Sign in to follow this  
Alpha_ProgDes

Is Windows 8 really bad for games?

Recommended Posts

[quote name='RivieraKid' timestamp='1344773438' post='4968690']
microsoft didnt start the app store war. They dont have a choice since if they dont follow suite their profits will be far shorter than the competitors. Why is nobody complaining about Apple, they are the worst for this kind of stuff. They wont even let you install your app store, or anything which even hints at the existence of a direct competitor. Total bullshit.
[/quote]
Is that true for Mac OSX or just iPad/iPhone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='RivieraKid' timestamp='1344773438' post='4968690']
microsoft didnt start the app store war. They dont have a choice since if they dont follow suite their profits will be far shorter than the competitors. Why is nobody complaining about Apple, they are the worst for this kind of stuff. They wont even let you install your app store, or anything which even hints at the existence of a direct competitor. Total bullshit.
[/quote]

Apple doesn't have 90% of the desktop market, Microsoft does, thus Microsoft has to play by a stricter set of rules than Apple.

If Microsoft bundles their own <anything> with the OS it immediatly becomes very hard to compete in that segment of the market even if you have a better product. (This is not good), If Apple bundles their own <anything> with their OS its pretty much irrelevant.
Take Internet Explorer as an example, it is currently the only non free(as in beer) browser on the market, All other major browsers, including Apples safari are given away for free, are arguably better than Internet Explorer and still have a hard time competing, If it wasn't for Microsofts Desktop OS dominance IE would have either been free or the competitors would have been able to charge a fair price for their products aswell.

The appstore part is problematic though, Linux distros has had built in app"stores"(with mostly free software up until recently though) since 1998, Apple has had one for quite some time aswell and users are starting to expect their OS to provide that functionality, Should Microsoft be allowed to bundle their own even if it means that the competition is eliminated, development stagnates and prices go up ?

Should Microsoft be forced to do what they were forced to do with browsers in europe ? , Give users the option to install third party appstore software on installation of the OS ? (I think this is quite likely to happen if EA or Valve decides to take this to court, but what about the smaller appstores then ?) Edited by SimonForsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1344826570' post='4968928']
If Microsoft bundles their own <anything> with the OS it immediatly becomes very hard to compete in that segment of the market even if you have a better product. (This is not good),
[/quote]
It comes down to what is essential functionality for a product to provide from a consumer perspective, and whether developers/manufacturers need to include an option for a competitors product. If you look at this in any other industry it becomes clearly absurd, but in ours for some reason it makes sense.

In the 1920s more than 50% of the cars in America were Ford Model Ts. Would you argue that before you were given your model T Ford should have asked you if you wanted a Chevrolet's tires? What about goodyear or yokohama tires? Maybe you should be given a list of the top 20 fuel suppliers so you can decide which additives and octane level are most proper for your needs before the dealership fills it up and you drive it off the lot? Why can't I have Ford put a subaru boxer engine in my focus if that's what I want? Maybe Subaru should sue GM because it makes a better engine, but it's ability to give that engine to consumers is stifled by the fact that GM sells 9 million cars per year vs Subaru's 200-300 thousand?

At some point you just have to let the developers/manufacturers release a product that they feel is complete and let the consumers decide if and to what degree they want to change it after purchase/delivery/installation.

[quote]If Apple bundles their own <anything> with their OS its pretty much irrelevant.[/quote]
I'm not so sure. A lot of people bring up bundled apps as a reason for people to buy apple products, and many of them are of lesser quality to other apps. Apple even takes active steps to ban higher quality apps that compete with their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='way2lazy2care' timestamp='1344836085' post='4968959']
[quote]If Apple bundles their own <anything> with their OS its pretty much irrelevant.[/quote]
I'm not so sure. A lot of people bring up bundled apps as a reason for people to buy apple products, and many of them are of lesser quality to other apps. Apple even takes active steps to ban higher quality apps that compete with their own.
[/quote]

I mean from a market perspective, Apple doesn't have enough marketshare for their actions to be devastating to the competetion, Microsoft controls 90% of the desktop OS market and is required, by law in many countries to not use that position to push their way into other markets. (Digital software distribution is not the same as Operating systems)

Your ford example is fairly irrelevant, Ford doesn't have 90% of the car market and tires, engines, etc are required for a car to work, If they had 90% of the market and tried to use that to take over the drive-thru market then we'd have a similar situation and a similar problem (and quite a few governments would step in and stop it from happening)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1344838383' post='4968966']
I mean from a market perspective, Apple doesn't have enough marketshare for their actions to be devastating to the competetion[/quote]
Apple had a large part of the smartphone market, and still control a very large part of the tablet market.

[quote]Your ford example is fairly irrelevant, Ford doesn't have 90% of the car market and tires, engines, etc are required for a car to work, If they had 90% of the market and tried to use that to take over the drive-thru market then we'd have a similar situation and a similar problem (and quite a few governments would step in and stop it from happening)
[/quote]

I don't think so. From a consumer perspective, an internet browser is pretty essential to the functionality of the computer. Just like tires, you more than likely need tires/browser to get access to unprovided tires/browsers without having access to another car/computer. Access to a digital storefront will be just as important to core functionality as the market shifts to digital distribution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='phantom' timestamp='1344543413' post='4967896']
And based on Apple success the population WANT app stores to buy their stuff at so MS adding one is just giving the majority what they appear to want.[/quote]Of course people want sites to download software on - that was clear with or without Apple, on phones or computers.

But I see no evidence that people actively want a closed system where software can only be released on one download site. An argument for popularity is flawed I think anyway, because it's unlikely people are buying it for those reasons - but it doesn't work, as I can just as well say that the even greater success of Symbian and now Android shows that people WANT their download sites to not be closed, by that logic.

[quote]When this news first hit my reaction was 'company who provides software via closed app is scared of another company providing software via closed app'[/quote]In this context, "closed" means you buy a product, and software can only be installed on it when downloaded from one company (typically the one providing the OS), and they can decide whether software can be released at all on it. Are there hardware products like this for Steam?

The situation for Windows is unclear to me. Non-metro applications won't be using this "closed" system, so in that sense there's not much to worry about. On the other hand, I've heard the claims that WinRT is meant to replace Win32 - is it possible to write a non-Metro application on WinRT? If so, can WinRT non-Metro applications be distributed anywhere? Or is Win32 meant to live on anyway, with WinRT only intended for tablet-optimised applications?


Is there a consensus on this, or can someone provide a ref? Servant of the Lord claims that the Metro download site won't be closed, just that it'll have a huge advantage over other sites by being the default, similar to Google Play. I think there's an interesting point that even there, MS may be at risk of monopolistic practice if they do this with Windows 8 (similar to the problems they had with IE - the rules are different if you're a monopoly). But if they do it like Apple, and enforce this with DRM so that it's not possible (unless you "jailbreak" the device), then that's even more worrying. Can anyone clarify what the planned situation will be?

Even if non-tablet computers are safe, I think it's still reasonable to be concerned if we end up with one company having a monopoly on software distribution for tablets. Thankfully phone tablets are dominated by Android, and there's still plenty of choice for the larger Android tablets - but I worry if manufacturers end up switching from Android to Windows for their larger tablets (yes, I know everyone seems to be assuming Windows 8 on tablets will fail before it gets out of the door - but on the other hand, manufacturers haven't been having so great success on larger non-phone Android tablets, and they do seem to be gearing up to try their luck with Windows 8. Windows 8 doesn't need to outsell Apple here, simply doing better than the 10" Android tablets will risk Android being dropped from 10" tablets by most manufacturers).

What's the situation with WP7 - can applications only be distributed via MS? Or is it open like on other platforms like Symbian/Android?

[quote]Not to mention that the technology to enable such a thing has only recently really come into being on a 'general' scale - internet connection speeds, stability and coverage has improved a large amount in the few years since Win7 was released and its really only in the last couple of years that general people have gotten use to the idea of 'app stores'.[/quote]In the UK at least, broadband has been around and commonplace since the early 2000s. Download sites have been around for years - people have surely got long used to downloading software from the Internet! Whether it's freeware from a website, to systems like Steam. I agree it wouldn't have made so much sense way back for 2000/XP, but doing so around the Vista timeframe would have been fine. And it's not like MS have to wait until people are used to something, they can introduce things themselves too (as they often do). Admittedly, MS always get moaned at when they introduce something new, even if it's something good...

Although I can just see the idea being floated a few years ago, and MS thinking there'd get terrible publicity if they dared to make it so they get a 30% cut on all software. But now that the media have worshipped and praised Apple for doing exactly that, now MS can get away with it. Great move, media! Edited by mdwh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='ChaosEngine' timestamp='1344546123' post='4967911']
From my gaming, as long as I can install steam and run my games, I'm happy. I think Newell is being somewhat hyperbolic describing it as a "catastrophe", but from a consumer POV, my gut feel is that the desktop is circling the drain, and I really don't see win8 being a major player in the tablet market.[/quote]Circling the drain? I'm not convinced. Note that "desktop" actually means a vast range of devices, including notebooks, and hybrids with touchscreens. Most tablets are in the form of phones that fit neatly into people's pockets. Larger tablets have a place, but I'm not convinced that most people will eventually throw away other forms of computing for handheld tablets. Hell, for office use, it's a health-and-safety disaster for starters... Having to look down at the flat tablet all day rather than keeping the screen at eye level, having to work with a small 10" screen when you don't actually need portability.

[quote]MS just don't have the "cool" factor in the market place and their marketing screams of the nerdy kid trying to fit in with popular crowd. I know lots of people who are happy to fight to the death over iOS vs Android, but I know no-one who cares that much about the Metro (or Win8 UI or whatever we're supposed to call it) ecosystem.[/quote]Most people don't care about "ecosystems" full stop - it's a marketing buzzword that companies like Apple create to make them look good, when no one really knows what it means. Judging success by how many zealots a platform has is a poor measure - in fact, typically the most popular platforms have fewer zealots, because the mainstream just want to use a platform, they don't get fanatical. You say IOS vs Android, but in my experience, Android fanatics are rare, it's mostly a one-sided match between a vocal minority going on about Apple all the time, and the rest who just don't care. But Android is far more popular, as was Symbian before that. On non-phone platforms, people are more fanatical about Linux and OS X, but most people use Windows.

Indeed, your point shows that MS don't have to worry - they have 90% market share without needing to be "cool".

I don't think they expect or need people to rush out and upgrade to Windows 8, MS have never worked like that. Most their sales come as people upgrade their computers, not because they just upgraded the OS. I imagine most their sales come from Windows being shipped with a new computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Daaark' timestamp='1344579186' post='4967987']
Tablets do not replace desktops. They are mostly simple consumption devices. You pick it up, sit on the couch, and read a book, flip through a comic, play a game, listen to a podcast, watch a youtube video, look at your facebook, browse the web, etc... All consumption type activities with minimal input needed.

...

Surface doesn't change this. Sure they include a physical keyboard, but so do countless other tablets. You can even buy surface like keyboards for your android or iOS device already. It doesn't change anything. It's about as useful as plugging in a keyboard to an PS3. It helps when entering text, but that's a rare activity. My tablet even has an optional keyboard dock that turns it into a netbook. Not buying it was 100$ well saved ;).[/quote]The main difference about the Surface though is that it is a full blown PC (particularly the Pro) version, and not stuck as being a simple consumption device. This also makes the keyboard a lot more useful. Hopefully we'll see a lot more choice on these kind of "hybrid" devices with Windows 8. (I think chances are, most people would rather stick with a cheaper Windows laptop even if it's less portable, and stick with their Android smartphone as a tablet, or maybe pick up a ultra cheap Android tablet like the Nexus 7; but it's still useful to have the Surface on the market as a high end flagship, even if MS continue to make most their money from other manufacturers with traditional devices.)

Even for "consumption" devices, people who just use it for Facebook still need to type posts. A keyboard becomes unnecessary if you're just using it for things like media playing or reading the Internet (which admittedly, many people do).

Personally one thing I like about netbooks/notebooks is not just the keyboard, or the way it can stand up on its own on my lap without me holding it, but the touchpad. A touchscreen is great on a 4-5" device - the screen is almost as small as a touchpad anyway, so having a tiny touchpad doesn't make sense. But once you get up to 10" or more, I'm having to move my finger all the way across a large screen. Touchpads are quick, simply because of the far smaller range. I think that touchscreens still have their uses - it would be nice to see them become standard on notebooks (as they already have on many desktop monitors, but not notebooks, interestingly), but it's not just the keyboard I don't want to lose - most the time I am far quicker on a touchpad (which is also multitouch). Edited by mdwh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The real answer is no, win8 is not bad for gamedevs. It provides new platforms and opportunities without killing the old ones.

Now WinRT on tablets (means arm stuff) might reduce options. but there never was steam on arm, anyways.

I'm writing this on a win8 tablet that has steam with portal2 on it, is currently docked, running on a 24" 16:10 screen with mouse'n'keyboard, lots of audio devices for music production, and all my dev tools for programming.

This is my pc. Surface will be my pc. Win8 expands the windows world. It does not restrict it. And the new Store will sure expand options for devs.

The real reason why people like the one from steam cry around it are two:

1) typically, gamers always hate 'the new windows'. this was true for xp, vista, win7, now win8. so to fit to the gamers, you have to support the new os, but you have, too, to hate it. else they think you're not cool.

2) steam is not just portal and those bigger games. no, it's tons of small games. and they most likely will lose developers there to the app store, as it's more accessible for non-gamers. Stuff like the Wordament game in the app store, small games like this will prefer to be in the one store every future windows user will access and use. And they'll leave steam behind. A much higher possible customer base for the casual gamers awaits them.

so they feel threatened by microsoft in their market. it's called competition. it's a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, if you all are so preocupated with the 20-30% microsoft earns from your games, make a website, pay the hosting, put your game online, find some publicity then come back to MS crying after you realise that more than 90% of what you earned have leaked to those costs.

stop complaining, this will make our lives easier. as developers AND as custumers. screw Steam, origin and whatever. they whant to compete? them offer something better than MS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1344826570' post='4968928']
Take Internet Explorer as an example, it is currently the only non free(as in beer) browser on the market, All other major browsers, including Apples safari are given away for free, are arguably better than Internet Explorer and still have a hard time competing, If it wasn't for Microsofts Desktop OS dominance IE would have either been free or the competitors would have been able to charge a fair price for their products aswell.

[/quote]

okay, did you pay for your ie? serious? it's for download for free! on ALL the microsoft websites. did you think that it's non-free just because it comes with windows? well, it runs on mac and linux free of charge, just with a little more work... get your facts straight. Microsoft has a great effort with open source and freeware, just do some search!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Mito' timestamp='1344964370' post='4969537']
well, if you all are so preocupated with the 20-30% microsoft earns from your games, make a website, pay the hosting, put your game online, find some publicity then come back to MS crying after you realise that more than 90% of what you earned have leaked to those costs.[/quote]
It's important to create a website for a game regardless of whether it's in an app store or not, hosting costs are inexpensive, and putting your game on Microsoft's (or anyone's) appstore doesn't mean you no longer need to market your game, so Microsoft's service won't save you any of those costs.

Steam as an alternative probably costs an equal percentage of revenue - it's not the cost that people are complaining about - it's the utter abuse of their monopoly that has already been declared illegal in the past that is the problem. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft"]United States v. Microsoft[/url]

Large Company does something illegal, profits immensely (or else ensures a competitor doesn't profit).
Governments step in, punish Large Company with a huge fine.
Large Company still gets to reap the benefits of what it did, because the competitor is defeated, or because the indirect benefits of it's actions is worth more than the cost of the governmental fine.
Large Company lays low for a few years.
Large Company does something else illegal.

The government reacts way too slowly, and large companies get away with it.

[quote name='Mito' timestamp='1344965861' post='4969545']
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1344826570' post='4968928']
Take Internet Explorer as an example, it is currently the only non free(as in beer) browser on the market, All other major browsers, including Apples safari are given away for free, are arguably better than Internet Explorer and still have a hard time competing, If it wasn't for Microsofts Desktop OS dominance IE would have either been free or the competitors would have been able to charge a fair price for their products aswell.
[/quote]
okay, did you pay for your ie? serious? it's for download for free! on ALL the microsoft websites. did you think that it's non-free just because it comes with windows? well, it runs on mac and linux free of charge, just with a little more work... get your facts straight. Microsoft has a great effort with open source and freeware, just do some search!
[/quote]

Oh, you mean the Internet Explorer for Mac that Apple and Microsoft formed a [i]5 year deal[/i] for? Just because it doesn't cost the consumer anything doesn't mean it's free.
As soon as that 5 year deal ended, Microsoft dropped support for it, and it [i]hasn't been updated since 2003[/i] (support ended in 2005).You can try to download it from a Microsoft website, because I can't find an actual download anywhere on their site (3rd party websites are still hosting the old 2003 version though).

[quote]stop complaining, this will make our lives easier. as developers AND as custumers. screw Steam, origin and whatever. they whant to compete? them offer something better than MS.[/quote]
They [b]already have [/b]been offering something better than Microsoft. Microsoft has already had digital stores available that failed, because [i]Microsoft [/i]wasn't offering something better. So instead of offering better quality (competition), Microsoft abuses it's power in an illegal way ([url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_tying#Tying_of_Microsoft_products"]product tying[/url]).

Stop complaining when you see injustice or corporate abuse? No thanks. I might not be able to stop such things from happening, but I'm certainly not going to close my eyes and pretend they aren't happening, or pretend that the company is some benevolent entity just out to help us little developers or consumers to "make our lives easier".
I'm not going to grab a sign and go picket outside Microsoft's HQ, because I know how little that'd do, but it is perfectly reasonable to discuss the issues (even ranting a little [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/wink.png[/img]) with other people in the same industry. Edited by Servant of the Lord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Mito' timestamp='1344965861' post='4969545']
[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1344826570' post='4968928']
Take Internet Explorer as an example, it is currently the only non free(as in beer) browser on the market, All other major browsers, including Apples safari are given away for free, are arguably better than Internet Explorer and still have a hard time competing, If it wasn't for Microsofts Desktop OS dominance IE would have either been free or the competitors would have been able to charge a fair price for their products aswell.

[/quote]

okay, did you pay for your ie? serious? it's for download for free! on ALL the microsoft websites. did you think that it's non-free just because it comes with windows? well, it runs on mac and linux free of charge, just with a little more work... get your facts straight. Microsoft has a great effort with open source and freeware, just do some search!
[/quote]

Read the EULA(s) before spouting out nonsense,
You have to own a valid Windows license for [b]each machine[/b] you're running IE on, even if you are running it using Wine, ReactOS, etc. (If you install IE on machines you don't have a Windows license for you are a pirate)

Yes Microsoft does have some freeware and even some Opensource software, IE, Windows Media Player and a few other bundled applications however are not free. (You might get upgrades for free for some time if you've allready bought a previous version) Visual Studio Express edition on the other hand is free, it doesn't require the purchase of a Windows license to use, (Windows is the only supported OS for it though so running it on anything else might be difficult but thats a different matter) Edited by SimonForsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1344971098' post='4969569']
Large Company does something illegal, profits immensely (or else ensures a competitor doesn't profit).
Governments step in, punish Large Company with a huge fine.
Large Company still gets to reap the benefits of what it did, because the competitor is defeated, or because the indirect benefits of it's actions is worth more than the cost of the governmental fine.
Large Company lays low for a few years.
Large Company does something else illegal.

The government reacts way too slowly, and large companies get away with it.
[/quote]
That looks more like the government isn't harsh enough, rather than being too slow. Ideally the punishment should be such that the company will not be left with any advantage over the competition. In the most extreme case it may even be required to be split to create more competition (although whether or not that works in practice is a different issue). Edited by Sik_the_hedgehog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1344971098' post='4969569']
They already have been offering something better than Microsoft. Microsoft has already had digital stores available that failed, because Microsoft wasn't offering something better. So instead of offering better quality (competition), Microsoft abuses it's power in an illegal way (product tying).
[/quote]

if they already offer something better, then don't complain.

there's no abuse of power here, just a app store. just because their system is the most used they don't have the rights to create a store and ship it on the system? the microsoft lawsuit was because microsoft have took action to ensure that netscape won't function properly on windows. that is unfair competition. Games for Windows Live ships with retail versions of windows since Windows Vista (just do a search, if you have minesweeper instaled, you have games for windows live.) that doesn't hurt steam.

steam whants to compete? make exclusivity deals, maintain better prices, maintain it's promotions.

as for the website for your games, how many games for iOS or android have websites? you don't need it. it's a plus, but you don't need it unless you are making a AAA game.

someone said the Xbox live is only used because it's the only option, well, i know (as in "i see every day and chat with") at least 10 people that choose XBox insted of PS3 [i]just because of the live.[/i]

Steam has a much unfair competition and doesn't complain. they compete with pirates and they are winning.

[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1344974343' post='4969580']
Read the EULA(s) before spouting out nonsense,
You have to own a valid Windows license for each machine you're running IE on, even if you are running it using Wine, ReactOS, etc. (If you install IE on machines you don't have a Windows license for you are a pirate)
[/quote]

you are talking about the microsoft PL license. IE is multi-licensed, the EULA that comes with it for windows only show the PL license because that are the one you use on windows. if you have ubunto, search synaptic for Internet Explorer. last time I checked, it was there, published by microsoft. (IE 7 was there, not sure about IE 9)

besides, microsoft doesn't has to support their software on other OSs if they don't want, as apple doesn't need to. they offer you a browser that runs on their system.


i don't understand any of you, it's just unfair competition because it's microsoft. and don't start again with market shares, because in any other industry, this doesn't matter.

EDIT: I replied within the quotation [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/dry.png[/img] Edited by Mito

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1344971098' post='4969569']
Large Company does something illegal, profits immensely (or else ensures a competitor doesn't profit).
Governments step in, punish Large Company with a huge fine.
Large Company still gets to reap the benefits of what it did, because the competitor is defeated, or because the indirect benefits of it's actions is worth more than the cost of the governmental fine.
Large Company lays low for a few years.
Large Company does something else illegal.
[/quote]
This is oversimplifying that case quite a bit, and despite the cases findings it's been hotly disputed by economists. Putting aside that a large cornerstone of the case was that internet speeds at the time were prohibitively slow to download another web browser/application, which is no longer the case.

The problem is that you are assuming that monopolies are illegal, which is false. Abusing monopoly power is illegal, but there are many monopolies in the US. Local power companies are a good example.

In this case Microsoft is giving away a product that consumers want included in their operating system for free. They are not disallowing others to be installed. US Anti-trust law is designed to protect consumers from monopolies, not to protect businesses from them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act
[quote]
The purpose of the Act was, to quote Sherman:
"To protect the consumers by preventing arrangements designed, or which tend, to advance the cost of goods to the consumer"[/quote]

The US supreme court says this on the Sherman Antitrust Act
[quote]
"The purpose of the [Sherman] Act is not to protect businesses from the working of the market; it is to protect the public from the failure of the market. The law directs itself not against conduct which is competitive, even severely so, but against conduct which unfairly tends to destroy competition itself.[7] This focus of U.S. competition law, on protection of competition rather than competitors, is not necessarily the only possible focus or purpose of competition law. For example, it has also been said that competition law in the European Union (EU) tends to protect the competitors in the marketplace, even at the expense of market efficiencies and consumers."[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Mito' timestamp='1345029294' post='4969799']
you are talking about the microsoft PL license. IE is multi-licensed, the EULA that comes with it for windows only show the PL license because that are the one you use on windows. if you have ubunto, search synaptic for Internet Explorer. last time I checked, it was there, published by microsoft.
[/quote]

There is no internet explorer package in Ubuntu, There is the IEs4Linux(not published by Microsoft, it is a third party wine script which lets you install IE versions up to 7) package in the universe repository but that requires a valid Windows license for each machine you use it on. (It is up to the user to ensure compliance)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Alpha_ProgDes' timestamp='1345051808' post='4969879']
If Windows 9 becomes Metro-only how will that affect software like Steam? Doesn't that pretty much forcefully remove them from competition altogether?
[/quote]

no, they will just adapt. period.

screw this shit, we already stoped in time because of this fear of change.

I admire the attitude microsoft risky they are taking to change the core of their system. Windows 8 is faster, more intuitive and more fun to use. steam is slow and ugly. I want that to change. I want that interface to be perfected. Valve will only do this if required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Alpha_ProgDes' timestamp='1345051808' post='4969879']
If Windows 9 becomes Metro-only how will that affect software like Steam? Doesn't that pretty much forcefully remove them from competition altogether?
[/quote]

You really think Microsoft is going to kill off legacy app support for their primary OS? That would likely be the one thing they could do to give up significant desktop market share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Mito' timestamp='1345029294' post='4969799']
[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1344971098' post='4969569']
They already have been offering something better than Microsoft. Microsoft has already had digital stores available that failed, because Microsoft wasn't offering something better. So instead of offering better quality (competition), Microsoft abuses it's power in an illegal way (product tying).
[/quote]

if they already offer something better, then don't complain.[/quote]
Have you read the thread? I'm not complaining that Microsoft is offering something worse or better, I'm complaining that they are abusing their position in a questionably legal way.

My complaint is: "Steam, and other companies, are offering better products. Microsoft can't compete in quality, because all their attempts failed. Instead of [i]competing[/i], they are abusing their position as the platform holder to gain the lion's share of customers, which harms competition instead of helping it."

I said, "Steam offers a better product, Microsoft is doing something that I think is borderline illegal according to the laws of this country, and harmful to the developers and consumers (and I explained why I think that)".
You said: "It benefits developers, stop complaining, Steam just needs to make a better product."
I said: "Steam already has a better product."
You said: "Then stop complaining"

Clearly you don't get what I'm complaining about: They are doing something that might be illegal (there's no hard and fast laws here, because it depends on the size of the company and is open to the interpretations of judges) to reduce competition, because they thus far hasn't been able to compete through quality.

[quote]there's no abuse of power here, just a app store. just because their system is the most used they don't have the rights to create a store and ship it on the system?[/quote]Yes. Just because they control the vast vast majority of the market, their actions have a [i]much [/i]greater effect on the market, and the government has special regulations for companies with that much sway.

[quote][the microsoft lawsuit was because microsoft have took action to ensure that netscape won't function properly on windows. that is unfair competition.[/quote]
That wasn't the only reason for the lawsuit. Another reason was the bundling of IE with Windows itself, not just the API that favored Internet Explorer.

[quote]steam whants to compete? make exclusivity deals, maintain better prices, maintain it's promotions.[/quote]
Steam [b]has [/b]been competing, they [b]have had[/b] the best prices [b]and[/b] the best promotions (and innovation). If Microsoft's Windows Store takes the consumers anyway, despite Steam being better in every way, then that means that competition through quality, pricing, and promotion, is pointless because the customers are all using the Windows Store - thus harming the competition, not helping it.

This is my whole point. Steam is very competitive, through the normal methods of competition, and they are rightly benefiting from it. If Microsoft comes along and takes the consumers [i]without [/i]better pricing, promotions, innovation, and quality of service, then it makes Steam's and Origin's and every other store's competition pointless.
[quote]as for the website for your games, how many games for iOS or android have websites? you don't need it. it's a plus, but you don't need it unless you are making a AAA game.[/quote]
But your argument was, "If you are on the Windows Store, you save the cost of having to make a website". That's not true. You don't [i]need [/i]a website, but being on the Windows Store doesn't save the cost of a website anymore than the app store or Steam does.
[quote]someone said the Xbox live is only used because it's the only option, well, i know (as in "i see every day and chat with") at least 10 people that choose XBox insted of PS3 [i]just because of the live.[/i][/quote]
You're mixing two different things. XBox Live (as in the entire online system) contains Xbox Live [u]Arcade[/u] (the digital store). If another company had a digital store on the XBox 360, to compete with XBox Live Arcade it'd have to offer: Better prices, more/better games, better promotions, and better interfaces and features... which would in turn force XBox Live Arcade to upgrade itself, and the other store would upgrade itself, creating better stores overall for the consumer.

[quote]Steam has a much unfair competition and doesn't complain. they compete with pirates and they are winning.[/quote]
That is a whole conversation in itself, and isn't really relevant to the current discussion.

[quote]i don't understand any of you, it's just unfair competition because it's microsoft. and don't start again with market shares, because in any other industry, this doesn't matter.[/quote]In every other industry competition [i]does[/i] matter. In some other industries there isn't competition, but that doesn't mean competition wouldn't improve things.
Competition almost always improves things for the consumer, if the government A) Doesn't intrude on a regular basis B) Does get involved when a company steps across the line C) Encourages (through tax breaks) standardization and cross-compatibility.

Companies need to be large enough that economies of scale cut the cost, but not so large that they push out all the competition and stop innovating.
(I'm neither big business nor big government nor communistic [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/blink.png[/img])

[hr]

[quote name='way2lazy2care' timestamp='1345043068' post='4969852']
Putting aside that a large cornerstone of the case was that internet speeds at the time were prohibitively slow to download another web browser/application, which is no longer the case.[/quote]
That's a good point. On the other hand, now we have things like this:
[img]http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3820/fud.png[/img]

And then the actual installation and patching time for Steam, and not to mention having to know it even exists.

[quote]The problem is that you are assuming that monopolies are illegal, which is false. Abusing monopoly power is illegal, but there are many monopolies in the US. Local power companies are a good example[/quote]
I know monopolies aren't illegal. Microsoft is a monopoly (maybe less so now, with Google and Apple catching up). Microsoft bundling IE with Windows was (possibly!) an abuse of that monopoly. Microsoft bundling Windows Store with Windows is (possibly! maybe! debatably!) an abuse of that monopoly - it's whether or not it actually is an abuse of power and position that I'm arguing about. I most likely am wrong, and hopefully it won't crush the higher-quality competitors... but if I'm going to talk about it with other intelligent developers on this forum, I'd rather do so [i]before[/i] the competition gets crushed or fails to be crushed, so I can at least have bragging rights if I'm correct. [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.png[/img]

[quote]US Anti-trust law is designed to protect consumers from monopolies, not to protect businesses from them.[/quote]
Interesting, I didn't know that - I thought it was meant for both. [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[img]http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3820/fud.png[/img]

That is entirely Steam's fault. All they have to do is get a countersigned certificate for their installer and that goes away. Basically that's saying that a company has to prove who they are through a CA in order to bypass the security warning. I'm not seeing a problem with this as it's much better than what OSX has done in Mountain Lion.

[img]http://km.support.apple.com/library/APPLE/APPLECARE_ALLGEOS/HT5290/HT5290-MacAppStore-001-en.png[/img]

Notice there is nothing which tells you how to change your security settings and by default there is no option to override this dialog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='tstrimple' timestamp='1345058087' post='4969913']
That is entirely Steam's fault. All they have to do is get a countersigned certificate for their installer and that goes away. Basically that's saying that a company has to prove who they are through a CA in order to bypass the security warning.[/quote]
Ah, pardon my ignorance - I didn't realize there was a way for Valve to make that warning go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1345056681' post='4969905']
Companies need to be large enough that economies of scale cut the cost, but not so large that they push out all the competition and stop innovating.
(I'm neither big business nor big government nor communistic)

[...]

I know monopolies aren't illegal. Microsoft is a monopoly (maybe less so now, with Google and Apple catching up). Microsoft bundling IE with Windows was (possibly!) an abuse of that monopoly. Microsoft bundling Windows Store with Windows is (possibly! maybe! debatably!) an abuse of that monopoly - it's whether or not it actually is an abuse of power and position that I'm arguing about.
[/quote]
Good enough way to remember it, I suppose. I use Linux, or at least I like to, and this whole app store debate is directing my eyes towards every distro's equivalent "Software Center" and underlying management system, whether it's apt-get or portage or rpm or whatever.

Sure, I could knowingly compile and install a program without using apt-get on Ubuntu. But why would I want to do that, if the very same program is available there? But for argument's sake, I still could do it.

Maybe, just maybe this is apples to oranges, so to speak, but I can't imagine having such an app store thing pre-installed and not using it, unless it just wasn't very good. (edit: And I do remember having that Games for Windows Live thing on my desktop a while back. Never used it, installed Steam instead. ;) ) Edited by Heath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry but i won't botter in quoting every single part of your post i want to reply, so i will only quote this one, but reply to it as a whole.

[quote name='Servant of the Lord' timestamp='1345056681' post='4969905']
And then the actual installation and patching time for Steam, and not to mention having to know it even exists.
[/quote]


This is Valve fault. I'm a software developer, so i know they can speed up this crap if they whant. what you don't realise is that Steam has no competition. Origin a competition to Steam? how many people like Origin? I've seen many complaining and none defending. in this thread, how many times steam was mentioned and how many times origin was? Steam already has no competition.

I think Steam's GUI is just crap. yes, crap. it's painfull slow. they can speed that but they don't care.

you said Microsoft has 90% of the market share, but how many of those costumers are gammers? and how many of those gammers are already Steam custumers?

And why you care? if microsoft show you better deals and don't impose the burden of having to run steam on the background while i play, then valve better catch up.

it's not unfair competition, it's competition. Games for Windows Live has been there for ages. if it doesn't offer nothing better, it won't be used by gammers, but the real magic of this store is other software. all of that software in one place will really make my life and the life of many other people much easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this