
Notch: "I'd rather have minecraft not run on win 8 at all than to play along." - evo_9
http://kotaku.com/5947162/notch-id-rather-have-minecraft-not-run-on-win-8-at-all-than-to-play-along
======
thetabyte
What people here aren't getting with the references to XBox and iOS is that
Notch's objections aren't to closed platforms. He objects to _PCs as closed
platforms_. Minecraft was originally an indie game developed for PCs due to
their open ecosystem. It was only able to reach closed markets like iOS and
XBox because of its success as a side project on an open platform. Notch
strongly believes that the computer should stay a bastion of openness in order
to sustain a indie game community--indeed, the majority of my own games I play
today are small, independent games that provide a unique experience that I
would hate to lose due to higher barriers to entry.

~~~
kenjackson
How would the existence of Windows 8 stopped the creation of Minecraft? He
still could have developed with it (there's the desktop). He could have
deployed his app, had it certified, etc... There doesn't seem to be anything
that openness would have provided him.

Open platforms are good for a few classes of devs:

1) Devs at competing companies. Closed platforms make it easier for one
company to shut out a competitor.

2) Malware creators.

3) HW tinkerers. This is probably the class I have the most empathy for. With
that said Win8 has a complete desktop mode fully available for tinkering.

~~~
maratd
You have no experience dealing with a 3rd party that controls the marketplace.

Apple's behavior is not exceptional. It's how every monopolist behaves when
they own the market. I dealt with the very same issues when I had my own
business selling on eBay.

At the end of the day, when you have to move your product through someone's
market, it's not your product, it's not your business, and those aren't your
customers.

It's all theirs. Because if you do something they don't like, they will just
turn you off ... or worse, they'll call you and tell you to change it.

> There doesn't seem to be anything that openness would have provided him.

It would have provided him the freedom of developing the product he wants,
without compromise. It would have allowed him to take _his_ vision directly to
_his_ customers. And nobody would be able to get in his way.

> With that said Win8 has a complete desktop mode fully available for
> tinkering.

Have you tried installing unsigned software on Windows 8? You get a huge
window pretty much saying NO. Only after clicking on more info, do you get an
option to override. I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9?

~~~
kenjackson
_At the end of the day, when you have to move your product through someone's
market, it's not your product, it's not your business, and those aren't your
customers.

It's all theirs. Because if you do something they don't like, they will just
turn you off ... or worse, they'll call you and tell you to change it._

That can just as easily apply to the platform it was built on. Windows, OS X,
or Android, can do this today if they were so inclined (well maybe not Windows
due to anti-trust concerns -- but that has to do with market dominance, not
openness).

What you're saying is that you must run on a full stack you completely build,
from the foundary, CPU, on up (because Intel could break all Windows computers
with firmware update if they were so inclined).

We've all built on something, giving away some degree of responsibility and
ownership. Now maybe Notch's point is that this is where he draws the line. It
seems like an odd place to draw it IMO, especially given how fast the game
market tends to move (when was the last time someone asked you to play Words
with Friends?).

But like I said before, more power to Notch wherever he goes. I'll miss not
playing Minecraft as I move all my machines to Win8 (admittedly not much of a
gamer though), but not for too long I'm sure.

 _Have you tried installing unsigned software on Windows 8? You get a huge
window pretty much saying NO. Only after clicking on more info, do you get an
option to override. I can only guess what will happen with Windows 9?_

Really, that's a complaint of yours? I actually which there was a setting to
not let these install at all.

~~~
bad_user
Android allows for third-party sources when installing software.

There are developers out there that distribute their software through other
channels than Google Play. E.g. one of the Humble Indie Bundle that I bought
had 4 Android games in it and distribution was through download links sent by
email. And when publishing on Google Play, at least for now, there is no
approval process.

And no, Windows and OS X cannot do this today, as long as installation of
software from third-parties is still possible and your OS is not remotely
controlled by them. Microsoft can't do anything today to ban an app on
Windows. But it's increasingly clear that they want this capability.

For those of us familiar with the gaming industry since the nineties, we've
experienced this same fight between PCs and gaming consoles and even though
the PC wasn't a common household appliance until the mid nineties at least and
even though the likes of Sega, Nintendo and later Sony looked poised to take
over the world, most games were built for PCs first, because that's were the
innovation was and because nobody could pull the rug from under your feet.
Even the arguments were exactly the same as today - for consumers it was ease
of use, no viruses/mallware and a better return on investment, while for
developers it was the lack of piracy, promotion and a piece of a large pie
where the competition was controlled.

And it's a pretty sad fact that this is precisely what Apple and now Microsoft
are trying - the consolification of the PC. Well I for one do not think that
consumers will buy into it. And I predict that Windows 8 will only have
moderate success, while Windows 9 will be a total failure, just like Win Me
and Windows Vista before it.

~~~
nivla
Just because android allows installing third-party softwares now doesn't mean
it will remain like that forever. Remember when you could install chrome
extensions the same way but now Google only allows you to install them from
their store and the only other way is not so client friendly workaround?

~~~
bad_user
This is true ; although Google has the disadvantage that they made Android
open-source. This means in case the Google stewardship goes awry, companies
and individuals will have the ability to fork.

This has happened before with other projects and Amazon has already forked
Android just because they can. Also my Galaxy S came with an alternative,
albeit shitty app store - which goes to show that phone makers are aware that
they need some control over the platform.

~~~
nivla
I agree but it is ingenious of Google to tie their premium products around
open-source that it becomes an inseparable feature. An android fork without
the Marketplace, Maps, Siri like features just seems crippled (Amazon Kindle
is an exception). Remember Google sent C&D to Cynogenmod a few months back
forbidding them from including any of the apps above? Now think about
convincing a handset manufacture to accept the fork or trying to teach a
technologically impaired about rooting the phone and installing a fork. It may
seem possible but sadly its not practical.

Today I noticed my chrome changed its icon from the wrench to the 3 bars,
which atleast for now I find it hideous. However there is no easy way for me
to fix it despite chrome being an open-source application (chromium - which I
believe is not being actively developed anymore).

~~~
mquander
You're totally wrong about Chromium; the vast majority of Chrome functionality
continues to be implemented in Chromium. You could fix it if you cared enough.

In addition, it's perfectly legal (and easy) to install the Google apps on
Cyanogenmod or any other Android ROM yourself, so you're not missing out on
anything by running it.

You should probably find some more compelling examples for your argument.

~~~
saurik
In this specific case, however, that is a highly relevant argument, as none of
the mobile-specific parts of Chrome are available: you can't build Chromium
for Android. Your snippiness thereby seems somewhat out of place.

------
aristidb
Why the hostility towards Notch? Minecraft will keep working on Windows 8
(just not in the Store), nothing to fear, move on.[1] It's equally
unreasonable to love Microsoft as it is to hate it.

[1] Well, it probably won't work on Windows RT because only Windows Store
things work there, but then that would likely require a total rewrite of the
Java&OpenGL game to C++&DirectX (or another Microsoft-approved solution)
anyways, and Minecraft (as opposed to Minecraft Pocket Edition[2]) is not
suitable for tablet touch control anyways.

[2] Which is developed by another firm.

~~~
watty
I think any hostility you see is due to his comment of "I'd rather have
minecraft not run on win 8 at all than to play along.". He'd never be dumb
enough to do this so why say it, and why stir the pot with everyone who thinks
Minecraft really really might not run on Windows 8?

~~~
BCM43
Why would he never be dumb enough to do this? It seems that he does not see it
as a moral decision, and I'm guessing he's betting that windows 8 adoption
will never be that large.

------
sbochins
Don't quite get what his beef is with Windows 8. It doesn't really seem to be
"openness" issues like he is saying. If that were the case why would he have
ported his code to Xbox (another closed microsoft platform). If he doesn't
like the Metro UI why is he complaining about things being closed. I guess
people don't usually really think about what they say when they tweet.

~~~
reddit_clone
Well, XBox was a closed system to begin with.

May be his beef is that Windows, up to now fairly open is now becoming a
walled garden. And he is being vocal about it.

~~~
powertower
Windows 8 app certification requirements [http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
us/library/windows/apps/hh69408...](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
us/library/windows/apps/hh694083.aspx)

> 1.2 Your app must be fully functional when the customer gets it from the
> Windows Store

> 1.3 Your app’s trial functionality must reasonably resemble its full
> functionality

> 1.4 Each app must display only one tile after it is installed

...

Have no idea what he is complaining about. If he doesn't want to be on Metro,
he can always be on the Desktop. He certainly doesn't mind it being on
iPhones, iPads, and on Android devices.

~~~
zmmmmm
You've listed exactly 3 points from a multipage document with dozens of
requirements as if they summarize the whole document. This is not true - the
requirements go way beyond the points you listed.

Apart from that, these points are merely necessary, but not sufficient for
getting titles published. In a closed ecosystem you hand over control of your
ability to publish to someone else, and that is fundamental. The terms that
really matter in the MS developer agreement are:

> i. App Availability. Microsoft has no obligation to make any app available
> that you submit, even if that app is Certified

and

> j. Updates. Microsoft may update this agreement at any time in its sole
> discretion

That leaves open any kind of anticompetitive reason MS may come up with in the
future to manipulate the store.

~~~
powertower
Here are some more random picks...

> 3.9 All app logic must originate from, and reside in, your app package

> 4.1.2 Your app must obtain opt-in or equivalent consent to share personal
> information

Did you even read any of those terms? They are ALL of the same nature.

> You've listed exactly 3 points from a multipage document with dozens of
> requirements as if they summarize the whole document. This is not true - the
> requirements go way beyond the points you listed.

Now you're just making things up.

> That leaves open any kind of anticompetitive reason MS may come up with in
> the future to manipulate the store.

Sure, whatever you say.

------
kenjackson
With all due respect, I'm going to Windows 8. I'd like Minecraft to be there,
but if it's not, I'm sure some other indie developer will put together a
compelling game on the platform.

~~~
genbattle
I think he's not so much against having Minecraft run on Windows 8 at all (i'm
sure if Java support it, it'll run), I think he's just more averse to serving
it via Microsoft's store.

I think Notch is overreacting in this case because he's already supported
Microsoft's platform monopoly with Minecraft on the Xbox 360 (which is
completely closed), so this stance seems kind of contrary.

Possibly there's some sort of clause in Microsoft's contracts that says an
Application on the Windows Store can't be sold outside the store or something
which he's actually getting up in arms about.

I'm not particularly crazy about Windows 8 either, but Notch probably needs to
be a little more specific with his protests (then again, it is just a twitter
post).

~~~
trafficlight
I can't remember where I read it, but he has the same attitude about Steam.
Notch feels that he has a large enough userbase that Steam (or Windows 8 App
store) doesn't offer enough advantages over Mojang's homegrown distribution
system.

~~~
jeffool
Likely his Twitter. I think he's said as much.

------
Ensorceled
Okay, here's the real problem that Notch is worried about.

Every game and app that has "Microsoft Certified Safe(TM)" is one more reason
the average user will be reluctant to run apps or games that are not
"Microsoft Certified Safe(TM)".

They are worried that the next batch of indie games will, instead of running,
pop up a window "Microsoft has not certified this app as safe. You can be
infected with viruses, or key loggers can steal your bank accounts. Do you
still want to run this uncertified application?"

It's not about the big assed buttons.

~~~
talmand
I totally agree.

In the PC gaming community, I'm in that group by the way, that sort of thing
will be met with anger and derision because it's already a common thought that
Microsoft does nothing but crap on the PC gaming community. Look into Games
for Windows Live, or whatever that call that crap now, to see what I mean.
Microsoft's presence in the PC gaming space is a joke and they have a long,
hard road to go down to get past that. Labeling games that have yet to be
certified, at a cost I'm sure, as unsafe and vectors for malware installations
will do nothing to alleviate that attitude.

Notch is right, anything that Microsoft does relating to PC games is of
concern because it appears they go out of their way to ruin the experience to
get you to switch to the "superior gaming experience" of the 360. Where of
course they control everything and make money off of other people's work.

------
dpark
Wait, so he's refusing to put Minecraft in the Windows Store because it's
"less open" than Windows 7? Didn't his company rewrite Minecraft so that he
could sell it on iOS?

~~~
zmmmmm
He's not refusing to put on the store. He's refusing to go through a charade
of "certification" to assist MS to put it on the store - essentially to assist
them in closing down their open platform by getting all the popular titles
into the closed ecosystem. If MS will open up the store put it there without
certification then I suspect he's fine with it.

While it would certainly have been more consistent to withhold the iOS port,
there was no equally good open alternative on that platform, so it would have
been a fairly futile gesture. On Win8, having independent games continue to
thrive and ignore the Metro store will make a tangible difference to
Microsoft's ability to shut down legacy apps in the future. So I can
sympathise with why he would treat these situations differently.

~~~
recoiledsnake
I find your argument specious at best. If we're talking the Metro store,
Windows RT tablet users(eg. the Surface RT users) will be unable to run the
game simply because they're ARM machines like the iPad on which the game runs
on.

It's funny that he has no problem going through the certification for the
"Post-PC" iOS app store which is supposedly killing the PC and going to sell
more than PCs in the near future. But suddenly he has a problem with Windows 8
and Windows RT. There is a disconnect here.

> If MS will open up the store put it there without certification then I
> suspect he's fine with it.

Sorry, but is this a joke? Every malware, spyware, virus, grayware, toolbar,
Bonzi Buddy clones will end up in the store.

Look at what Steam had to do with Greenlight.

[http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-31-valve-bans-
stea...](http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-31-valve-bans-steam-users-
creating-fake-greenlight-projects)

[http://www.shacknews.com/article/75603/steam-greenlight-
adds...](http://www.shacknews.com/article/75603/steam-greenlight-
adds-100-submission-fee)

~~~
saulrh

      Windows RT tablet users will be unable to run the game
      simply because they're ARM machines
    

I'd be _extremely_ surprised if Java doesn't get ported to WinRT. Especially
because they've already done the work to get it running on ARM linux.

~~~
tedunangst
Would you be extremely surprised if Java doesn't get ported to iOS?

~~~
saulrh
Not really. iOS was locked down well before Oracle had Java running on ARM, so
getting java on ios wasn't a particularly reasonable goal. Getting Java on
win8 arm is a reasonable goal.

~~~
chj
win8 arm is already locked down. You can't have a JIT engine on it.

~~~
ditoa
Will Windows RT (aka Windows [8] on ARM) not allow .NET apps to run then?

~~~
chj
except their own.

------
ameen
I'd been wanting to build Windows apps and had been working on one for the
past 6 months. I happened to be invited to a MS event for Windows 8 and as
excited as I was to be there, I was disappointed to learning that "Metro-
style" apps can't be published elsewhere, it has to be from the Windows
Store(sic), and with MS handling sales, updates, etc.

What then, is the benefit of an entirely new OS, with a new feature -
Metro(the AppBar, charms, dashboard, etc), if you're going to force developers
to use your own AppStore? I wouldn't mind giving a cut of my profits to MS,
but I wouldn't want to be on their mercy for updates, sales, etc. And if
anyone didn't notice, this is the desktop PC we're talking about. I'm not
interested in Tablets or other stuff for which my application is clearly not
aimed at(neither designed for).

I think Microsoft is aiming to get more applications for its Tablet devices,
and in doing so it'll destroy the only remaining MS product that has a huge
market share - the desktop PC.

Nokia was once at the same enviable position where MS was, and we all know how
that ended.

Viva la Linux!

~~~
finnw
More likely they expect to get a large market share for free, from name
recognition alone. Try convincing a 50-year-old who has owned nothing but
Windows PCs for 25 years that a new Windows 8 (or 9) PC is not what they need.

------
jiggy2011
I don't know what qualifies as a "PC" any more these days. I will say that I
don't see much future in Windows as the free for all it once was. We can argue
the pros and cons of that until the cows come home, my guess is that this is
just an inevitable reaction to this horrible Windows software experience of
today.

Just about every Windows app I've tried to install in the last couple of years
has also tried to fool me into installing some bundled 3rd party crapware.

If you want an open platform , use one that is open by design in other words a
Linux distribution.

~~~
nivla
>Just about every Windows app I've tried to install in the last couple of
years has also tried to fool me into installing some bundled 3rd party
crapware. If you want an open platform , use one that is open by design in
other words a Linux distribution.

and yet the latest Ubuntu comes with Amazon Shopping bundled. I think its
becoming a trend to monetize on everything, both open and closed. No
necessarily a bad thing but everything seem to merge that way. Think the
future might redefine the words "open" and "free".

~~~
djhworld
There are numerous distributions of Linux out there, if you don't like the
advertising in Ubuntu, there's nothing stopping you from uninstalling the
advertising features or moving to a different distribution

That's the whole point of Linux.

~~~
nivla
The point was not about avoiding or getting rid of the "bloat/crapware". The
poster above me claimed that you won't find "bloat/crapware" in an open-source
os and I was just pointing out that with Ubuntu's recent changes, it is not
the case anymore.

~~~
jiggy2011
That wasn't exactly my point. My point was that the bloatware/crapware problem
in Windows has gotten so out of hand that MS had to do _something_ and that
something was to start tightening up who can ship software for the platform.

Of course there is nothing stopping people shipping crapware for Ubuntu or any
Linux distro. The advantage of open source OSs is that you will always have a
choice about how much "nannying" you want from the OS.

------
stephengillie
The article lists many tech celebrities whose dire predictions have made other
articles. I'm still waiting to see the technical problems each has with Win8.

------
lhnz
I am behind Notch on this.

A strategic move for Microsoft might be:

(1) Build an eco-system around their app store by providing benefits to users
through it (some natural and others artificial).

(2) Impose an increasing level of control over what developers on their system
can do.

And then once this power-relationship is established, you do this to maximize
profit:

(3) Lock out non app-store members from developing.

(4) Take rightful dictatorial control over the developers in their market.
What they can sell, how they promote themselves, what prices they can sell at,
whether the money goes directly to them, etc.

(5) Ensure the stable dominance of the big app development studios by
negotiating them preferential agreements.

Control over the means of distribution is power. This is the natural
progression of people optimising for wealth.

~~~
iy56
That's a horrible strategic move for microsoft. Do you have any idea how many
shitty homegrown apps their huge business customers use?

~~~
lhnz
Actually the existence of shitty business apps is one of my points.

They improve the quality of those 'shitty' homegrown apps for their huge
business customers (the cheese is that if you want to be seen in Metro you
have to play ball) and then over time they get a cut of sales of all of these
apps.

There is an economic impetus for creating a walled garden. Businesses aren't
investing money here just for intrinsic benefits. Owning the market is
powerful as you can control how other people get their money.

~~~
iy56
Why would a company want all its employees to have to _buy_ their outlook
calendar-based time logger doohickey? They just distribute it on new hires'
computers and be done with it. And that's not even getting into the ones that
actually have proprietary data/trade secrets. Forcing all windows 8 programs
to go through a Microsoft-curated app store is just not going to happen unless
it's for some very limited "starter edition".

------
hetman
Yes, I can see how making an application more consistent and predictable would
be terrible for the end users.

~~~
corporalagumbo
Yeah, and I bet they're gunna really loathe buying certified apps from a
unified marketplace with extremely streamlined install and uninstall
processes.

------
jack57
DISCLAIMER: I use Windows 8 as my main operating system.

The notion that normal desktop applications will not run on Windows 8 is
incredible. I could download Minecraft right now, and it would run without a
hitch. People need to use Windows 8 and realize that it is an iteration of
Windows 7. It feels like Windows 7 with an interesting tablet overlay that I
never use.

P.S. Every single game I own on Steam works

~~~
ameen
I have it on dual boot. Normal desktop applications will work on Windows 8,
but if I want to make a Metro version of that app, it has to go through the MS
certification and can only be sold on the Windows store.

Metro is where major Win 8 innovations are (AppBar, Charms, App Dashboard, App
Lifecycle, etc.)

------
mariusmg
The friggin Windows Store is optional. Nobody is forcing you to use it if you
don't want to. The "platform" is just as open as it was before.

~~~
RobAley
Ah, thats good. If his users want to use the default Metro platform to launch
and play the game, then they can right?. Oh wait...

~~~
mariusmg
Yes, you actually can. A start screen tile in Windows 8 can launch a both
Metro and desktop apps.

~~~
RobAley
When we looked earlier in the year, the only way to get non-signed desktop
apps to run from metro was to either have a signed metro app call them or
create a fudgy work-around by creating a dummy file/protocol type, assigning
your desktop app as the default handler for that dummy type, and adding a file
of the dummy type to metro. They also stated in january, with regards to the
first solution, "we're moving away from allowing an application to start any
other application". Not exactly free and open (or ideal), and not one for most
users to do themselves.

Has this changed since then?

------
Zenst
One interface to piss them all off - Metro.

Reason I say that is if you take Metro away what are the issues.

I know anybody who knows how to use a mouse is pretty much of the WTF metro
GTFO and that is understandable, but removing that aspect there is nothing
realy upsetting that wasn't there before hand. Yes I know developing on
microsoft API's (exspecialy anything associated with IE) has been a complete
nightmare for many in the past including myself with many a fix being lamented
as fixed in the next release only to find the next release entails you having
to change other aspects as they are nolonger supported. Thats true with
anything were you touch a API outside your control, at least potentualy in one
way or another.

If anything by not officialy certifying minecraft for win8 is doing no harm at
all for microsoft as it probably runs fine as is and with the processing power
nowadays HTML5 becomes more and more appealing to many as apposed to going
native.

Is he right to make a stand, yes, it is his right and has to be respected,
especialy as he is able to. But personaly the more I look into win8 and metro
aside I'm liking it for what it is, there again I'm the sick puppy who
preferes vista over win7 and i'm sure no metro fan, but having explorer or an
alternative desktop option is not going to be too hard.

Also worth noting that it will be hard to garner true win8 sales once its
released as Microsoft have done alot of write off's last quarter (pulling some
early like write off of the cost of pressing windows 8 and other gems) so the
win8 release quarter can only look better however it does. This with the cheap
upgrade and less messing with versions (mini, lite, almost, profesional and
ultra or whatever they were). So for many it will be a fiscal no brainer,
especialy all those XP installs becoming less supported (unless your a new
intel chipset that support XP over Vista, bless).

Maybe Microsft will install a desktop chosser akin to the browser selection,
at least that would plicate alot if they had a clear cut choice.

But anything that runs on a closed source OS in any form is gong to be
limited, its if those limitations actualy matter that to what your doing is
what realy counts and whilst I applaud Notch's stand I do wonder if later on
he find some toys missing that needn't of fallen. Especialy when the
certification process for a xbox is alot more stringant than any flavour of
desktop OS.

------
kleiba
I so wish Notch would stream another coding session to twitch.tv again.

------
dmansen
To all you people saying that this is just "best practices" requirements, etc:
do you not realize this is MICROSOFT? The evil empire? He's taking a stand! A
completely meaningless stand, but really, this is important!

~~~
jebblue
Well stated, perhaps a quick review will help:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=885975>

------
mariusmg
Hypocrisy. My least favorite sin.....

------
recoiledsnake
What is Windows 8 "certification" that he's complaining about? Is it about
adding it to the Windows Store distributed by Microsoft? In that case, doesn't
it need to rebuilt with WinRT/DirectX?

Or to add it as a link to the developer's website like desktop apps can have
in the Store?

The requirements are here: [http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
us/library/windows/desktop/hh74...](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
us/library/windows/desktop/hh749939.aspx)

Can't see anything really bad there, if anything those rules finally herd the
Windows application cats.

~~~
Goronmon
>It must be code and feature complete

At what point in the timeline of Minecraft did it meet this criteria, because
when I started playing, this wasn't true, and yet he was still making sales
and people were still enjoying the game.

And what happens when Microsoft starts "enhancing" the rules?

~~~
watty
Apple App Store: "2.6 Apps that are “beta”, “demo”, “trial”, or “test”
versions will be rejected."

Minecraft is in the App store.

~~~
AerieC
*Apps that are likely to make us lots of money may bend some of these rules.

