Hacker News Reader

Comment by cabirum | Hacker News Reader

FUD.

Desktop apps don't have to be distributed through Windows Store. In fact they can not. Windows Store contains only Metro UI apps, available for both tablets and desktops. All the software and games and stuff are installed exactly the same way as in other Windowses, without any restrictions implied by the article. Steam isn't going anywhere, Skyrim, Mass Effect are not, either. The problem does not exist.

View on HN

The article argues that Metro apps are the future, not desktop apps. If the past is any guide to the future, desktop apps will be unacceptable to consumers in 10 years time and completely unusable in 20 years time (based on the MS-DOS to Windows transition).

Steam and other apps may work fine now, but what happens in 10 years? That is the long-term issue this article is trying to bring up.

The MS-DOS to Windows transition was more technical than business. It is not an apt analogy because Windows Next being completely closed down would be a purely business decision. If we're using 'what-if' arguments, then what if Microsoft does remove desktop in favour of Metro and then open up Metro to everyone?

That's very well possible, but to some extent only. It's at least doubtfull that desktop apps like CAD/IDE software will ever ceise to exist.

Presumably Steam will either start developing to the Metro interface, or continue targeting the old desktop interface. They are hardly about to throw up their hands and say, "well we had a good run but we're done now".

Given Microsoft's track record with Win32 replacements, it seems a little far-fetched.

I'd say there's more of a risk for Metro developers that the platform will be EOL'd/legacy/forgotten in 5 years than there is a risk to traditional desktop devs.

>The article argues that Metro apps are the future

I'm not seeing it. Metro's entire UI paradigm would seem to limit it to primarily content consumption apps and toys (games). For instance I don't think we'll ever see Photoshop or Ableton on metro as we know it today.

That's not to say creation apps won't exist - look at the iPad, you've got full office suites, music apps that emulate synthesizers with a great degree of fidelity, etc - but those are most definitely a niche.

Windows still runs applications build for Win95, released 17 years ago. If anything, MS have always been known for maintaining backward compatibility. The MS-DOS argument.. it's simply not worth supporting 16bit dos programs in 2012. Also, VMs.

Yes, because nothing says "Microsoft isn't harming the platform and developers" like "we'll always be able to distribute software that users can run in their VMs".

And, supposedly, with 32bit Window 8, DOS apps are still supported through NTVDM. (64bit Windows has never bothered to emulate the necessary 'virtual-8086' mode.)

I'm still a bit sceptical of this. Metro only allows you to work with one app on the screen at a time and you have to hit start every time you want to switch apps instead of a taskbar.

If people want to use their desktop computers in such a way, why didn't they build the UI this way years ago?

They did. It was called dosshell; it sucked (for various reasons).

Arguably things like screen in a terminal can be interpreted the same way. It's still a very awkward way of multitasking.

In Metro mode, you can have an application running and another application running on the side. [1]

[1] http://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/wind...

So 2 at a time. Meanwhile I have..

counts

24 windows open across 9 different applications.

That you're looking at at the same time?

I've long since opened and closed things since last comment, but I've got lets see.. 5 windows visible on my screen right now. This browser, a XenCenter session, an IRC client, a script for that IRC client, and a miniaturized iTunes.

2 is such an absurdly low limit as to be virtually useless.

Which is fine now, but what happens when Windows 9 and DX12 drop in 2015, and all the new features and APIs only work with Metro UI apps? Suddenly all those desktop applications are second class citizens. By Windows 10 or so, non-Metro apps will be slower, heavier, and crippled relative to Metro apps, and it'll be hard to even find modern and supported tools to develop and compile them. And that's assuming Microsoft doesn't make deliberately crippling moves - throwing up warnings about "uncertified and potentially dangerous" applications or blocking uncertified desktop applications from using some features (webcam, arbitrary ports, whatever) without configuration changes.

The reason people are speaking up now is not out of fear of Windows 8, but out of fear of Windows 9 or 10.

Fun Fact: Desktop applications can use Metro APIs. Chrome is a good example of this. Upon installing Chrome on a Windows 8 computer, you can use it through the metro interface.

That is the exception provided to the 'default' web browser.

The danger is that in future APIs may be tied to the Windows Store. This is already happening on Mac OS X where if you want to use the iCloud API your app must be distributed through the Mac App Store.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com