Microsoft Responds to Windows 8 Hate From Game Devs

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chrome, Firefox, and Opera are free. If you must give away your product to have a market share, are you really competing in a commercially viable sense? The companies that made web browsers used to sell them before Microsoft tried to take that market and the search provider market which is connected to it over in Windows 95 b or c with their advertising "channels" and integrating iexplore.exe into the desktop. Is there any person that actually has a choice not to have Internet Explorer installed on their computer now?
 


Actually, you don't need to have IE on your computer. It can be removed from a Windows installation ISO and then Windows can be installed without IE. I think that European versions of Windows also have IE as an option add-on program that is not installed by default, so a European copy of Windows could be used. Sure, it's jumping through hoops, but it is still doable. There are also ways to uninstall IE from a Windows installation that already has it. I know this because I've tried it on XP and on 7 successfully. Windows 8 might be more difficult given *Metro*, but it might still be doable.

Also, I don't know about you, but I think that using the internet should be free. I already have to pay for my overpriced internet connection, why should I also need to pay to use it?

Also, Apple and proprietary distros of Linux aren't free, yet their market share is growing, albeit slowly, so success against MS is obviously not tied into working with MS. There are also non-free AV and other security software that hasn't faded out of use despite MS and many others offering free AV and other such security software.
 
Are you seriously trying to tell me that Linux is competitive with the PC on desktop computers? It has about 1% market share.

www.netmarketshare.com

Is it possible to use Linux as an alternative? Yes. Is it convenient? No. Its not a real choice for the average end user, only for tech geeks. Removing IE might be a choice for tech geeks but for the average user its just way too much hassle and there's no guarantees that other Microsoft integrated software like Windows Update for instance will operate without it being there.

You mentioned A/V software up there and it just happens that in Windows 8 there's now a built in A/V where there never has been up till now. There was the Windows Defender (anti-spyware) and Windows Firewall (firewall), but not a true antivirus.
 


Some Linux distros are very convenient. Average users are probably who could use it the most right now. Besides, I clearly said proprietary versions which have nothing to do with average users, so I have no idea why you just jumped the gun here.

The average user doesn't care about removing IE, so it doesn't matter if they know how to do it as far as that goes.

The Windows 8 AV can be disabled and it doesn't matter if it is there because people whom pay for AV will almost definitely keep paying for it. People whom don't pay for it will probably continue to not pay for it. Do you think that corporations and businesses will switch to MS AV just because it is free? Heck, it might not even be offered for free to them anyway.

I don't know about you, but I most certainly won't use MS's AV. Avast is better.
 
just test windows server 8 which is using this kind of concept. i still prefer a windows with start menu and i will stick with windows server 2008 r2 until the end of the world!
 
[citation][nom]cybersans[/nom]just test windows server 8 which is using this kind of concept. i still prefer a windows with start menu and i will stick with windows server 2008 r2 until the end of the world![/citation]

If the start menu is all that you cared about, then you can install one. It takes a few minutes tops and is free. I've tested it in Windows Server 2012 and it still works.
 
Dont worry people, let MS launch Win8... Win7 will out last Win8 just as XP out lasting Vista.If Win7 is the last OS, then hope Android or Linux steps up the market.
 
I want to see Plants Vs Zombies version, where geeks get horded by windows 8 updates and Windows 8 release, then they need to collect buffs like windows 7 SP, Apple gadgets, Linux/Android stuff.. Someone make it so all us gamers can buy or downlod it free just to make statement as how much we hate Windows 8, and prefer to stay on Win 7, or change OS to competition if we are forced to do so.
 
[citation][nom]BlizzardGamer[/nom]I want to see Plants Vs Zombies version, where geeks get horded by windows 8 updates and Windows 8 release, then they need to collect buffs like windows 7 SP, Apple gadgets, Linux/Android stuff.. Someone make it so all us gamers can buy or downlod it free just to make statement as how much we hate Windows 8, and prefer to stay on Win 7, or change OS to competition if we are forced to do so.[/citation]

Hating something that is better than Windows 7 is just stupid. Yes, it has Metro. So what! If you don't like Metro, then you don't use it. You don't need to use Metro to use Windows 8. If you like the start menu that much, then you can simply install one and enjoy all the benefits that Windows 8 has to offer over Windows 7. It is faster, lighter, more responsive, has some UI improvements with the task manager and the copy manager, among many other improvements.
 
