CryEngine
already has early support) then does it make any difference to the developers
of the games?

The only thing I could think of where it might matter is if the GPU drivers
have better support for DX12 than Vulkan, resulting in better performance, but
I have no idea if that's the case.

~~~
KirinDave
It's not uncommon for people using engines to still need to appeal to the
underlying frameworks.

------
madspindel
I don't really understand the problem here. Windows is an open plattform. I
can install Steam. I can listen to Spotify. Browse the web with Google Chrome.

If you don't like the Universal Windows Platform, well. Don't release your
games on it. I have heard Steam is a quite popular alternative...

~~~
ramy_d
_I don 't really understand the problem here. Windows is an open plattform. I
can install Steam. I can listen to Spotify. Browse the web with Google
Chrome._

Except you don't get to do all those things through the windows store. You
don't install Chrome through the windows store, only the google app with 1
tab. No firefox on the windows store either. Is steam on the windows store?
How long before the windows store becomes the principle method to get apps on
your desktop? Sweeny's criticism resonates here: _Sweeney then compared UWP to
Google 's Android, which is "technically open, but practically closed" thanks
to how "comically difficult" it is for general users to sideload apps. "This
is not merely a technical issue: it has the market impact of Google Play Store
dominating over competing stores, despite not being very good," he says._

~~~
pdkl95
> Except you don't get to do all those things through the windows store.

It's almost as if there is a War On General Purpose Computation... and the
locked down malware "appliances" are winning.

This started with iOS; the people that should have recognized the dangers of a
_gatekeeper_ controlling who can develop or install software decided to
embrace the shiny iPhone and later Apple's tables. Now, even Microsoft is
getting into the "app store" market and stripping away the remnants of their
platform that weren't locked down.

> sideload apps

Is that the new euphemism for "install software"? Once everyone is convinced
installing software outside of the "official" app store is deviant or unusual,
it will be easy to introduce a meme that 3rd party software is
risky/harmful/immoral.

> "This is not merely a technical issue ..."

/sigh/

Even with Tim Sweeny's current explanation of the problem and Cory Doctorow's
warnings[1][2] several years ago, I doubt many people - even HN readers in
this very thread - will actually fight this trend or even change their
behavior in any meaningful way. They will continue to give Microsoft money and
market share. Instead, I expect down-votes and complaints from apologists that
pretend this is for "security", true-believers that pretend this trend to lock
everything down doesn't exist, and willfully-blind nerds that think
jailbreaking devices is a long-term solution.

[1]
[http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html](http://boingboing.net/2012/01/10/lockdown.html)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nypRYpVKc5Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nypRYpVKc5Y)

~~~
oldmanjay
Your belief that people who don't share your opinion are "willfully-blind" is
grossly dehumanizing. You are not the keeper of the one correct mindset.

~~~
pdkl95
> opinion

It's not my _opinion_ that jailbreaking isn't a long-term solution to the
lockdown of the General Purpose Computer. Jailbreaking isn't available in all
situations, it may involve legal risk, it often requires technical knowledge,
and it can impact the relationship with the manufacture such as voiding a
warranty.

As for the term "willfully blind", how would you describe someone who denies
facts?

You may not like certain facts, but they still exist.

------
glaberficken
I have a kind of mixed feeling about this. So if you do a mobile OS its ok to
have app walled gardens, but on Windows you can´t?

Won't we always have the "option" of going the Linux way?

I think it's really telling that Valve has been investing heavily in
developing it's Linux gaming econsystem, they saw this comming a mile away.

~~~
nabla9
Microsoft OS has monopoly power in the PC market. They have been in the court
for actions like this before [1].

The difference between mobile and PC is that if hardware maker has their own
closed system, what they have is basically an appliance. PC's are generic item
build from standards and Microsoft has produced an open operating system with
large markets for software running on their OS. They can't just close it on a
whim and abuse their monopoly power position [1].

\----

[1.] Findings of Fact in U.S. v. Microsoft Corporation, Civil Action No.
98-1232 (TPJ) and State of New York, ex re. Attorney General Eliot Spitzer et
al., v. Microsoft Corporation, Civil Action No. 98-1233 (TPJ), November 5,
1999.

"Monopoly power" is not the same as monopoly. One must always point this out
when saying it or discussion is derailed.

~~~
raesene2
But surely they're not closing off the pc platform, just potentially
restricting what can happen on their OS. You can still use PCs with linux
without any lock in. Long gone are the days when Microsoft was a monopoly on
client computing devices, these days we have linux, Mac osx, chrome OS,
Android, steamOS and iOS.

Several of these other platforms are already closed to one degree on another,
with iOS probably being the most restrictive, so I'm not sure I see Microsoft
as being dominent enough to warrant a claim of monopoly power any more

~~~
speeder
I needed to buy a computer some years ago.

