Your Paid For Windows 8 Metro Apps: Microsoft's Handy Big Brother Kill Switch

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

i see what your saying panther but i do think its the begining of their walled garden

 

[Wile E]

Having experienced this first hand from both Google and Apple, you generally get a refund when they are forced to pull an app. I got a refund on both occasions, and with Apple, the app was already months old.

What MS is doing is absolutely no different than what Apple or Google are doing.

Another ridiculous anti-Microsoft editorial. Please stop posting this crap.

 

[Kreij]

@Wile_E : Both Apple and Google were taken to task for it. Why should this not be the case for Microsoft? Just because Apple and Google already do it doesn't mean it sits well with everyone.

Just my opinion.

 

[Wile E]

Not sitting well is different than claiming the end of the computer world every time Microsoft changes something or tries something new.

 

[Mistral]

qubit, man, you sure you don't write for Fudzilla as well?

 

[qubit]

But they're not doing that man, developers don't have to use their store, consumers don't have to us their store.

How is that controlling?

It's not like if you have an Iphone and HAVE to use Itunes is it?

Now if Microsoft made it so could only run applications you bought from their store run on windows then hell yeah I'd fully support a fuss being kicked up.

But they haven't and I doubt they ever will.

Well, the Metro interface has been created to replace the standard desktop and you can only use it with apps from the Windows Store, so yes, developers and users will have to use it. They are indeed, trying to "pull an Apple".

Just look at the way they're trying to control who supplies hardware for their ARM-based Windows 8 computers in Microsoft Tells ARM Partners to Pick Notebook Vendors. And if you think it's "just me" with a title like that, this article was written by bta - Microsoft is going for total control, nothing less. There's no other way to put it.

Having experienced this first hand from both Google and Apple, you generally get a refund when they are forced to pull an app. I got a refund on both occasions, and with Apple, the app was already months old.

What MS is doing is absolutely no different than what Apple or Google are doing.

Another ridiculous anti-Microsoft editorial. Please stop posting this crap.

The answer I explained to Panther, above applies to yourself, too. The fact you got a refund, makes no difference. They took something away from you, didn't they? Of course you got a refund.

And please don't go calling my articles crap, thanks. That's just trolling and I'd appreciate it if you didn't speak like that - let's keep the conversation pleasant and on topic. No one makes you read them, do they?

 

[newtekie1]

I'm not "anti-Microsoft". I'm anti any company that pulls this control freak shit. This is why I don't like Apple

No, you are anti-Microsoft. So much to the fact that you will blame them for things they aren't even in control of, repeatedly, even after being corrected several times.

 

[gourygabriev]

As a hard pill it is to swallow, it can't be helped. people didn't care much about it when Apple did it and look how successful thay are doing in controlling their medium. It's one of those things where if people didn't support such ideas, it wouldn't be copied by others.

 

[Fx]

I wonder what took them so long to come up with this. Apple has been doing this for years

there are a lot of catch-all's in there but stringent controls are always implemented with portals like this for any software

only time will tell how this pans out

 

[pantherx12]

Well, the Metro interface has been created to replace the standard desktop and you can only use it with apps from the Windows Store, so yes, developers and users will have to use it. They are indeed, trying to "pull an Apple".

Protip : it's not replacing if the standard desktop is still their underneath.

You can switch of the Metro UI, also I'm willing to bet some euros that when windows 8 is out of development other windows application stores will pop up.

"@Pantherx ... it's quite possible that is what Microsoft has in mind. Win8 apps ONLY at the Windows App Store.
We just don't know yet. "

Yeah we don't know that but it's incredibly unlikely, the best thing about windows is that anyone can write a program for it.

People on this forum do it all the time, it would be crazy stupid for MS to kill of their greatest strength. (From a business perspective)

I'm not trying to defend Microsoft I know they make some dick moves but people are getting worried over the potential of something happening.

And frankly that's stupid, I could potentially die whilst squeezing out a poo but I'm not going to live my life in fear over it

 

[qubit]

No, you are anti-Microsoft. So much to the fact that you will blame them for things they aren't even in control of, repeatedly, even after being corrected several times.

Here we go again...

Your "correction" was bogus and you went round in ever decreasing circles, so I gave up with you. In fact, later on you actually swapped the argument round and accused me of saying the thing that you were. :shadedshu I showed that thread to some friends and they couldn't believe what you'd done, lol.

As I said, I'm against any company that tries to pull stunts like this.

 

[Kreij]

Okay, maybe I'm a little confused.
I think that someone will always be able to load 3rd party software on their computer, but I mean "apps".
Isn't the concept of an app store that they are "apps" that integrate into mobile as well as PC?
Aren't the "apps" at an app store aimed at the mobile market?

 

[pantherx12]

Okay, maybe I'm a little confused.
I think that someone will always be able to load 3rd party software on their computer, but I mean "apps".
Isn't the concept of an app store that they are "apps" that integrate into mobile as well as PC?
Aren't the "apps" at an app store aimed at the mobile market?

Yes it will be a place to get mobile apps, how ever I don't think Microsoft will only offer cross compatible applications. (It would make sense from a business perspective to allow companies that specialise in desktop only software to utilise the app store)

It will probably tell what hardware you are using and offer relevant applications this way they can maximise their sales and avoid compatibility issues.

Much like how the Android Market is supposed to work

 

[newtekie1]

Here we go again...

Your "correction" was bogus and you went round in ever decreasing circles, so I gave up with you. In fact, later on you actually swapped the argument round and accused me of saying the thing that you were. :shadedshu I showed that thread to some friends and they couldn't believe what you'd done, lol.

As I said, I'm against any company that tries to pull stunts like this.

I never swapped the argument. You have always been of the opinion that Microsoft is behind Secure Boot, and it is their product, and you are dead wrong. You might mention in the article that it is actually a UEFI feature, but you title the article as if it was a Microsoft Windows 8 feature, when it isn't. And if you friends couldn't believe what I had done, why? Because they were amazed that I could make a logical argument that made you look stupid? It really isn't that hard. And I showed your threads to some of my friends, and most of them couldn't believe someone who calls themselves a new reporter would post such opinionated "news articles" without doing even the very basic of research on the subject, such as figuring out who really was behind the features before just blaming Microsoft based on the false opinions that "Microsoft has all the money" and "Windows 8 supports the feature, so Microsoft is at the root of the feature". And they really couldn't believe when you actually tried to counter x86-64 might as well be called a Microsoft invention by your logic argument with "well Microsoft does have 64-bit Edition right in the name"...

And no, you obviously aren't against any company that tries to pull stunts like this. You harped on Microsoft for Secure Boot, but ignored the fact that it was IBM, Apple, AMD, Intel, Lenovo, HP, and Dell that had just as much influence and in fact they were pushing for it long before Win8 started supporting it. And your response to that? "Well we all know Microsoft has the money, so we all know who is really pulling the strings." Really? Because Apple alone has more money than Microsoft, and all those other companies combined have waaaay more money than Microsoft. Yet, you singled out Microsoft? Explain that. The only explanation is you are Anti-Microsoft.

Well, the Metro interface has been created to replace the standard desktop and you can only use it with apps from the Windows Store, so yes, developers and users will have to use it. They are indeed, trying to "pull an Apple".

Oh, and I love your attempt at BS researchless claims to try and some how justify your original anti-microsoft bashing. The "Microsoft has all the money" comment about secure boot, and now this BS to try and justify this anti-microsoft rant.

Sorry, but you don't have to use Metro UI. AND you don't have to use it only with apps from the Windows Store. Any program you install on the computer through the normal method works with the Metro UI. So you have no clue what you are talking about, obviously, and are just making stuff up at this point to help make your anti-microsoft bash seem legit.:shadedshu

It is too bad for you that some people will actually research things, and point out that your claims are complete BS. Try at least doing a little research before making statements, it will help with your credibility as a news reporter.

 

[jpierce55]

If they do form a "walled garden" t is one way to help develop Linux or some other OS into the world.

 

[xtremesv]

If Windows becomes a walled garden like Apple's, believe me, it won't last that much

Windows "openness" is one of the reasons it became the number one desktop OS in the world, surpassing Mac OS.

I always like to compare Windows vs. Mac OS to Android vs. iOS. Android is quickly becoming the ruling mobile OS in the globe because of its open nature, as this trend persist, iOS will remain as a niche. Microsoft can't afford to lose the market share of its star product and if they were to adopt a business model a la Apple, I think they will be assuming that risk

 

[Steevo]

Must be that time of the month for some.


This "news topic" is trash, it applies to BETA software, not public release, and applies to applications from a store for that BETA software, not public release paid for software. BETA.


If you want to argue semantics lets say I wanted to run a virus or a dangerous program and AVG, Avast, MSE, Norton, Kapersky, etc..... removed it. I could then start a thread about how Microsoft removed my software too. But I know it would be BS, everyone else would know it was BS, and it would get closed.



Plus, you aren't forced to purchase any apps, and if you are concerned I'm sure a simple firewall will prevent them, and there are numerous firewalls, hardware and software and many software are even free.

 

[Completely Bonkers]

Have read quickly through this thread, my comments are:

1./ It is a legitimate concern
2./ I can't see a walled garden in the corporate/enterprise/gvt markets
3./ And not in professional or enthusiast retail either
4./ BUT, and I genuinely believe this, many software companies are devilishly trying to move to a software-as-a-service business model where you license the use and that use is limited by time that **** Windows 8 Lite for free **** could well operate closer to this concept.

W7 Starter was utter tosh. I can imagine a W8 or W9 with a bottom end product for free, with walled garden app store. Brings down the cost of "netbooks" and "webstations" and moves to a more differentiated pay-for-feature product.

 

[DannibusX]

I get it, you hate Steam.

 

[qubit]

Protip : it's not replacing if the standard desktop is still their underneath.

You can switch of the Metro UI, also I'm willing to bet some euros that when windows 8 is out of development other windows application stores will pop up.

Yes, of course you can switch it off - for now, since Microsoft cannot change things overnight. Notice how to turn it off though, you have use to a registry hack. Kinda discouraging, isn't it? And I don't buy the beta status argument for why this should be, as a button to switch between them is trivial to implement and takes a couple of minutes. In the finished product, this switch may be present, but Windows 8 will be wholly geared to use the damned Metro interface, making the current one difficult to get to and/or use.

One has to read between the lines with things like this and see where Microsoft is trying to push things (my point about the ARM vendors in an earlier point is part of this "lines reading", to get the whole picture). Unfortunately, people such as NT just can't see this/don't want to see this/have shares in Microsoft etc and start getting a bit rude, accusing me of lots of ridiculous things etc and get all worked up about it, so I don't bother debating it past a certain point.

I think CD's post is very plausible:

Have read quickly through this thread, my comments are:

1./ It is a legitimate concern
2./ I can't see a walled garden in the corporate/enterprise/gvt markets
3./ And not in professional or enthusiast retail either
4./ BUT, and I genuinely believe this, many software companies are devilishly trying to move to a software-as-a-service business model where you license the use and that use is limited by time that **** Windows 8 Lite for free **** could well operate closer to this concept.

W7 Starter was utter tosh. I can imagine a W8 or W9 with a bottom end product for free, with walled garden app store. Brings down the cost of "netbooks" and "webstations" and moves to a more differentiated pay-for-feature product.

I don't quite agree with point 2 though, judging by the pathetic spending decisions I see by government, all the time. I think it's quite easy to get one over them. :shadedshu Savvy corps, not so easy.

 

[pantherx12]

Dude, you just click the desktop button on the Metro UI and you get regular windows .... (and since developers already know how to develop for this, why the hell would Microsoft bother adding a button to permanently switch off the they want people to develop for?)

The registry hack is if you never want to see the metro UI I.E completely disable it ( The metro UI is just the new start menu NOT the new desktop)

Have you even used the preview man?

 

[qubit]

I get it, you hate Steam.

It's not clear if you're referring to me? Assuming you are, then no I don't hate Steam, or I wouldn't have bought over 100 games on that platform. It is, however, one of the few forms of DRM that I will tolerate.

Dude, you just click the desktop button on the Metro UI and you get regular windows .... (and since developers already know how to develop for this, why the hell would Microsoft bother adding a button to permanently switch off the they want people to develop for?)

The registry hack is if you never want to see the metro UI I.E completely disable it ( The metro UI is just the new start menu NOT the new desktop)

Have you even used the preview man?

Oops! I stand corrected. Yes, I've used it for a bit a while back and obviously I had confused the purpose of the registry hack over time. I still think my wider point that MS is trying to push towards this closed model is valid, though. As ever, "time will tell".

 

[pantherx12]

I still don't think it will be a closed model, it would put Microsoft out of business then we really would be left with a closed model.

Microsoft KNOW it's greatest strength is allowing any one to develop and create for the windows platform.

It's the very reason why there are so many programs for windows man.

But I can see that it's what you believe that's all fine and all but I don't feel a news post is the place for this kind of opinion as it's all based on speculation.

And I do appreciate you are concerned and you are trying to inform people about what you think could be a problem but you just keep jumping to conclusions dude.

Jumping to conclusions is not news.

Hope you see I'm not trying to have a go, just sharing my concerns too

 

[Mussels]

both apple and steam and just about any other service do this as well.


for example, if you pay for an app that turns out to be a copyright or trademark breach, they'll need to be able to remove it from your device (and hopefully refund you)

 

[qubit]

I still don't think it will be a closed model, it would put Microsoft out of business then we really would be left with a closed model.

Microsoft KNOW it's greatest strength is allowing any one to develop and create for the windows platform.

It's the very reason why there are so many programs for windows man.

But I can see that it's what you believe that's all fine and all but I don't feel a news post is the place for this kind of opinion as it's all based on speculation.

And I do appreciate you are concerned and you are trying to inform people about what you think could be a problem but you just keep jumping to conclusions dude.

Jumping to conclusions is not news.

Hope you see I'm not trying to have a go, just sharing my concerns too

Thanks for a great post and I really appreciate the highlighted bits especially. I love constructive criticism and you're welcome any time.

Perhaps you're right and it won't be quite the horror story that it looks like to me - and I bloody hope you're right and I'm not! However, reading such a dreadful agreement and looking at the general trend, it looks like MS is trying to do an Apple here. I'm not stating this as a categorical fact, just that the indication looks pretty strong to me and also to other news sites.

Sure, they very well know that it's the open nature of their platform that got them their success. However, that doesn't prevent the possibility of them thinking that maybe now they can tighten the noose. Or put it another way, lots of dumb executive decisions have been made by all sorts of companies and I don't think MS is immune from this, either.

Regardless of trends though, this agreement on its own is pretty awful, so I make no apology in reporting it with that tone, in really getting that point across - and lets face it, it also makes the article much more interesting. And the fact that other companies make agreements like this too, as some people here pointed out, actually means the situation is worse not better. It simply means that shit like this spreads like a cancer and it's what we really don't want.