For all 'linux is complicated' cult out there.

How to install linux (ubuntu based distros at least)
1-pop the cd in the drive
2-follow the on screen instructions and fill out the fields just lke you do with windows
3-it does the stuff for your and reboots and tadaaaa there you go

How to use linux
1-know how to read
2-know how to use keyboard and mouse

How to install wine to run windows exe's
1-Go to software manager
2-write wine
3-press enter
4-click install

How to understand that linux is not complicated
1-Actually using it yourself
2-Not take the words of other people for it when they didn't tried linux themselves either

Top tips
1-Linux may be glitchy on some configs, on that case i advise not to use it.
2-Use linux mint (pick your version, there are reviews on the interwebz)

p.s. I use the mint to work, w8 preview for fun, winning combination for me
 
Even if installing Ubuntu is easy, Linux is still confusing for the average Windows user who has spent years trying to understand Windows and Windows-based software and now must re-learn where and how to install, configure, and use software to be able to be productive with Linux. All the same software is not available on Windows and Linux so the user probably will not even know the name of the software that he needs to use to accomplish things that he already knows how to do on Windows.

Re-learning takes time so a user is going to need a very compelling reason to do it. Every time the user has to go to a search engine to figure out the name of some software he needs to use that he already knew on Windows he is wasting time that he could have spent doing something productive if he did not change. What is the reward of all this time spent re-learning Linux instead of Windows?

The things that Linux does better than Windows are all related to either open-source software-development, security, or server functionality. None of these are important to the average desktop user, so the desktop user has no compelling reason to use it except maybe cost, but even if you have to pay $300 for Windows it will ultimately be cheaper and less hassle to use for experienced Windows users because time is valuable and it will take a lot of time to re-learn everything.

The desktop user has a lot of compelling reasons not to use Linux: he already knows how to use and install Windows and doesn't know how to use Linux, Linux is incompatible with important pieces of software that he wants to use like Microsoft Office or the latest PC game, most of his friends use Windows so if he has trouble he has people he can ask for help or advice, but he has no such support if he uses Linux, and all of his hardware came with drivers for Windows but he may not know how to find or install a driver for the same hardware for Linux.
 


MS Office and many games (even modern games) can be run on Linux with WINE and sometimes other things necessary. Also, there are many free Linux forums that can help, including one here on Tom's. You have some good points, but these two facts are also true.
 
WINE released support for Microsoft Office 2010 in WINE 1.4 on March 7, 2012. Microsoft Office 2010's retail release was on June 15, 2010. That is 631 days.

http://wine-reviews.net/wine-reviews/wine-release/wine-14-released.html

If you use the Windows O/S you can use 100% of Windows software and if you use Linux you can use some percentage of it that is much less than 100% and with those there are increased bugs and issues related to small incompatibilities due to imperfect emulation. That is a lot of hassle and uncertainty for the desktop user. Its a lot easier to do "it just works" than it is to do "maybe I can make it work", so for the average end user it is a no brainer to continue to use Windows to run Windows software. WINE is for Linux enthusiasts that want to be able to use Linux for as much as possible, not for Windows users that want to make sure their software works without hassle.
 
[citation][nom]matt911[/nom]WINE released support for Microsoft Office 2010 in WINE 1.4 on March 7, 2012. Microsoft Office 2010's retail release was on June 15, 2010. That is 631 days.http://wine-reviews.net/wine-revie [...] eased.htmlIf you use the Windows O/S you can use 100% of Windows software and if you use Linux you can use some percentage of it that is much less than 100% and with those there are increased bugs and issues related to small incompatibilities due to imperfect emulation. That is a lot of hassle and uncertainty for the desktop user. Its a lot easier to do "it just works" than it is to do "maybe I can make it work", so for the average end user it is a no brainer to continue to use Windows to run Windows software. WINE is for Linux enthusiasts that want to be able to use Linux for as much as possible, not for Windows users that want to make sure their software works without hassle.[/citation]

Like I said, WINE isn't the only thing that stuff can be done with and much of its official support can be used long before it is official through savvy tricks. Sure, the average Windows user would not know them, so it's still not important for them until they learn them or someone who knows them gives them some help, but still, they exist. Regardless, I wasn't arguing that we should all switch to Linux, only that it is an option for those who want to use it. Like I said, you had some good points.

However, if someone wants to use Linux, then it is a viable option, granted that it might not be the most practical option available in many, perhaps most, cases.
 
[citation][nom]ejb222[/nom]Dude did you not know that 90% of PC users would have no clue how to run linux(or even install it)....let alone install Wine to run EXE etc. If you want to use Linux, thats cool. But there is no way that the majority of PC users will switch to Linux.[/citation]

True to that. We linuxuser are very compatible with any OS... Windows, OSX, Linux. but as for those common no-brainers, yeah good luck
 
Microsoft keeps saying that it will be backwards compatible for older games, what they mean by games is their own games. Their plan is to be like Apple and better, at the same time knock out Sony's PS3 by forcing gamers to make games for Windows 8 so it can be easy access for noobies. well good luck and hope you fail EPICLY!
 
[citation][nom]dauntekong[/nom]Microsoft keeps saying that it will be backwards compatible for older games, what they mean by games is their own games. Their plan is to be like Apple and better, at the same time knock out Sony's PS3 by forcing gamers to make games for Windows 8 so it can be easy access for noobies. well good luck and hope you fail EPICLY![/citation]

Windows 8 still supports the games supported by Windows 7 and Windows Vista. That is what they meant by supporting older games.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]Windows 8 still supports the games supported by Windows 7 and Windows Vista. That is what they meant by supporting older games.[/citation]
Yeah I know... Microsoft branded games from Vista and 7... =P

either way big gaming company is going to stop development if Microsoft is not supporting them
 
[citation][nom]dauntekong[/nom]Yeah I know... Microsoft branded games from Vista and 7... =Peither way big gaming company is going to stop development if Microsoft is not supporting them[/citation]

Last I checked, pretty much no big games are branded as Microsoft games and MS is not supporting any more nor less than they did with Vista and 7. MS is simply also offering up more platforms for distributing the games. DX and such are still around and being updated further.
 
For normal PC users it is much more a matter of unfair competition than it is of Microsoft flat out banning non-Live games from Windows 8. If Xbox Live is built into the system then it will always be the first game advertiser/distributor to reach the user and its interface software won't require download and installation like competing game publisher's software will. That makes it easier for the end-user to access (or the operating system to push in the user's face against his will) and gives Xbox Live the tactical advertising early-bird advantage.

Always being the first to advertise to PC gamers is bound to increase Xbox Live's share of PC gamers a great deal and possibly publishers will even come to the conclusion that having the early-bird advantage is so important that they have no choice but to sell their games on Xbox Live Marketplace also (and pay Microsoft's royalties which are higher than competing distribution platforms) whether they want to or not.

Whoever owns the operating system has the ability to take by force the early-bird advertising advantage no matter who possesses it already by simply building the advertising software into the operating system. Microsoft did it with Internet Explorer to try to take over search engine advertising, did it with the Windows Media Player to push out RealNetworks Real Player, and now they are doing it with Xbox Live to try to take over game publisher advertising.

They haven't been 100% successful in these takeovers. Some people still use other web browsers and some people still use Real Player, but Microsoft has undoubtedly increased their share of these markets by making sure they are the first to have a crack at the PC user's mind and wallet.

Google still beats Microsoft out as a search provider because they fight back aggressively by alliances with other key web-oriented software that Microsoft doesn't have control over (like Java, Adobe Reader and Flash) that offer to install the Google toolbar which can steal the search homepage back from Microsoft and they buy goodwill by offering websites monetary support through the Google advertising links. Other smaller search providers that used to be important like WebCrawler, Lycos, and AltaVista have very little relevance now though. RealPlayer seems to be used much less than it once was. Clearly Microsoft has made some ground.

Microsoft has realized the influence that Flash and Java have over their ability to push Google out so they also have been trying to develop SilverLight and .NET Framework as direct competitors to these and integrate them into the Windows operating system too. Their motto could be "If at first you can't succeed, integrate!"
 