My favourite OS is Fedora.

First thing, is I find out that all manufacturers only were selling non-
Windows machines at a significant markup, the only way this made sense to me
is if Microsoft is actively bribing them (ie: "selling" windows for a negative
price).

So I thought, I would just buy this cool Windows 8 laptop, and remove Windows
8, since it is crap anyway.

Well... no, I am still using that Windows 8 (now 8.1, after it forcefully
upgraded itself), because for some reason (maybe a UEFI bug) I can't make
anything that ins't Windows that came installed to boot, not even Windows
install discs boot, much less Linux discs, and yes, I did disabled SecureBoot,
but it still blocks everything except Windows 8 itself from booting (this mean
I can't use Memtestx86 either)

If that ins't closed, I dunno what is.

~~~
raesene2
So your pc or fedora has a bug which prevents you changing os and it then
follows that Microsoft have a monopoly power in PCs... Sorry I don't quite
think that follows

~~~
mordocai
Nitpicking, but the problem as they described is definitely not fedora. It is
definitely a PC problem.

The main problem here is that Windows is such a monopoly that the PC
manufacturer didn't care to make sure anything else worked.

~~~
arien
Just like mobile developers don't bother making Windows Apps because they
consider the % of users is too low.

In other words, this manufacturer probably didn't care because the % of users
who would use it for something other than the standard config is too small to
justify the time spent outside that standard.

I don't think this specific case can be called monopoly. You can install Linux
and other stuff fine in most laptops, this looks like an isolated case. I
mean, you can even install Ubuntu on a Surface Pro and Surface Book
(proprietary MS hardware).

------
chokolad
BTW, Phil Spencer posted this on twitter

[https://twitter.com/XboxP3/status/705795213709561857](https://twitter.com/XboxP3/status/705795213709561857)

UWP is a fully open ecosystem, available to every developer, and can be
supported by any store. Broad range of tools
[http://bit.ly/1QIHTf0](http://bit.ly/1QIHTf0)

~~~
throwaway2048
That claim is in no way backed up by anything linked, everything talks about
using windows store, and zero mention of third party stores.

~~~
chokolad
Next tweet We will discuss our next steps with the Universal Windows Platform
at //build later this month.

[https://twitter.com/XboxP3/status/705795341572923392](https://twitter.com/XboxP3/status/705795341572923392)

------
pjmlp
So Tim Sweeney apparently is fine with Apple, Google, Sony and Nintendo
controlling their eco-systems, only Microsoft cannot do it.

~~~
larsiusprime
Apple, Google, Sony and Nintendo started with closed ecosystems. Keeping them
closed maintains the status quo. Microsoft presided over a relatively open
ecosystem (the PC). Moving that from open to closed could be rightly perceived
as a loss of something some people would like to keep.

I don't see the hypocrisy here.

~~~
pjmlp
If he feels so bad about it, he shouldn't let Epic have console exclusives or
even develop for them.

After all Epic is also profiting from them.

Or it is only bad when the size of the pie isn't as big as one wishes for?

~~~
Strom
I get the feeling you didn't fully understand what larsiusprime explained, as
you brought another example which isn't similar to the main issue here.

The primary key of the issue here is the loss of something that actually
existed. The iOS App Store has never been open. You can dislike the lack of
openness but there has never been an event that removed the openness, as it
has never existed. The same goes for Epic's games. The console exclusive Gears
of War 3 never had a PC version released and then subsequently taken away and
buried ATARI style. It has always been console exclusive.

Tim sees Microsoft's actions as a force that will reduce the openness of the
Windows platform.

~~~
pjmlp
Maybe we are talking in circles here, but if he cared so much about openess
maybe he shouldn't have supported closed platforms in first place.

If he is such a knight of openess, then Epic should only have targeted open
platforms.

Yet they happily took the money those bad closed platforms brought them.

It is not a matter of consoles always being closed, rather a duality of
principles when money speaks.

~~~
Strom
He's not fighting against closed systems because they are closed. He's not
fighting against closed systems in general for any reason. If he was doing
this, then you would have a point. He is angry that the status quo of having
an actively supported open Windows platform is being threatened. He is
fighting against losing that. The new closed system is just the evil actor
that he identified.

This is a classical case of loss aversion. [1] Tim would be at least equally
mad if Microsoft decided to redirect all its efforts from win32 to cow
milking. Would you then claim that Tim is a hypocrite for having drunk milk
instead of actively boycotting the dairy industry?

Yes, you could make the argument that extremely black & white attitude is
necessary, and that if you like some open system then thus follows that you
need to fight against every closed system. Some people like Richard Stallman
do this. However most people, like Tim, belive that a more gray world can
exist, and tend to fight when visible threats manifest and otherwise spend
their time on other things.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion)

~~~
randyrand
Hahah I like the cow milking example. spot on.

------
SloopJon
What we've learned from Steam and Apple's app stores is that users will make a
Faustian bargain if they see the terms as favorable enough, especially when it
lowers prices. This in turn attracted developers.

However, with the history of PlaysForSure, Zune, Games for Windows, Windows
Phone, and the Windows Store, I don't have much confidence that Microsoft will
win the hearts and minds of users or developers this time around.

~~~
kabdib
Microsoft might _try_ to make an open system. But over the long term, they
just won't be able to. Open is not in the Microsoft DNA. "Whatever can be
controlled, _must_ be controlled."

It might start open-ish. But then some PM will notice that users can post
content that is objectionable, or that there are such things as "porn mods"
for Skyrim, or whatever, and then the lid will come down.

Xbox Live Arcade started out as a way for indie developers to get their games
into the Xbox market. Over time XBLA reached the point where only deep pockets
could successfully navigate the TCRs and multiple verification passes needed
to ship. Indies got frozen out.

Let's not even talk about XNA, or Games for Windows Live (shudder).

Whatever hardware Microsoft offers a gaming platform on, it won't be left
uncontrolled for long.

~~~
Jordrok
As a primarily PC gamer, there was a period around 2008-2010 where XBLA seemed
to be flourishing and it was seriously making me consider buying an XBox.
There seemed to be a lot of really good indie games suddenly popping up which
were XBox exclusives. I never quite reached the tipping point though, which is
probably for the best because as far as I can tell, the current incarnation of
XBLA is a shadow of its former self. As an outsider I'm not really sure why
that is, but it certainly hurts my confidence in Microsoft's ability to manage
an open video game ecosystem.

Valve and Steam on the other hand (though still not perfect) have only grown
and gotten better in the meantime.

~~~
chokolad
> which is probably for the best because as far as I can tell, the current
> incarnation of XBLA is a shadow of its former self. As an outsider I'm not
> really sure why that is, but it certainly hurts my confidence in Microsoft's
> ability to manage an open video game ecosystem.

I am not sure why you say that. There is significantly more Indie games being
released for Xbox One right now than it was for Xbox 360 and XBLA. There are
also early preview releases similar to Steam EAPs, etc.

------
staticelf
I really like the initiative of UWP but I agree with the author that you
should be able to install UWP-apps from any source. Is it really true that you
can't?

Maybe it's time for game developers like Epic to support Linux and make gamers
choose linux as their desktop, that would probably create a surge of new users
and contributions to the linux desktop development and maybe finally provide a
"real" alternative.

Why I am running Windows is mostly because I can't stand all the issues with
Linux desktops and that graphic drivers and games barely exist on the
platform, I am loving Valves support though.

~~~
partiallypro
You can install UWP apps from any source, however by default it's not allowed.
It is a toggle in the settings though (meant for developers.)

~~~
obsurveyor
And the boogeyman is that Microsoft will automatically patch it out in the
future. Microsoft has earned the doubt but I don't think it will happen.
Signing every build during development of new products/features would be very
onerous, probably even to internal processes at Microsoft.

~~~
mynameisvlad
It's enabled to allow local and remote debugging, so I highly doubt it's be
disabled since it would directly break that key development feature.

~~~
makomk
They could easily disable it for anyone who doesn't have a copy of Visual
Studio and a developer account on the Windows Store, though - and I think
they've taken action against use of similar features by non-developers on
mobile before now.

~~~
obsurveyor
"Easily"? I thought it was a system level thing? I don't have to sign in to
Windows with my developer account(I only use a local account) to use Visual
Studio or access the account MSDN/community stuff.

~~~
mynameisvlad
Yeah, I wouldn't call it an "easy" fix. It's a system-level toggle and IIRC,
since Win10 is in no way tied to your dev center account. I believe in
Win8/8.1 you had to sign in to create a local signing cert, but that seems to
have been removed in Win10 since I switched to developer mode with no real
changes other than a radio button choice.

Plus, it'd be very hard to accurately determine "correct" usage. You don't
have to have a dev center account to develop for Windows. You just need it to
distribute your apps. I've made plenty of apps without distributing them and
haven't needed to touch dev center. I do believe you need VS to create the
apps, but only because the tooling is only available there. There's nothing
technically limiting that, though, and simply having VS installed does not
indicate you are developing Windows apps. You could be writing Python, for
example, or even writing stuff for Arduino using 3rd party extensions.

------
sgdread
The second Microsoft will try to lock down distribution of software from
platforms like Steam and GoG to gain competitive advantage and profits, they
will be sued by Steam, EA and other platform owners. Apple with 10 major book
publishers tried to do same on eBooks markets with Amazon. Ended up bad for
them. "Sue the bastards!" (c) Richard Branson

------
endergen
Does anyone know exactly which features you don't get access to unless going
through their distribution?

Cause anything short of not getting the latest drivers or something or
anything that affects performance or existing feature sets isn't the worst
thing ever. Ok it's lame to try to close a system that's been open forever.
But this is exactly what Apple is doing with their App Store, minus I believe
preventing any serious Platform APIs from being called.

~~~
Blaaguuu
I don't know for sure, but my assumption would be that it currently isn't
anything particularly interesting... Maybe things like sending updates to
Windows 10's 'notification' drawer?

~~~
endergen
That's my impression without Tim Sweeney getting specific. He's more making
sure Microsoft doesn't take over distribution and charge a 30% cut or
something and do other forms of competitive hampering of other distribution
channels like direct to gamers, or alternatives like Steam which MS is super
jealous of.

------
cyanbane
Is the core of this that game purchaser is losing the ability to purchase this
type of game from other channels and forced to from the MS store in exchange
for this game being able to run on any hardware (Win 10/XBox One/Windows
Mobile)that runs UWP. Are they betting that a lot of PC gamers may see value
in knowing that an app is vetted and will work with minimal configuration on
their PC in exchange for only using this channel for purchase? Is the hardware
amalgamation of PC and Xbox Live that bad to the end user or just the game
devs or just to 3rd party AAA title devs that have to compete with MS's AAA
titles and bargain to get into this new channel?

~~~
FussyZeus
Speaking as an avid PC gamer, if this is Microsoft's angle they do not
understand their audience. Half of PC gaming IS the ability to tinker and
tweak and configure the games to work the way we want.

Personally, I couldn't give a shit if my games ran on Microsoft's shiny new
platform if I tried. As long as we can distribute and run executables I don't
really see this having much of an effect, and if Microsoft really starts
trying to lock devs out of features they need, well, there's always Ubuntu.

I feel like this is a really bone headed move, when Valve is pushing the
bounds of gaming on Linux Microsoft is doubling down on more "exclusive"
platforming, because that went so bloody well last time. _cough_
gamesforwindows _cough_

------
pearle
Polygon podcast [1] where Tim is interviewed about his article:

[1] [http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/4/11159584/tim-sweeney-
windows...](http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/4/11159584/tim-sweeney-
windows-10-monopoly-interview)

------
joewood1972
The problem with an open distribution system is that it easy to abuse, and
that leads to security problems. Most of us all know non-IT literate family
members that have clicked through a web advert advertising to "speed up your
computer" to end up installing some bad spyware/malware or whatever. I'm happy
for Windows to become a walled garden by default, as long there's an easy
option to switch it off.

~~~
chipperyman573
I'm not. Every time a family member asks me to make a program to automate
something they do regularly it always involves a call about how to disable
SmartScreen and _always_ goes something like this:

> _Ok, so run the program. Yeah, I know it says your computer is protecting
> you, just ignore that. Look for a little button that says "More info". No,
> "More info". No, don't click OK. Ugh. Re-open the file. Ok, under that scary
> sentence that you should ignore, there's a button that says "More info".
> Click that. Ok, good. Click run anyway. Yes, I know it says it could be
> unsafe, click it anyway._

You get the picture. It makes distributing little side projects you make a
huge headache, which frankly is not something I see microsoft solving any time
soon.

~~~
joewood1972
Not sure I follow. For distributing apps for friends you can (and I do)
distribute using HockeyApp or TestFlight or whatever. There's also a
Development->Sideload app feature in Windows 10 already. It's hard to argue
that the cost of doing this outweighs the security benefits. Just think how
hard it would be to do a DDoS attack without robots installed via malware
everywhere.

------
macspoofing
Tim Sweeney is pissed at Microsoft for trying to do what Apple and Google
already done on mobile devices.

~~~
richardwhiuk
and Microsoft on Xbox, and Sony on Playstation and Nintendo, and Sega, and ...

~~~
corysama
Tim has been tolerating crap from a bunch of people. But, being pissed about
now getting even more crap from someone who has been a good friend for
decades; That makes him a hypocrite?

------
exodust
So much speculation in the article and in the comments.

I won't pretend I'm across the whole doomsday prophesy implied, but... a lot
of the reason (not 100%, but a lot of the reason) why many gamers own a
Windows PC is for Steam.

Okay, so I have no data to back that up except... lots of my younger cousins
and nephews and their friends who beg their parents (and me) for a new
graphics card so they can run this or that game. They are ALL on Steam, it's
in their blood. They might do a bit of homework and multimedia stuff on their
Windows boxes, but Steam is a major application, not least of because the
social integration and features that run very deep within the Steam network.

Microsoft trying to ruin that party will be like Google trying to convince
everyone Google Buzz is the social platform of the future. Barely a pebble in
the pond rippled from that attempt, and Microsoft are no strangers to the art
of pebble-throwing.

------
ekianjo
This post is like Stockholm's Syndrome: "Oh Microsoft please don't close your
platform. Because anyway we want to keep using it no matter what". You know,
you could have chosen to mention Linux instead or keeping your hands tied. But
no, Tim likes to be a prisoner.

------
Eyas
It seems like the real complaint is that Windows Store lock-in is bad (which
might be the case for distributers, jury is out for me whether its bad for
gamers).

Universal Windows Platform, however, is an API that is strictly better and
safer in many cases. It means an app can run on phone and PC, be sandboxed,
offers power and lifecycle management features which the Win32 API does not,
and a generally saner API.

------
jsingleton
This image caption struck me:

    
    
        Minecraft is developed by Swedish company Mojang. 
        Will future games be developed now that Microsoft is closing its borders?
    

I hope this was added afterwards by the guardian. I'm pretty sure Tim wouldn't
have missed the MS acquisition. You can bet anything Minecraft will be in the
Windows Store.

~~~
jerf
'Twould be a very bad bet against: [https://www.microsoft.com/en-
US/store/apps/Minecraft-Pocket-...](https://www.microsoft.com/en-
US/store/apps/Minecraft-Pocket-Edition/9WZDNCRDZSBB)

(MCPE, based in C++, appears to be intended to eventually take over as "the"
Minecraft. It's behind feature-wise the Java version, but advancing relatively
quickly lately.)

------
kregasaurusrex
It looks like this is going to become a tipping point for which Vulkan and
DirectX offer competing system calls for accessing a computer's GPU. The UWP
being shown here will be essentially locking developers into using the DirectX
library and drop future support for Vulkan against what users want to see in
gaming as being platform-agnostic. Coming into this console generation, gamers
wanted to see games from AAA publishers be able to come out on X1/PS4/PC
faster because of similar system calls; such that code for one platform
wouldn't require a total re-write to work on the others. MS is now wanting to
lock out developers from using an open platform such that their calls will be
different and "better" than those made by an open one.

------
mastax
The day Microsoft kills Win32 is the day Windows dies.

~~~
pjmlp
Hence why they are working into packing Win32 apps as UWP ones.

Search for Project Centennial.

------
MikusR
Epic is just transitioning their Unreal launcher into a storefront. So they
need to launch an attack on competitor. Similarly when Windows 8 launched
Steam owner (Gabe Newell) also ranted against Windows store.

------
WhoBeI
A bit half arsed though..

They could have signing certificates that automatically timeout and force
publishers to update often and then charge for the certification. Publishers
can always get a little extra by paying for the "editor's pick" feature. Oh,
and also, because users despise long downloads why not have a normal and
premium download rate for both publishers and end users.

And leaving an off switch in there... I think someone got a chair in the head.

------
vamur
Steam has a defacto monopoly for gaming on Windows and there are over 2000
games for Linux on Steam. So Microsoft would be foolish to try and restrict
games to their own app store. That would be the end of Windows as a gaming
platform. And given Microsoft's past efforts failing miserably it's unlikely
whatever they come up with this time can win on its own.

------
Animats
It's clear where this is going. Apple did it first, with rigid control of the
IOS platform. Then Google gradually tightened the screws on Android apps. Now
it's Microsoft's turn.

It's not just about games. It's about control of the app business. Apple won't
let you sell an IOS app that competes with an Apple product. In time, neither
will Microsoft.

~~~
mywittyname
Let's be clear: Apple and Google can do things that would be considered
illegal if done by MS. Due to anti-trust regulations, these companies are
playing by different rules.

~~~
Animats
Microsoft could reasonably claim they no longer have a monopoly position.

One could make a conspiracy in restraint of trade argument that Apple, Google,
and Microsoft are acting collectively to control the app industry.

------
pearle
Good for him, I hope others speak out as well.

------
bitmapbrother
Tim has nothing to worry about. Microsoft was never a player in PC gaming and
never will be. Steam is PC gaming. Microsoft has tried a couple of times to
take on Steam and have failed spectacularly. Microsoft should either try and
buy Steam (although Gabe would never sell) or embrace it.

~~~
gottam
Well, that's not entirely true. A decade ago Microsoft was a big player in PC
gaming. Microsoft game studios made some big sellers like age of empires,
mechwarrior, freelancer, etc, but was dismantled after their xbox initiative
took off.

~~~
bitmapbrother
Considering the calibre of games that were released during that time frame
Microsoft was never a big player in the industry.

------
gehrforce1
Isn't most of this because they also want the same apps to run on Xbox, Phone,
Hololens, etc?

------
CleanCut
My studio, Agile Perception, will be boycotting UWP. I'm glad Tim brought this
to light. I was wondering whether or not our next project should include UWP.
[https://agileperception.com](https://agileperception.com)

~~~
ryao
When will your next project be available on Linux and Mac OS X?

------
rl3
It's bad news when Tim Sweeney decries the very existence of your platform.

------
shmerl
Hopefully stronger push for Linux gaming will prevent this kind of thing.

------
Skoofoo
Microsoft is trying to monopolize an industry? Stop the presses!

I wish Microsoft never entered the video game industry in the first place.
They made it worse for everyone for their own profit.

------
sfunk1x
Rings a bit hollow.

Easy solution - don't develop games for Windows or Xbox!

~~~
turbohz
That's what sparked the creation of SteamOS. Let's hope developers get onboard
and hardware vendors start (seriously) supporting the platform.

~~~
UK-AL
Steam is pretty much what windows is trying to do.

------
pmarreck
Can't someone come up with an open-source Linux OS fork that is designed
mainly for games?

Oh, wait... Valve is trying that. ;)

~~~
shmerl
Any regular distro is quite usable for it. Valve just made a console UI. For
desktop gaming it isn't useful really.

------
wnevets
I hope game devs remember the train wreck that was games for windows.

------
ryao
Maybe the publishers should start publishing exclusively for sane PC platforms
like Mac OS X and Linux instead of Windows. I believe that they can do all
three via Steam though.

~~~
KirinDave
What do you mean by "sane?" From a technical standpoint, Windows is
competitive and probably superior to Linux for desktop and portable
applications. For server side, Windows is probably not the right choice.

And as for OSX... if you express this concern about Microsoft's app platform
but not Apple's encroachment on their (poorly managed) app platform? You're
being unfair and letting prejudices and populism blind you to the issue.

And all of this ignores that the most important computing platforms, the ones
on mobile handsets? They're impossibly locked down and no one seems to care.

~~~
yarou
What does this article have to do with the Mac App Store? You can easily
disable gatekeeper by right-clicking on a pkg. I don't see any similar
mechanism on Windows 10, and anyway, the article is discussing how UWP would
lock down APIs for _developers_ , which leads to an overall adverse selection
situation for game consumers.

And it's laughable that you think Windows 10 is even remotely comparable to
Linux for "portable applications". How are Win32 executables portable at all?
They don't even work between versions of Windows. Win32 API is still a mess
and pretty much everything about Windows is not standards compliant.

~~~
KirinDave
This complaint is that at any moment, Microsoft might add a feature that only
UWP gets. It's not like you can't run unsigned apps on Windows either. Hell,
you can run unsigned UWP apps too! You just need to enable developer mode.

Apple has this exact same facility in the Mac app store. And has an even
tighter lockdown on the iOS store which we all mysteriously pretend is
different somehow because reasons and 30somethings nostalgia.

Linux on portable devices such as laptops is a comedy of errors, failed device
driver support, excuses, and politics breaking battery life.

If you say otherwise, you have much lower standards than I do for a modern
laptop.

> How are Win32 executables portable at all? They don't even work between
> versions of Windows

... Wait. Wait... I just read this. What? I have DOS executables that still
work in windows, let alone very old win32 api executables. Do Linux
executables work somewhere else besides Linux without someone bending over
backwards to support them (e.g., FreeBSD?).

~~~
ryao
Those DOS binaries work on Linux with DOSBox. The Linux binaries also work on
SmartOS (OpenSolaris).

~~~
KirinDave
I know that options exist, but uh... I mean Wine doesn't count?

It's more the absurd claim that Win32 as an API hasn't made good nods towards
backwards compatibility. It has.

~~~
ryao
DOSBox is a separate project from Wine. It has also been said that DOSBox
backward compatibility is better than cmd.exe on recent versions of Windows.

That being said, Linux can run old binaries just fine. You just need the
libraries. Windows does not have a stable syscall API, so that cannot as
easily be done with Windows. As for win32, Sun tried to standardize the
Windows API during the DOS days to ensure backward compatibility, but
Microsoft killed it.

~~~
KirinDave
I'm still not sure how this interjection is relevant to the conversation at
hand, but thank you for the interesting information.

From what I can tell, you're executing a playbook based on prejudices and not
an actual argument. Is OSX less arbitrary in its UI or less locked down? Could
it be that developers HAVE to accept Apple's locked down game environment for
iOS because it's the only platform that does a good job of combating game
piracy? Is the Android App Store actually any better in this regard?

Maybe. Maybe not. But all I see here is a very biased set of standards.
Windows 10's App store is far less important to the industry than the iOS
store in the large, as far more software moves through it.

I'm actually hoping for a good discussion of why people are comfortable with
the iOS store beyond, "I have historical reasons to hate Microsoft but not
Apple." I clearly will not get that from you.

~~~
ryao
The article is about desktop gaming. The reason epic is upset is that
Microsoft is making new APIs UWP-exclusive, although I had to read more things
to learn that, They feel that Microsoft is pulling the rug out from under
them. The reason they are not upset about anything Apple is doing is that
Apple does not restrict APIs to its Mac OS X App Store. They really do not
care about iOS because it was locked down from the beginning (as were mobile
devices in general), so there is no rug to pull out from under them.

Windows has always been a mediocre platform. I was really happy when I got off
it because I no longer had to deal with reboots for updates, disk
fragmentation, viruses/malware, micro-managing software updates, yearly
reinstalls to get cruft off the system, everything I install thinking it is so
important it should autostart (which is really a problem of being able to
execute code during the installation process), etcetera. Prople who suffer
from Stockholm syndrome over the abuse they have from running Windows think
such things are a normal part of having a computer, but they are not. Sane
platforms do not have such problems and Windows is just not a sane platform.

As for "I have historical reasons to hate Microsoft and not Apple", it is the
opposite. By the time that I obtained my first computer (running Windows),
Apple's colorful iMacs looked like children's toys and before that time, I had
been traumatized by parents who tried to pass off children's toys as
computers. Apple's ridiculous hardware designs combined with my experience of
my parents' outright lies lead me to believe that Apple was trying to replace
actual computers with inferior substitutes that looked pretty. Until Mac OS X,
that was not far from the truth, but I did not know that at the time and
developed a deep seated hatred of them. Things slowly changed over the years
as I began to see the technical merit in what Apple had done, first with iOS
after I found Android to be s terrible OS design and then with Mac OS X fr it
being a POSIX system like Linux and being Darwin like iOS. That being said,
hatred just is not a healthy thing and any dislike I have for any vendor's
software is not worth harming my health by doing something as silly as hating
them. I already went down that path once with Apple for irrational reasons.
There really is no reason for me to go down that path again.

As for iOS, you are trying to get a discussion over iOS from the wrong person.
The right person should be yourself, but if you cannot see what is wrong with
the other options on the market, then there probably is no one who can explain
it to you. iOS design is great (e.g. no garbage collection outside JavaScript,
no annoying app drawer, no noticeable UI lag that gives me headaches,
consistent UI design, etcetera). It is an excellent stand-in for WebOS until
the day that I get a sane Linux distribution (i.e. proper package management,
no Java, X Windows, etcetera) running on smartphone hardware that I like.
Given that I have my hands full with non-mobile platforms (laptops excluded),
that will probably be a very long time.

~~~
KirinDave
> The article is about desktop gaming. The reason epic is upset is that
> Microsoft is making new APIs UWP-exclusive, although I had to read more
> things to learn that,

Citation, please. Sweeney's tweets implied this was the hypothetical. So
either Tim is under NDA and being coy, or something else.

But the simply fact is: I do not disagree with Apple & Microsoft & Google
doing this to their platforms, so long as a reasonably accessible side-loading
option exists and there's always the opportunity for a third party store and
appropriate facilities for developers.

We're at a point where there are no more options to protect people's computers
other than code signing. We've tried a lot of things, and we've reached a
point where we must concede that education and simple restrictions on binary
execution _cannot overcome the basic difficulties users have_. All the app
sandboxing in the world won't help us if users are fooled by sub-optimal UX
into running malware.

And Malware exists on every major platform. Even OSX. Even iOS.

> The reason they are not upset about anything Apple is doing is that Apple
> does not restrict APIs to its Mac OS X App Store.

This is absolutely false. Apple not only labels several APIs as "private" and
non-accessible, but it also creates rules for entire _types_ of software. They
even stop arbtirary updating mechanisms because of their review path, which
then impacts users! What's more, there _is no untrusted general distribution
path for iOS_. I don't know why you said this, as I can't find any way to
interpret it.

And don't even get me started on how Apple mandates how you transact with
users. I'm amazed its legal, but in the US vendors have always had ice water
dumped on them by every new technology. It's about our contempt for creatives,
a cultural norm Apple has expressed for a long time.

And don't say the desktop OS is a dodge. The situation with Apple's store and
Microsoft's store is _absolutely identical_ , except that on OSX, so many
developers are unhappy with the store they've decided to take the risk and ask
users to disable that protection.

So, Apple locks its _entire_ API set to its store on iOS. Unless you're going
to ask customers to jailbreak their phone, you have no options other than
setting up a developer environment.

I was going to go through your second two paragraphs of value judgements and
fisk them a bit, but honestly I don't see the point. You're dismissing a lot
of accomplishments of a lot of people out of what looks to me like pure
preference and not an informed assessment of the situation. It doesn't take
much research to find out that Apple's iOS is generally considered the worst
of the 3 mobile platforms for modern mobile UX, with its only saving grave
being a slightly superior accessibility story over Android.

Which is natural and fine, but maybe couching your argument in terms of
technical reasoning is not the best way to express your point.

------
dragonbonheur
Long live Win32 and Linux!

------
superuser2
Epic (in the context of Windows and software) is an electronic medical records
company in Wisconsin. Might want to specify that this is Epic Games; that was
confusing at first.

~~~
sbarre
I would guess that if asked about "Epic" in the context of software, _most_
people would guess Epic Games, and not the EMR company.

~~~
superuser2
Really? Epic Games has 160 employees according to Wikipedia; Epic Systems has
~10,000.

I do happen to have worked in healthcare IT though.

------
ekke
Nice photo caption fail: "Minecraft is developed by Swedish company Mojang.
Will future games be developed now that Microsoft is closing its borders?"

In the light of: [https://mojang.com/2014/09/yes-were-being-bought-by-
microsof...](https://mojang.com/2014/09/yes-were-being-bought-by-microsoft/)

------
dang
Url changed from [http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/03/tim-sweeney-to-
microso...](http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/03/tim-sweeney-to-microsoft-
universal-windows-platform-can-should-must-and-will-die/), which points to
this.

------
parenthephobia
Meta: HN's title could stand to be less vague. Not everyone knows who Tim
Sweeney is. Readers might confuse him with Tim Cook!

~~~
Strom
I am confident that almost nobody on HN will confuse Tim Sweeney for Tim Cook.
Also, this is similar to lingo usage, not everyone will know what PHP is, but
that doesn't mean we should start adding wikipedia definitions into the
titles. People who are unaware can do some research to find out, and the rest
of us won't be subjected to annoyingly verbose titles. Additionally in this
specific case the first sentence of the article explains who Tim Sweeney is.

------
serge2k
I couldn't get past the first paragraph. The FUD is strong with this article.

~~~
ionised
How would you know if you only read the first paragraph?

------
tobltobs
Maybe it wasn't a good idea of them to support the gaming monoculture called
Windows for the last 20 years.

~~~
theandrewbailey
They haven't. For the past 10+ years, MS hasn't seriously cared about gaming
on Windows, because Xbox.

~~~
greggman
DirectX 10, 11, and 12 all came out in the last 10 years. All had significant
improvements over each previous one. MS has spent millions on making windows
_the_ high end gaming platform.

~~~
theandrewbailey
But in the 10 years before that, DirectX went from idea to version 9 (which
was pretty good). Their PC game development almost stopped 10 years ago. Ever
wonder where Age of Empires and Halo on Windows went? Xbox needed more
resources.

------
drzaiusapelord
At the end of the day, Win10 is a mobile OS with some legacy desktop support.
I think once we see it for what it is, we'll be more comfortable with it. Does
this guy from Epic have a problem with publishing these games to iphone/ipad?
The game changed pretty quickly and Nadella has no interest in re-creating
Win7 or going back to Desktop OS's and open-ish platforms. This is the new
reality for MS, good or bad. Personally, I'm not happy with it, but I think
people should be aware of what it means to upgrade to Win10 and be part of the
modern MS ecosystem.

edit: really 4 downvotes? Care to tell me what is wrong in my comment. Are you
guys really defending Win10 and Nadella here? This is his vision - iOS-like
system on the desktop and that 30% app revenue. Being cognizant of that should
be a positive.

~~~
zmmmmm
Why should we be more comfortable because it's a mobile OS? I don't really
understand why that suddenly makes locked down proprietary systems OK?

I do agree, the time to complain about this was 7 years ago when Apple did it
(as I did at the time). The horse has now long bolted and we might as well
consign ourselves to living in a world where making money from software
consists of assigning 30% of revenue to a rent seeking landlord. We can expect
the opportunities to do otherwise to narrow down to zero over the next 10
years. It's not good, but it's a decision everyone made collectively 7 years
ago while drooling over iPads and iPhones.

~~~
mdasher
Microsoft isn't rent-seeking with Windows 10. They are attempting to build a
secure and trusted platform, just like Apple did with iOS. That platform and
the store for the platform are valuable. I applaud them for moving in this
direction and applaud them some more for doing it without sacrificing the
openness of Win32 on the PC (at least for now).

~~~
makomk
The Windows Store has been stuffed full of fake apps trading off the names of
other, genuine big-name apps with various levels of malicious content for
years. It's definitely rent-seeking, and not in any way a "secure and trusted
platform".

~~~
mdasher
Your proving my point. When the store was first launched it did have a problem
with misleading apps. But today those problems are far less. MS tweaked their
submission policies and tossed the misleading app. That shows continued work
on the trust and security of the store, a value add, and thus not rent-
seeking.

