Recommended Posts

Nice, as expected. I figure many of the well known desktop apps will go into the store, I'm sure even if you don't use it you know about WinZip. I personally use WinRAR though.

"Go to developer's website".. That's just ridiculous!

I know; why have it in the App Store if you can't get it from there. Oh, I guess I can just open my browser and go to winzip.com. If you can't obtain it there, it's not a store, it's just advertising. Of course, you get ads on many of the new Metro apps. With music, for example. I don't care about the brainless idiot pop music being churned out, I just want to play my music. But now, it's like my PC is just another conduit for advertising.

I know; why have it in the App Store if you can't get it from there. Oh, I guess I can just open my browser and go to winzip.com. If you can't obtain it there, it's not a store, it's just advertising. Of course, you get ads on many of the new Metro apps. With music, for example. I don't care about the brainless idiot pop music being churned out, I just want to play my music. But now, it's like my PC is just another conduit for advertising.

I think that desktop apps will work fine on the store but they need to improve the store first. If they will allow filtering the desktop apps (or other outside-the-store link 'apps'), then it's fine. I'm saying it will work because instead of typing the specific app's website, the average users will be presented with the available apps including ratings and reviews from other windows users (assuming those reviews will not turn into fanboy/hater threads). I personally would like better sorting (like sorting based on which app had the latest update). I do agree that the store may turn into just an advertising app if not controlled properly.

"Go to developer's website".. That's just ridiculous!

It was decided like that because most desktop developers for years have had their own licensing, payment and refund models in place in their own stores, many distributing product keys that go along with payments - whereas anything bought in the store doesn't and are tried directly to your Microsoft account and are automatically validated by Windows.

It means the desktop apps get to keep their payment model, they don't have to give Microsoft a 30% share, don't have to recode anything, but they still get listed in the store.

But isn't the fact that they are still listed in the store good enough? You may discover some great desktop apps that you may not know about once the store gets abundant and I don't see anything wrong with having to download from the vendor's website.

But isn't the fact that they are still listed in the store good enough? You may discover some great desktop apps that you may not know about once the store gets abundant and I don't see anything wrong with having to download from the vendor's website.

This is so true, lots of general users don't know about a number of good apps out there, often they have to dive through web searches to try and find what they want and end up installing crapware or even malware by mistake.

Again I never thought i'd find myself saying this but Apple's approach to this matter makes more sense. You can buy, install, and update desktop apps from their app store.

Sorry to say MS doenst do anything for free its a buiness and as I see it this is another revenue stream to tap in to a ready market of windows users much akin to the google play store.They will initially make it free to advertise just to fill the shelves up but then the software retailer will see a range of advertising fees arise from the ether to stay listed in the store front.

Sorry to say MS doenst do anything for free its a buiness and as I see it this is another revenue stream to tap in to a ready market of windows users much akin to the google play store.They will initially make it free to advertise just to fill the shelves up but then the software retailer will see a range of advertising fees arise from the ether to stay listed in the store front.

I'm pretty sure that's not true given that they're allowing people to distribute Metro apps free.

Again I never thought i'd find myself saying this but Apple's approach to this matter makes more sense. You can buy, install, and update desktop apps from their app store.

Just going to copy pasta what Johnny said:

It was decided like that because most desktop developers for years have had their own licensing, payment and refund models in place in their own stores, many distributing product keys that go along with payments - whereas anything bought in the store doesn't and are tried directly to your Microsoft account and are automatically validated by Windows.

It means the desktop apps get to keep their payment model, they don't have to give Microsoft a 30% share, don't have to recode anything, but they still get listed in the store.

I prefer this way actually and I'm sure many developers do too. It's free advertising for them, and they don't have to pay MS anything. The downside is they are responsible for handling the payments, the software delivery etc.

Again I never thought i'd find myself saying this but Apple's approach to this matter makes more sense. You can buy, install, and update desktop apps from their app store.

Didn't Apple just change their Store to be like the Windows one in this regard? (i.e. you can only install sandboxed apps now, same as Windows Store)

Didn't Apple just change their Store to be like the Windows one in this regard? (i.e. you can only install sandboxed apps now, same as Windows Store)

Don't know. But you can still distribute desktop apps through their store, even if it is only sandboxed apps they're still fully functional as desktop apps, whereas you're still limited to RT apps on the Microsoft store so they're not the same.

Why would Microsoft host the files for apps not developed for Metro, if Microsoft just added a straight download link to the file then the developers would complain that their websites aren't getting traffic etc and they need to sell adverts to help fund the bandwidth costs.

It's a way to advertise good desktop applications and lead people to the correct location instead of using Google where results are not filtered and people end up downloading viruses, junk and so on.

Don't know. But you can still distribute desktop apps through their store, even if it is only sandboxed apps they're still fully functional as desktop apps, whereas you're still limited to RT apps on the Microsoft store so they're not the same.

What does "fully functional" mean in this context? Do you just mean being able to run in windowed mode with arbitrary window sizes?

What does "fully functional" mean in this context? Do you just mean being able to run in windowed mode with arbitrary window sizes?

No, I mean they're able to actually run as desktop apps. The design paradigms are far less restrictive and developers can use their own UI functions and menu layouts.

The MS store is there to advertise apps first and foremost, distribution and management are limited to metro apps because of the way they're coded and sandboxed and will just run without issue, mostly anyways. Desktop apps, well known ones like the stuff Adobe sells for example IS sold, distributed and managed by them directly. They DON'T want to change this and MS ISN'T going to force them to change this just to list their app in the store. How is this such a bad thing? If MS did force it and tried to take away the developers control of their desktop apps and also want a cut of it like with metro apps you'd lot would also turn around and go crazy over that as well.

Some of you will never be happy with anything MS does, I'm kinda glad they've stopped, to an extent on trying to please as many people as they can now. It's just not working anyways.

No, I mean they're able to actually run as desktop apps. The design paradigms are far less restrictive and developers can use their own UI functions and menu layouts.

I don't understand. What would prevent developers from implementing whatever "UI functions" and menu layouts they want?

imo this is just Microsoft punting on the question of what a modern desktop app should be. They don't want to offer fulfillment through the store until they can guarantee things like modern API usage (WinRT), controlled backgrounding (PLM), isolation (AppContainer) and declarative install/uninstall (AppX), however it is much easier to implement and enforce these in a new environment with very limited interaction with the existing desktop than it would be to bring them to the existing environment (or to implement all features of the existing environment such as arbitrary windowing in the new environment, again without sacrificing the nice properties they want the new environment to have). Then there's the question of how existing desktop apps and code could be adapted to whatever the new standard is, or are they going to introduce yet another desktop framework (after Win32, MFC, WinForms, WPF, Silverlight OOB ...) and expect everyone to rewrite their apps yet again? Eventually they will have to figure something out though ... maybe new advances in lightweight virtualization could help.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!