[citation][nom]matt911[/nom]For normal PC users it is much more a matter of unfair competition than it is of Microsoft flat out banning non-Live games from Windows 8. If Xbox Live is built into the system then it will always be the first game advertiser/distributor to reach the user and its interface software won't require download and installation like competing game publisher's software will. That makes it easier for the end-user to access (or the operating system to push in the user's face against his will) and gives Xbox Live the tactical advertising early-bird advantage.Always being the first to advertise to PC gamers is bound to increase Xbox Live's share of PC gamers a great deal and possibly publishers will even come to the conclusion that having the early-bird advantage is so important that they have no choice but to sell their games on Xbox Live Marketplace also (and pay Microsoft's royalties which are higher than competing distribution platforms) whether they want to or not.Whoever owns the operating system has the ability to take by force the early-bird advertising advantage no matter who possesses it already by simply building the advertising software into the operating system. Microsoft did it with Internet Explorer to try to take over search engine advertising, did it with the Windows Media Player to push out RealNetworks Real Player, and now they are doing it with Xbox Live to try to take over game publisher advertising. They haven't been 100% successful in these takeovers. Some people still use other web browsers and some people still use Real Player, but Microsoft has undoubtedly increased their share of these markets by making sure they are the first to have a crack at the PC user's mind and wallet. Google still beats Microsoft out as a search provider because they fight back aggressively by alliances with other key web-oriented software that Microsoft doesn't have control over (like Java, Adobe Reader and Flash) that offer to install the Google toolbar which can steal the search homepage back from Microsoft and they buy goodwill by offering websites monetary support through the Google advertising links. Other smaller search providers that used to be important like WebCrawler, Lycos, and AltaVista have very little relevance now though. RealPlayer seems to be used much less than it once was. Clearly Microsoft has made some ground.Microsoft has realized the influence that Flash and Java have over their ability to push Google out so they also have been trying to develop SilverLight and .NET Framework as direct competitors to these and integrate them into the Windows operating system too. Their motto could be "If at first you can't succeed, integrate!"[/citation]

My response to this is IE versus Chrome, FF, and Opera. I don't mind MS using their own operating system as a platform for what they want to so long as they don't stop their competitors from competing. They don't seem to be doing that (despite whining about the contrary) at all, so as far as i'm concerned, there's no serious issue with them redeploying their Xbox Live/app store stuff into Windows 8 and in a very integrated manner. IE is integrated with most copies of Windows, but that doesn't stop Chrome and FF from beating it in usage.
 
[citation][nom]ejb222[/nom]Dude did you not know that 90% of PC users would have no clue how to run linux(or even install it)....let alone install Wine to run EXE etc. If you want to use Linux, thats cool. But there is no way that the majority of PC users will switch to Linux.[/citation]

Dude installing linux is sooo much easier than windows.. put in the install disk.. boot into linux, and install the OS while surfing the web.. Now try that on windows that insists on rebooting before you can actually use anything at all. I see you havent given linux a try in the last few years or you wouldnt have made such black and white claims.

 
I fail to see how that last line is relevant, I thought this article was about the Windows 8 PC operating system, not the console gaming market. Still, I'd like to see more choices in both, the OUYA is the only new console I intend to buy & I will not be "upgrading" to Windows 8. Especially if they intend to make it hard for Steam who I purchase ALL of my PC games from.
I think Microsoft has been uncontested for too long, they needs some real competition. Android might just be the ticket
 
[citation][nom]einheriar[/nom]Dude installing linux is sooo much easier than windows.. put in the install disk.. boot into linux, and install the OS while surfing the web.. Now try that on windows that insists on rebooting before you can actually use anything at all. I see you havent given linux a try in the last few years or you wouldnt have made such black and white claims.[/citation]
True but the public at large doesn't know that. They are the ones that decide the market, the "End User Majority" for lack of a better term have been made to fear Linux as being a geek operating system. Also the multitude of different versions doesn't help, the end user wants to be able to go to the store, buy what they need and there be no question about what they will get. The Linux waters are too muddied for that. They are afraid that they wont know how to use Linux or that they will buy the wrong version, even if those fears are unfounded. Android on the other hand is on many phones, they see and use it every day. Now all they need to do is add some power API's for the geeks and it could be a real threat to the Windows stranglehold. If nothing else it would force Microsoft to make a better product.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom