Win 8 and the Future, again: flawed logic ? Gamasutra's 'Next Twenty Years: ... Windows 8's Closed Distribution ...' ?
-
Today's CP Newsletter linked to an article, "The Next Twenty Years: What Windows 8's Closed Distribution Means for Developers," dated October 16, by Casey Muratori, on Gamasutra [^] It's an interesting five page essay by a veteran programmer (within the gaming "universe") that expresses a hypothesis, with great conviction, that: Win 8, and the Microsoft Store system, are going to kill-off Windows' best-selling games of today (adult content issues); drive developers away from Windows; and, cause MS to, eventually, self-destruct. At least, that's how I interpret the piece. I certainly disagree with the hypothesis, but one thing that really puzzles me in the piece is: Page #3 of the story quotes from the Microsoft Developer Agreement, pre-release 3.0 [^] that contains this excerpt:
Quote:
In-app Commerce. You may elect to support purchasing options from within your app. You are not required to use Microsoft's commerce engine to support those purchases. If you choose to use Microsoft's in-app purchase commerce engine, purchases will be subject to the terms of this Agreement, including without limitation the Store Fee and licensing and roaming requirements.
Muratori's interpretation of that quote is (bold/italic added by me):
Quote:
As strange as it may sound, if a developer offers a limited application for free in the Windows Store, they may then sell, directly in the app, an upgrade or unlock to the full version for which they can accept payment directly. They do not need to pay Microsoft 20-30 percent royalties as with a Windows Store purchase. Thus any developer who wants to use a non-Microsoft payment system is free to do so. The only thing they can't do is use a non-Microsoft distribution system, such as their own web page or store. So it is almost impossible to conceive of a circumstance where Microsoft would lose significant revenue by opening the distribution system since it has already opened the payment system, and substantively all the revenue comes from the payment system.
It seems to me that the MS dev agreement quotation could be interpreted to mean that in-app purchases from an app purchased on the Windows Store are subj
-
Today's CP Newsletter linked to an article, "The Next Twenty Years: What Windows 8's Closed Distribution Means for Developers," dated October 16, by Casey Muratori, on Gamasutra [^] It's an interesting five page essay by a veteran programmer (within the gaming "universe") that expresses a hypothesis, with great conviction, that: Win 8, and the Microsoft Store system, are going to kill-off Windows' best-selling games of today (adult content issues); drive developers away from Windows; and, cause MS to, eventually, self-destruct. At least, that's how I interpret the piece. I certainly disagree with the hypothesis, but one thing that really puzzles me in the piece is: Page #3 of the story quotes from the Microsoft Developer Agreement, pre-release 3.0 [^] that contains this excerpt:
Quote:
In-app Commerce. You may elect to support purchasing options from within your app. You are not required to use Microsoft's commerce engine to support those purchases. If you choose to use Microsoft's in-app purchase commerce engine, purchases will be subject to the terms of this Agreement, including without limitation the Store Fee and licensing and roaming requirements.
Muratori's interpretation of that quote is (bold/italic added by me):
Quote:
As strange as it may sound, if a developer offers a limited application for free in the Windows Store, they may then sell, directly in the app, an upgrade or unlock to the full version for which they can accept payment directly. They do not need to pay Microsoft 20-30 percent royalties as with a Windows Store purchase. Thus any developer who wants to use a non-Microsoft payment system is free to do so. The only thing they can't do is use a non-Microsoft distribution system, such as their own web page or store. So it is almost impossible to conceive of a circumstance where Microsoft would lose significant revenue by opening the distribution system since it has already opened the payment system, and substantively all the revenue comes from the payment system.
It seems to me that the MS dev agreement quotation could be interpreted to mean that in-app purchases from an app purchased on the Windows Store are subj
-
Today's CP Newsletter linked to an article, "The Next Twenty Years: What Windows 8's Closed Distribution Means for Developers," dated October 16, by Casey Muratori, on Gamasutra [^] It's an interesting five page essay by a veteran programmer (within the gaming "universe") that expresses a hypothesis, with great conviction, that: Win 8, and the Microsoft Store system, are going to kill-off Windows' best-selling games of today (adult content issues); drive developers away from Windows; and, cause MS to, eventually, self-destruct. At least, that's how I interpret the piece. I certainly disagree with the hypothesis, but one thing that really puzzles me in the piece is: Page #3 of the story quotes from the Microsoft Developer Agreement, pre-release 3.0 [^] that contains this excerpt:
Quote:
In-app Commerce. You may elect to support purchasing options from within your app. You are not required to use Microsoft's commerce engine to support those purchases. If you choose to use Microsoft's in-app purchase commerce engine, purchases will be subject to the terms of this Agreement, including without limitation the Store Fee and licensing and roaming requirements.
Muratori's interpretation of that quote is (bold/italic added by me):
Quote:
As strange as it may sound, if a developer offers a limited application for free in the Windows Store, they may then sell, directly in the app, an upgrade or unlock to the full version for which they can accept payment directly. They do not need to pay Microsoft 20-30 percent royalties as with a Windows Store purchase. Thus any developer who wants to use a non-Microsoft payment system is free to do so. The only thing they can't do is use a non-Microsoft distribution system, such as their own web page or store. So it is almost impossible to conceive of a circumstance where Microsoft would lose significant revenue by opening the distribution system since it has already opened the payment system, and substantively all the revenue comes from the payment system.
It seems to me that the MS dev agreement quotation could be interpreted to mean that in-app purchases from an app purchased on the Windows Store are subj
I wouldn't interpret to much into current wording and regulation. I see MS toying around with this a lot in the future. The AppStore by itself appears to be a competetive necessity, and requires some kind of sandboxing / lockdown. It all hinges on whether or not Microsoft will preserve the open desktop. Will the open desktop add enough value to survive? It's Microsofts competetive edge, I'd say if it doesn't MS likely will go under as well.
-
Current (desktop-based) installers can only install desktop applications. AFAIK Windows will refuse to load Metro apps that aren't digitally signed by the app store.
-
Current (desktop-based) installers can only install desktop applications. AFAIK Windows will refuse to load Metro apps that aren't digitally signed by the app store.
Daniel Grunwald wrote:
Current (desktop-based) installers can only install desktop applications.
AFAIK Windows will refuse to load Metro apps that aren't digitally signed by the app store.That would imply that I cannot run "Metro" apps on Windows 7? Further, that would not count as a change in strategy; the desktop remains open, and I can imagine them wanting to have a Apple-like store for the phoney-apps.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Daniel Grunwald wrote:
Current (desktop-based) installers can only install desktop applications.
AFAIK Windows will refuse to load Metro apps that aren't digitally signed by the app store.That would imply that I cannot run "Metro" apps on Windows 7? Further, that would not count as a change in strategy; the desktop remains open, and I can imagine them wanting to have a Apple-like store for the phoney-apps.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
That would imply that I cannot run "Metro" apps on Windows 7?
Not because of the signing, but because of WinRT being unavailable on Windows 7. Metro apps have to be written using WinRT. Don't know if WinRT is available on Windows 7.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
Today's CP Newsletter linked to an article, "The Next Twenty Years: What Windows 8's Closed Distribution Means for Developers," dated October 16, by Casey Muratori, on Gamasutra [^] It's an interesting five page essay by a veteran programmer (within the gaming "universe") that expresses a hypothesis, with great conviction, that: Win 8, and the Microsoft Store system, are going to kill-off Windows' best-selling games of today (adult content issues); drive developers away from Windows; and, cause MS to, eventually, self-destruct. At least, that's how I interpret the piece. I certainly disagree with the hypothesis, but one thing that really puzzles me in the piece is: Page #3 of the story quotes from the Microsoft Developer Agreement, pre-release 3.0 [^] that contains this excerpt:
Quote:
In-app Commerce. You may elect to support purchasing options from within your app. You are not required to use Microsoft's commerce engine to support those purchases. If you choose to use Microsoft's in-app purchase commerce engine, purchases will be subject to the terms of this Agreement, including without limitation the Store Fee and licensing and roaming requirements.
Muratori's interpretation of that quote is (bold/italic added by me):
Quote:
As strange as it may sound, if a developer offers a limited application for free in the Windows Store, they may then sell, directly in the app, an upgrade or unlock to the full version for which they can accept payment directly. They do not need to pay Microsoft 20-30 percent royalties as with a Windows Store purchase. Thus any developer who wants to use a non-Microsoft payment system is free to do so. The only thing they can't do is use a non-Microsoft distribution system, such as their own web page or store. So it is almost impossible to conceive of a circumstance where Microsoft would lose significant revenue by opening the distribution system since it has already opened the payment system, and substantively all the revenue comes from the payment system.
It seems to me that the MS dev agreement quotation could be interpreted to mean that in-app purchases from an app purchased on the Windows Store are subj
They way I read the license snippet is that you don't have to pay M$ any "royalty" if you use a payment system within your app other than M$'s. Of course, that is an interpretation in isolation. The rest of the license agreement may impact the paragraph in question.
BillWoodruff wrote:
the amount and nature of personal information they demand to "join," ... outrageously intrusive.
Then give them false info.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
That would imply that I cannot run "Metro" apps on Windows 7?
Not because of the signing, but because of WinRT being unavailable on Windows 7. Metro apps have to be written using WinRT. Don't know if WinRT is available on Windows 7.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein -
:-D Good luck.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein