Editorial

Notch: Don't be a hypocrite about Minecraft and Windows 8

An open letter to Markus "Notch" Persson:

Dear Notch

Let me start out this note by saying I am a huge admirer of yours. You came up with a game, Minecraft, and almost single-handedly it has caught on like no other PC game before or since. The sandbox adventure game is still selling thousands of copies, via download, per day on the PC and has racked up 7.5 million paid PC downloads so far.

Once more, the game is a true "indie" title; it has a unique look and gameplay that is not "commercial" by any means. Yet, it's so addicting that Minecraft creations made by others still astound me and others on the Internet.

That said, I was shocked to learn about your feelings toward Windows 8 today. It came from your own Twitter account when you stated, "Got an email from microsoft, wanting to help 'certify" minecraft for win 8. I told them to stop trying to ruin the pc as an open platform." Then you posted a follow up, saying, "I'd rather have minecraft not run on win 8 at all than to play along. Maybe we can convince a few people not to switch to win 8 that way."

Look, there's no doubt that Windows 8 is a major change for Microsoft's PC OS. We can debate about the pros and cons about the Metro Modern UI until the cows come home. That's fine. But to say that you don't want to see Windows 8 run Minecraft at all seems, at least to me, to be a massive over reaction to the OS and its features.

Windows 8 is just as open as it has been. Microsoft is still letting developers make programs that can be run on the desktop UI with no need for a Windows Store or certification to have them published. That isn't changing. It's kind of like objecting to buying a new car because it has an option to run diesel fuel as well as regular gasoline.

Let's not forget the fact that Microsoft has tried to launch its own direct download game store in the past with Games for Windows Live. Yes, it was, and still is, horrible, but that feature didn't stop you from launching Minecraft on the PC.

Your views might be more understandable if the PC version of Minecraft was the only one available. But that isn't the case at all. You and other team members have been happy to port Minecraft to other platforms, including Android, iOS and the Xbox 360.

Apple is pretty much the king of the closed PC platforms. This is the company that won't let anyone else make Mac PCs. Yet, Microsoft is still going to allow anyone who wants to build a PC from scratch a way to get an OEM copy of Windows 8. You have a very successful version of Minecraft on the Mac and iOS platforms. You didn't have a problem with Apple's closed systems policy when you launched the iOS or Mac versions.

And let's not forget the Xbox 360 version, which you admitted has already sold millions of copies since it launched earlier this year. Microsoft controls everything on the Xbox dashboard, but you were more than happy to offer up a port of Minecraft for the console. Let's not forget that Microsoft likely gets a nice percentage from every copy of Minecraft sold on the Xbox 360.

Windows 8, even with the Metro Modern UI and the Windows Store, is still the second most open platform there is for Minecraft (Linux is technically the most open). I have no problems with you debating what works and what doesn't in Windows 8 itself. But saying you don't want Minecraft to run on Windows 8 because of an "open platform" issue just doesn't make any sense.

At best, your attitude sounds like someone who is afraid of anything "new". At worst, your words make you look like a total hypocrite when you and your team at Mojang have benefited greatly from having Minecraft sold on closed platforms like iOS and the Xbox 360.

You need to explain your viewpoints on Windows 8 more clearly. At the moment, your opinions are in direct contradiction to your actions.

Sincerely and with the most respect:

John

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

RIM records losses; entry level BlackBerry 10 phone coming?

Next Story

Adobe cryptographic key recalled after compromise

141 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Notch very clearly stated that he'd wouldn't certify MineCraft even if it meant MineCraft would not be able to work on Windows 8 He did not say that he'd intentionally make MineCraft not work for Windows 8 in protest.

Interpretation makes an ass out of you and.. well, just you.

"It's kind of like objecting to buying a new car because it has an option to run diesel fuel as well as regular gasoline."

I suppose it is, yes. But the annoyance comes when every time you step in to your car to drive somewhere, you have to look for the "switch to diesel" button because each time it's forced back to gasoline, just because you wish to push gasoline onto the driver.

"It's kind of like objecting to buying a new car because it has an option to run diesel fuel as well as regular gasoline."
Let me change that metaphor for you, as it doesn't remark the crucial difference between the program-system in Win 7 and the app-system in Win 8.

Let's say that the only used fuel for cars is electricity, and that there's a new fuel coming up, called gasoline:
"It's kind of like objecting to buying a new car because it has an option to run gasoline as well as regular electricity." - There's a correct metaphor. Yours is only misleading.
As gasoline is more powerful and lasts longer, more people will probably choose it rather than electricity, but that doesn't mean that choosing gasoline is a good thing!

Is everyone forgetting that Modern UI apps have no way of using OpenGL? Even if Notch was ok with certifying Minecraft for the Windows Store, large parts of the code would have to be rewritten to make use of Direct3D. It's not worth the effort making another port of the game when the desktop version can be used.

So many of you have obviously not used Windows 8. Both Notch and Gabe Newell are both full or *********. Win8 isn't locked down in any way. Metro Apps are in no way required to be used, and games install and run just as they always have. The windows store includes links to the developer's website so that you can download and install the game, even though it is not a Windows Store game in a technical sense. And if you don't want your game in the Windows Store? Fine, you don't have to make it available there! It will still work just fine on Windows 8. How in the hell is that locked down? It is just as wide open as it always has been. The Windows store is just another way for people to find your product. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Kinda Farty said,
So many of you have obviously not used Windows 8. Both Notch and Gabe Newell are both full or *********. Win8 isn't locked down in any way. Metro Apps are in no way required to be used, and games install and run just as they always have. The windows store includes links to the developer's website so that you can download and install the game, even though it is not a Windows Store game in a technical sense. And if you don't want your game in the Windows Store? Fine, you don't have to make it available there! It will still work just fine on Windows 8. How in the hell is that locked down? It is just as wide open as it always has been. The Windows store is just another way for people to find your product. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Maybe if you took your blinders off you'd be able to see the incoming storm... ya know? LONG TERM consequences? Na! Who cares about that?

This is generation ME! It's all about the NOW! Woot!

rpsgc said,
Maybe if you took your blinders off you'd be able to see the incoming storm... ya know? LONG TERM consequences? Na! Who cares about that?

And which magic 8 ball is telling you that Microsoft is going to kill of the ability of Windows to run Windows software exactly?

Kinda Farty said,
So many of you have obviously not used Windows 8. Both Notch and Gabe Newell are both full or *********. Win8 isn't locked down in any way. Metro Apps are in no way required to be used, and games install and run just as they always have. The windows store includes links to the developer's website so that you can download and install the game, even though it is not a Windows Store game in a technical sense. And if you don't want your game in the Windows Store? Fine, you don't have to make it available there! It will still work just fine on Windows 8. How in the hell is that locked down? It is just as wide open as it always has been. The Windows store is just another way for people to find your product. If you don't like it, don't use it.

Actually, Windows 8 does intentionally inconvenience you if you refuse to use their Modern UI and its apps and is pulling features to try to lead people toward using the dumbed down new interface compared to the old desktop.

On top of that, it inconveniences Desktop users as Windows 8 is tablet optimized, not desktop optimized. The Modern UI is optimized only for tablet interface while leaving mouse users with much more work to do that before (and the extra layer of clicking really does add up) and since we are strategically led to use the Modern UI, it is a second inconvenience as well.

Why do we need to put a tablet OS and a desktop OS into one? Why not just let Desktop users be desktop users?

I can tell you for one that know that many games are starting to support the Mac OS and that they can still tell the difference between a desktop machine and a tablet, I am very close to changing op systems on my machine.

Also, if you think it's a bunch of cynical BS, then you really don't understand business. Sorry, there just isn't much else to say than that. If someone can't comprehend 2+2, are you supposed to try to teach them trigonometry?

I like that attitude, even if people think he's a hypocrite.

Windows 8 has a bigger backlash than Vista, and Vista was NOWHERE near as bad as people made it out to be. (I'd know, I've been using it since I upgraded to a DX10 system after its release) Windows 8 is a terrible OS for desktops. I doubt Microsoft will learn from this at all. I expect them to combine even more features into Windows 9 to work on even more devices.

For me, Vista is the last good semi-stock OS. 7 is manageable with a lot of UI modding to reverse the completely illogical and pointless decisions made from Vista to 7.

I still have to go back to Windows XP to run classic games properly with full hardware acceleration anyway. Sometimes ALchemy is more trouble than its worth. In that way, Windows XP was the last great OS.

DAOWAce said,
I like that attitude, even if people think he's a hypocrite.

Windows 8 has a bigger backlash than Vista, and Vista was NOWHERE near as bad as people made it out to be. (I'd know, I've been using it since I upgraded to a DX10 system after its release) Windows 8 is a terrible OS for desktops. I doubt Microsoft will learn from this at all. I expect them to combine even more features into Windows 9 to work on even more devices.

For me, Vista is the last good semi-stock OS. 7 is manageable with a lot of UI modding to reverse the completely illogical and pointless decisions made from Vista to 7.

I still have to go back to Windows XP to run classic games properly with full hardware acceleration anyway. Sometimes ALchemy is more trouble than its worth. In that way, Windows XP was the last great OS.

Vista was fun but unstable, that is the seed for the, I would say justified, backlash it got. Vista is to Windows 7 is Windows 8 will be to Windows 9. Honestly, I'm starting to expect Microsoft to just release prototype systems now. I'm getting into the habit of skipping every other generation of Windows operating systems. Windows 9 will probably be a hell of a lot of fun.

DAOWAce said,
I like that attitude, even if people think he's a hypocrite.

Windows 8 has a bigger backlash than Vista, and Vista was NOWHERE near as bad as people made it out to be. (I'd know, I've been using it since I upgraded to a DX10 system after its release) Windows 8 is a terrible OS for desktops. I doubt Microsoft will learn from this at all. I expect them to combine even more features into Windows 9 to work on even more devices.

For me, Vista is the last good semi-stock OS. 7 is manageable with a lot of UI modding to reverse the completely illogical and pointless decisions made from Vista to 7.

I still have to go back to Windows XP to run classic games properly with full hardware acceleration anyway. Sometimes ALchemy is more trouble than its worth. In that way, Windows XP was the last great OS.

Also, I should add that I'm running games from the 80's on Windows 7 just fine with no compatibility errors and no need to go back into XP. Windows 7 does actually have an abundance of compatibility features, it just sometimes takes getting your hands dirty to get them to work.

AFAIK, Minecraft is made in Java and Microsoft said "Hey yo, i hate java, f*ck java, so go ahead, spend your time and build it from scratch".

Brony said,
AFAIK, Minecraft is made in Java and Microsoft said "Hey yo, i hate java, f*ck java, so go ahead, spend your time and build it from scratch".

It's been ported to the Xbox 360 and iOS already - both of which I believe do not offer a Java Runtime or VM to execute applications / code in.
Porting from Xbox 360 to PC via Visual Studio these days is a bit time consuming if you never planned to go that route but actually quite easy.

Aergan said,

It's been ported to the Xbox 360 and iOS already - both of which I believe do not offer a Java Runtime or VM to execute applications / code in.
Porting from Xbox 360 to PC via Visual Studio these days is a bit time consuming if you never planned to go that route but actually quite easy.

Java should never lose support - it is a still heavily relied on language. That being said, I don't know where these claims of Microsoft abandoning Java come from. Also, I would prefer Microsoft or any game to not be wrote in VB.

Porting is a long process and would cost Mojang money as well as aggravate their fanbase significantly. They're already.. I should say we're already.. ****y about how long the updates take now. If you want to use the 360 as an example, remember that the Xbox version of MineCraft is at BETA 1.8 and MineCraft for the PC is hitting 1.4 FULL (if you didn't bother to count, that is 6 updates, 2 being "Major" by Mojang's definition).

Guys guys...He is just trying to act cool and gain attention.

Once Windows 8 (and Windows RT) will have huge market share, he will come back from sky and certify for W8...even port for Windows RT. Just like he did for iOS, xBox etc. Even the ********* attention (you-know-what) will agree to whatever required when it comes to money. RIght now his money is in gaining more attention.

Crimson Rain said,
Guys guys...He is just trying to act cool and gain attention.

Once Windows 8 (and Windows RT) will have huge market share, he will come back from sky and certify for W8...even port for Windows RT. Just like he did for iOS, xBox etc. Even the ********* attention (you-know-what) will agree to whatever required when it comes to money. RIght now his money is in gaining more attention.

. . . What? Do you even know what this subject is about? Have you read the source material to this article and actually fully read this article?

The Xbox and phone ports of MineCraft were planned for a considerably long time, there wasn't any "certify" BS about it. And, taking a quote from a recent response to this article, "I have never once said I don't like closed platforms. I have quite a few of them laying around my house, and I love most of them." Your argument is rather uninformed. The point is that those kind of systems are fine, they were designed to be closed platforms and for good reason. He's stating that he doesn't want to the PC, an already open platform, to be led into a closed platform for bad reason.

This isn't a great article when you ruin the argument he's rooting for. Open. So open is on Android and Xbox360. So? You just made the case why he's against Windows 8. Smart Android and Linux are still going to be more open than a tablet OS trying to run on a desktop or laptop.) Xbox 360. bleh. it's not a PC, but up to him to put it on one. Console Games aren't PC's. Apple is a PC. Hoping for the best from Windows 8 but it's still a tablet OS. It's really great as a tablet OS. But turning out two tablet OS 's at the same time 8 and Surface is gonna get confusing.

OK... let's take a step back... everyone put down the pitchforks and torches for a second

Let's bring everyone up to speed on what the issue is and the misconceptions around it.

The issue is Developers fear the "signing" of Modern/Metro Applications so they can be made available for sale on the Windows store.
So let's look at it from the developers' point of view and then the Microsoft point of view. Lastly the customers point of view!

Developers:
How do I write software and make money? Not sure how many people write software for free, if that's you--> We Love you! But most people and companies like to get paid. So you can develop a software program and then try to sell it. So you try to sell it, market it, get a cool web site promoting it . People buy it and you make money. Basic model.

So if you write software for Windows, and you should because you can sell it to a very big customer base!

In Windows 7 and earlier you need to program your software a certain way that is recommended. It must adhere to the registry entries rules, and must provide information about the program and also a clean un-install solution. If you don't do these things it's frowned upon. Plus your customer will think your software sucks and not buy it, buy the next release, or ask for their money back.

In Windows 8 you have a new option! You can advertise your software in the windows store. But the store listing will enforce more controls on your software. and if you don't comply Microsoft will not say your software if Microsoft certified. So if you do what they ask you get certified. If you are certified then your software gets access to call certain functions of the OS to do things, secure things, but it's OK because there has been a code review and you have been deemed not to me a malicious coder! Your app goes up on the windows store and is available to many new customers for sale! More than you reached before!

Microsoft:
Microsoft is looking at making money! Always has, and always will. But they also take a lot of heat from users because everyone thinks Windows is not secure. So they need to fix the security of windows. Stop the hijacks, and Trojans, and malware, and fake antivirus apps from screwing everyone's PCs. Why? So will they buy more software. Simple business. Keep your customers happy. So you say, “Well then by a MAC”, Funny you say that....I'll get to that later. The reason Microsoft is trying to "Validate" software that goes on up for sale on the Windows store is to make sure it's not malware. If the app is good, and is not malware, they "certify" it with Microsoft's stamp of approval for sale, and install on Windows 8. The code is OK so it has access to secure system calls. So this protects its customers from crap software and viruses, malware and the likes.
But they have to be backward compatible too. So you can install all your normal apps, even the malware ones as well. Because we love software with malware payloads so much You can by all means install anything you want on Windows 8, but you will be warned that it's not certified by Microsoft and you should be aware of what you are doing and installing, because once you say OK to install, the app will have access to secure system calls.

Customer (you):
So if you are a windows user, and are plagued with malware and viruses and crap ware screwing up your computer, then Windows 8 might be for you! You can install app only from the Windows store and know your computer is safe from malware. Sounds like a good guarantee! Especially to non technical users who don't know any better. Like your parents who call you to fix their computers every 3 days.
So the purpose of the windows store is to provide a "closed" system to malware. If you choose to go that route you can only install from the windows store and have the confidence that what you are installing is good software and you will not have to worry.
Sound familiar? Yes! It's Apple's model!
Apple verifies all IOS apps for sale and installs on IOS devices.
Stop! I see you squirming and about to complain!!! Windows RT. Windows RT is different from Windows 8. RT is for devices such as phones, and tablets. You really don't want your phone to get screwed up with malware! That's why everyone likes the iPhone and iPad. You can have a phone or Tablet and run apps and not worry about malware and crashes. It's the same logic with Windows Phones and tablets. To protect the user and user experience, you need to secure the device to insure they will work when the customer needs it to work. Which they need it to work always, 24x7!

So what did we learn today class:

1. So Windows 8 is for PCs, Windows RT is for devices.

2. Just as OSX is for Apple PCs and IOS is for devices.

3. This all boils down to better user experience by putting controls in place to stop malware from running rampant and improve security! If there anyone who will disagree with that?

4. Windows 8 will run ALL apps. With or without the windows store!

5. Developers can certify there app and pay a fee to get it certified and listed, but it has to be money well spent because will be advertised your software to every Windows 8 and windows RT customer.

6. But the developers can still write software and sell it the normal way. It will install and work fine. But customers will be warned it's not Microsoft certified. Remember… This is a good thing!

7. All you techno heads can still do what you do in Windows 8. For you know what you are installing and can continue to do so in Windows 8.

8. Windows RT is closed to protect the device! Good thing!!!

9. I cannot stand removing malware and fake antivirus apps!!!


So back to your question, "Well just buy and Mac”. This is why Apples are perceived as not prone to viruses, because they are protected by the Apple APP Store by Apple "certifying" apps with their stamp of approval.

So let's all agree that this is a GOOD step forward to providing better protection to our PCs, Apples, iPhones, iPads, Microsoft phones and tablets!

This editorial doesn't make sense at all.
First of all there is a difference between trying to open an already closed platform and trying to keep a currently open platform from closing. Notch is not setting out to try and change how the PC, Xbox, or mobile platforms work, quite the opposite he's resisting Microsoft's attempt to change how the PC platform works. Now you may agree or disagree with his stand on that but it is NOT being a hypocrite as your title so boldly claims.

Second Minecraft is going to work and be supported on Windows 8 in desktop mode just as every app that runs on Windows 7 is so that's not an issue. When Notch said "I'd rather have minecraft not run on win 8 at all than to play along." it's clear what he's saying is that if he HAD to get Minecraft certified (what he calls "play along") for Windows 8 in order for it to work there then he'd rather just not have it work there at all. Again though it is NOT that case that you HAVE to have your app certified and Minecraft will work just fine on Windows 8 in desktop mode. It was a bit of hyperbole intended to demonstrate his opposition to Windows 8 certification and by extension the Windows Store model for which it is required. I find it somewhat ironic that this hyperbole went right over your head and then you spend time saying how much of an overreaction his statement was which is in fact an overreaction on your part to his hyperbole.

I suspect many developers are going to ignore certification, the Windows Store, and metro in protest of Microsoft's attempt to close the PC platform. No PC developer in their right mind is going to refuse to support Windows 8 DESKTOP mode. In fact it is critical for them to make sure users continue to want Apps that require Desktop mode so MS can't drop it in future versions. Really they aren't against Windows 8 so much as for Desktop mode and against Windows Store/Metro. As Windows Store/Metro are some of the main reasons to get Windows 8 though I'm sure they'd rather people just stick with Windows 7. This is why he says "Maybe we can convince a few people not to switch to win 8 that way." but everyone realizes people are going to switch, heck at some point you won't be able to buy a PC from Dell, HP, etc. without Windows 8 on it so Minecraft WILL support Windows 8 DESKTOP mode.

Sorry... Minecraft is not a utility or government agency but at the moment is a privately owned game [the dev has published that someday it'll be open source or in the public domain]. And since Minecraft is private property, its owner has every right to do with it whatever he pleases, just like anyone has the right to do pretty much anything they want with the stuff they own. Anyone can disagree with something someone says or does, but unless they hurt public safety or someone's rights that's all you can do, disagree. You can indulge in personal attacks, John, since it's just a childish way of voicing your disagreement, but you can't really demand anything & expect results, even if your demand is only for an explanation.

Now Persson [Notch] has decided to act on something he believes, in a way that some people will notice -- in that respect he's no different from any advocacy group or organization, from the occupy demonstrations, from Neowin itself when it joined in protesting SOPA. Right or wrong, that itself is an honorable act, standing up for what you believe in, even -- especially when -- it's going to cause you some pain.

That said, if any app/game runs in win7, odds are overwhelming that it'll run in win8 as-is, so I'm uncertain whether the complaint is Minecraft won't be a Windows Store game, or if the complaint is more along the lines of "How dare you diss win8?" It doesn't seem certain whether this editorial is intended as a provocative statement to generate traffic, or really is an open letter intended to persuade.

*If* your goal is to persuade, perhaps a better approach would be to organize a mass plea, be it an e-mail or Twitter campaign or some sort of petition. If your goal is to debate win8, perhaps stating why you feel win8 is so open would be a good place to start. If you want to genuinely protest, or just generate traffic, I'd humbly suggest a stand of your own, perhaps a boycott? If it's something you really believe in, you're willing to put up with a bit of pain, right?

How is Notch being hypocritical? He said stop trying to ruin the PC as an open platform. How does selling on platforms which have ALWAYS been closed contradict his stance on a platform that has ALWAYS been open, starting to close?

All those Microsoft sponsorship dollars can't buy a little bit of critical thinking, it seems.

lolwut33 said,
How is Notch being hypocritical? He said stop trying to ruin the PC as an open platform. How does selling on platforms which have ALWAYS been closed contradict his stance on a platform that has ALWAYS been open, starting to close?

All those Microsoft sponsorship dollars can't buy a little bit of critical thinking, it seems.

And just how, exactly, is Win8 ruining the PC as an open platform? Name just one thing that you can do on windows 7 and not Windows 8, in regards to the platform being "closed."

Kinda Farty said,

And just how, exactly, is Win8 ruining the PC as an open platform? Name just one thing that you can do on windows 7 and not Windows 8, in regards to the platform being "closed."

Rome wasn't built in a day.

Microsoft isn't stupid to change it overnight... but then again, reading some of these comments I see most people wouldn't see that change even if it bit them in their behinds.

""But obviously he knows something about the inside of that process YOU DO NOT""

Ok, why the big secret?
What does he know?

It's like telling someone you hate their guts and not telling them why. I guess you don't have to tell them why, but don't expect them to not be confused.

Why not take away our confusion? Alternatively, he could just be Nick Burns the company computer guy, and call everyone idiots for not knowing everything he knows, which is kind of what it seems like at the moment.

the author of this article and those who agree with the author have totally missed the point while presenting it beautifully.

Yes, Minecraft HAS been made to run on closed systems such as Apple and Xbox. Yes, he CAN work with those systems. But obviously he knows something about the inside of that process YOU DO NOT. In fact, he clearly finds the process so awful that he has no desire to voluntarilly jump through another set of arbitrary hoops just to meet someone else's artificial rules. He prefers the OPEN market concept where he makes an app, he sells it, you buy it and not have to jump through an additional pile of technical hurdles that have nothing to do with the product and everything to do with the store itself.

And who can blame him? He already knows apple's bs, and he clearly knows all about Microsoft's BS and wants no part of it.

Who are you to say any different, in particular since none of you have had to go through the process itself.

Great posting fanboi! Lets recap... Windows 8 is great. Apple sucks. Xbox 360 is a closed system too so why support that. Yup that sums it up.

For everyone who is speaking out against Notch, I wish I had the time to go through their posting history to see if they bashed Apple for its Mac App Store and Gatekeeper. Since we're talking about hypocrisy and all...

Certification requires locking down the executables (removing the possibly of modding in minecrafts case) as well as forcing minecraft to be bundled with its own installation of java (to be stand alone) which would add 120mb to the install... I can kinda see why he didn't.

Personally I don't like the idea of having to pay $500+ a year for a "Authenticode certificates" in order to be allowed to sell/provide apps via the windows store. All this really does is price small/free apps out of the metro apps market. Sure they can exist on the desktop - for now. But will we even still have one by windows 9?

TL;DR: I think notch is doing the right thing

Bag said,
Certification requires locking down the executables (removing the possibly of modding in minecrafts case)...
Not true - having a locked down executable does not prevent modding.

Bag said,
Personally I don't like the idea of having to pay $500+ a year for a Authenticode certificates" in order to be allowed to sell/provide apps via the windows store
It's a good job that it doesn't cost $500/year then!

Bag said,
Sure they can exist on the desktop - for now. But will we even still have one by windows 9?
Yes we will. Microsoft have a history of focussing heavily on backwards compatibility. To think they will be getting rid of the desktop any time soon is hopelessly naive.

Jazirian said,
Not true - having a locked down executable does not prevent modding.

I haven't tried to do any modding in Minecraft in a long time, but when I was tinkering around with mods in Minecraft, it did require physically editing the main .jar file.

Condere said,

I haven't tried to do any modding in Minecraft in a long time, but when I was tinkering around with mods in Minecraft, it did require physically editing the main .jar file.


Indeed, this is correct. Not quite sure why Jazirian feels quite so personally attacked by me mentioning this o.0

Bag said,
All this really does is price small/free apps out of the metro apps market. Sure they can exist on the desktop - for now. But will we even still have one by windows 9?

The 2 reasons for MS to have an app store are 1) to make money, & 2) to prevent some other company, e.g. Apple, Amazon, Google, from making that same bit of coin. I'm Not saying anything bad, or good 'bout the folks at Microsoft, but they haven't set up their app store just to be nice.

But those other platforms (iOS and XBox etc) have ALWAYS been closed platforms. They haven't changed. However Windows is going from being wide open to being maybe not quite so wide open. Sure Win8 is a long way from being closed, but lets not forget that a journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step.

Slugsie said,
But those other platforms (iOS and XBox etc) have ALWAYS been closed platforms. They haven't changed. However Windows is going from being wide open to being maybe not quite so wide open. Sure Win8 is a long way from being closed, but lets not forget that a journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step.

Bandwagons don't require logic and long term thinking. Just blind hatred and blinders.

I think you missed the hidden context of Notch's tweet, John. What he meant by an "open platform", I'm sure, is because of Secure Boot and the Windows 8 "walled-garden" which hinders the ability to boot any non-certified OS on the system Windows 8 comes pre-loaded on. This in turn cuts off an entire market of Linux users to use any hardware that Windows 8 comes installed on without a signed certificate from Microsoft which is used in the bootloader.

This in my personal opinion is the nature of the tweet, but may also encompass other aspects that you talk about in your article, though you don't make a single mention about Secure Boot and how windows 8 is an open-closed ecosystem.

Think of it like this: The hardware of a computer today is pretty much free game to run andy version of Windows (Win XP or higher) and virtually any version of Linux with supported Kernel and drivers. You take that away by having Secure Boot and only being able to boot into Windows 8 and BAM! You've created a beautiful walled-garden of the OS that is "open" on the inside, but blocks everything (Linux) out.

brandonb927 said,
I think you missed the hidden context of Notch's tweet, John. What he meant by an "open platform", I'm sure, is because of Secure Boot and the Windows 8 "walled-garden" which hinders the ability to boot any non-certified OS on the system Windows 8 comes pre-loaded on.

If Notch wanted to complain about Secure Boot, what's stopping him from stating that directly? If you're going to start looking for hidden meanings, first consider the impact to his wallet.

brandonb927 said,
What he meant by an "open platform", I'm sure, is because of Secure Boot and the Windows 8 "walled-garden" which hinders the ability to boot any non-certified OS on the system Windows 8 comes pre-loaded on.
Secure Boot is enabled out of the box, yes, but the manufacturer is required to include a setting for disabling it. Everyday users benefit from increased protection, while power users have full backwards compatibility just a few key presses away. Everybody wins.

brandonb927 said,
I think you missed the hidden context of Notch's tweet, John. What he meant by an "open platform", I'm sure, is because of Secure Boot and the Windows 8 "walled-garden" which hinders the ability to boot any non-certified OS on the system Windows 8 comes pre-loaded on. This in turn cuts off an entire market of Linux users to use any hardware that Windows 8 comes installed on without a signed certificate from Microsoft which is used in the bootloader.

This in my personal opinion is the nature of the tweet, but may also encompass other aspects that you talk about in your article, though you don't make a single mention about Secure Boot and how windows 8 is an open-closed ecosystem.

Think of it like this: The hardware of a computer today is pretty much free game to run andy version of Windows (Win XP or higher) and virtually any version of Linux with supported Kernel and drivers. You take that away by having Secure Boot and only being able to boot into Windows 8 and BAM! You've created a beautiful walled-garden of the OS that is "open" on the inside, but blocks everything (Linux) out.


And the implementation of secure boot is entirely up to the system builder. It is not forced upon the PC by Windows 8.

brandonb927 said,
I think you missed the hidden context of Notch's tweet, John. What he meant by an "open platform", I'm sure, is because of Secure Boot and the Windows 8 "walled-garden" which hinders the ability to boot any non-certified OS on the system Windows 8 comes pre-loaded on. This in turn cuts off an entire market of Linux users to use any hardware that Windows 8 comes installed on without a signed certificate from Microsoft which is used in the bootloader.

YAWN. This old crap? My Asus motherboard has a UEFI with Secure Boot. And guess what? I can easily disable it and install any other OS i want. This is the same for other PC makers and upcoming Win 8 PC's. Alternatively i can enter another Secure Boot key for any other OS that chooses to support Secure Boot. Some Linux distros are already getting keys for the feature.

Lastly, Secure Boot isn't something from Microsoft. It's a standardised UEFI feature that has been created by multiple companies! And MS have simply chosen to support it in their latest OS.

This whole thing is not an issue and people like you don't know what you're talking about.

You idiots don't even know what he's complaining about and are trying to knock him.

Hows this, go read on code signing that Microsoft is pushing into ALL applications for Windows 8, look up the developer fee's and code signature fee's, then look at the Windows store fee's, and then break it down to a Minecraft standard where the executable is upgraded regularly and would have to be sent to Microsoft to be code signed EVERY time and approved for Windows 8 Desktop App Certification (NO THATS NOT FOR METRO).

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...e-signing-certificates.aspx

Kelxin said,
You idiots don't even know what he's complaining about and are trying to knock him.

Hows this, go read on code signing that Microsoft is pushing into ALL applications for Windows 8, look up the developer fee's and code signature fee's, then look at the Windows store fee's, and then break it down to a Minecraft standard where the executable is upgraded regularly and would have to be sent to Microsoft to be code signed EVERY time and approved for Windows 8 Desktop App Certification (NO THATS NOT FOR METRO).

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...e-signing-certificates.aspx

Yeah i'm sure if devs can make loads of money from 0,79 quid apps than poor-poor Notch cannot - Minecraft is 1600MSP on XBLA, $27 for PC, that's NOT a low priced little app for either platform (i don't know the pricing of iOS app) so i won't shed tears for him; Minecraft leads XBLA sales for i don't know how long.

And putting product on Store is not required. If he doesn't want to he doesn't need to (yeah, like he'll ditch an entire tablet market... now THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN) but bitching about freedom of the platform when your only interest is clearly your own (wich i have no problem with but wrapping it in freedomfighting, now that's the definition of hipocrisy) is not cool.

FloatingFatMan said,
Should he try to deliberately prevent Minecraft from running on Windows 8, I will be demanding a full refund for the 4 copies I bought.

i doubt you'd get it.

Thinking that the Store closes down the PC as a platform is at least idiotic. Wanting to install metro apps from unverified sources is another one.

The alternative is always there, you can install a desktop app and STFU. While the Store is a controlled and secure environment and honestly, the benefits of easy visibility and targeted promotion far outweight the small percentage of lost income per sale for a developer - one that made money out of XBLA should know this.

If Notch would be some indie trying to get along by self-promotion i'd say yay, stupid hippie got a point but he's a guy who MAKES HIS LIVING off closed platforms so yes, hippocrite is right on spot.

Just join the line or be left out. TBH i think his opinion has been bought - won't be the first time (for example Carmack was a whore too).

morden said,
Thinking that the Store closes down the PC as a platform is at least idiotic. Wanting to install metro apps from unverified sources is another one.

People should be able to use their computer as they see fit - even Android supports the installing of non-signed apps from competing stores. And while traditional .exe applications are still supported if the Windows Store takes over then Microsoft will be under pressure to start adding restrictions or stop it altogether. Microsoft already did that with Windows RT, dropping support by claiming it's a different architecture (despite the fact they have a history of building architecture emulation).

morden said,
The alternative is always there, you can install a desktop app and STFU.

Until when? Windows 9? Maybe Windows 10? Notch is looking at the big picture.

morden said,
While the Store is a controlled and secure environment and honestly, the benefits of easy visibility and targeted promotion far outweight the small percentage of lost income per sale for a developer - one that made money out of XBLA should know this.

And what about all the restrictions Microsoft places on certification? Some developers have refused to release simple patches because it would cost tens of thousands of dollars to fix, even though they know exactly what is wrong.

morden said,
If Notch would be some indie trying to get along by self-promotion i'd say yay, stupid hippie got a point but he's a guy who MAKES HIS LIVING off closed platforms so yes, hippocrite is right on spot.

His success is in a large part due the the open nature of the Windows platform; he then later moved onto closed platforms. However, it's not hypocritical to support a closed platform (like a console) but want an already open platform to remain open.

theyarecomingforyou said,
And while traditional .exe applications are still supported if the Windows Store takes over then Microsoft will be under pressure to start adding restrictions or stop it altogether.
Until when? Windows 9? Maybe Windows 10? Notch is looking at the big picture.

So again, you're making the assumption that Microsoft is going to commit financial suicide by throwing away compatibility with millions of applications.. without a hint of proof, just maybes and fortune cookies. By that same "logic" I can deduce that since Ubuntu is starting to include advertisements right in their version of the start menu with their next version of the OS, future versions are going to be unable to remove them and it'll eventually become a closed platform so they can keep their advertisers happy, and I'm worried that other distributions will start to do the same to cover the costs since the software is free. FUD? Absolutely, and it makes about as much sense as this whole "Windows is doing away with Windows software" argument.

theyarecomingforyou said,

People should be able to use their computer as they see fit - even Android supports the installing of non-signed apps from competing stores. And while traditional .exe applications are still supported if the Windows Store takes over then Microsoft will be under pressure to start adding restrictions or stop it altogether. Microsoft already did that with Windows RT, dropping support by claiming it's a different architecture (despite the fact they have a history of building architecture emulation).

Until when? Windows 9? Maybe Windows 10? Notch is looking at the big picture.

And what about all the restrictions Microsoft places on certification? Some developers have refused to release simple patches because it would cost tens of thousands of dollars to fix, even though they know exactly what is wrong.

His success is in a large part due the the open nature of the Windows platform; he then later moved onto closed platforms. However, it's not hypocritical to support a closed platform (like a console) but want an already open platform to remain open.

what you say is completely hypothetical... Windows 8 is a fully open platform with no restrictions for installing software on your machine... yeah-yeah sure, you can blah-blah all you want about how windows 10 won't let you install minecraft in 2019

once again: i have no problems with a businessman (and yes, a developer is a businessman, don't give me the creative artsy hippie crap about freedomfighting indies, Minecraft is very far from the little indie stuff) defending his interests and profit but he should know about profiting on closed platforms so i'm sure THAT'S NOT IT

as far as i'm concerned this guy is another media whore whose opinion has been bought as it happened with quite a few devs like carmack

Indie developer making bank off of closed platforms (iOS/XBL) condemns closed platforms as being harmful to Indie developers.

Isn't Notch's success a complete contradiction to everything he's claiming?

I think the main thing these devs are worried about is a potential downward spiral. Yeah everything still works outside of the Microsoft store in Windows 8....for now. What's stopping them from completely closing it down in Windows 9 or Windows 10. It's not that they're saying Oh hey it's closed off 100% right now, it's that they're saying Hey it's starting to get closed and will only get more restrictive in the future. That's just my 2 cents though.

Phantom Spaceman said,
I think the main thing these devs are worried about is a potential downward spiral. Yeah everything still works outside of the Microsoft store in Windows 8....for now. What's stopping them from completely closing it down in Windows 9 or Windows 10. It's not that they're saying Oh hey it's closed off 100% right now, it's that they're saying Hey it's starting to get closed and will only get more restrictive in the future. That's just my 2 cents though.

It is always a posibility but Notch does support platforms that already are closed off 100%. Some here agree with Notch because Windows used to be open and is becomming more closed.

Does that matter? If you are against closed platforms then you don't support them. Notch supports iOS so he isn't really against closed platforms. He loves making money on X360 and iOS.

IMO he is against Windows 8 because it means less money for him, more for Microsoft. That is his only problem with Windows 8. He just hopes Windows 8 isn't a succes so he can profit more from Windows 9. I'm sure he would act similar towards iOS if iOS alreayd wasn't 'too big too fail'.

Phantom Spaceman said,
I think the main thing these devs are worried about is a potential downward spiral. Yeah everything still works outside of the Microsoft store in Windows 8....for now. What's stopping them from completely closing it down in Windows 9 or Windows 10. It's not that they're saying Oh hey it's closed off 100% right now, it's that they're saying Hey it's starting to get closed and will only get more restrictive in the future. That's just my 2 cents though.

Technically nothing is stopping them from removing the desktop in FUTURE versions. But we are discussing Windows 8, on which this is quite clearly not the case. Financially, the chances of Micrososoft ditching the desktop are absolutely zero.

sjaak327 said,
Technically nothing is stopping them from removing the desktop in FUTURE versions. But we are discussing Windows 8, on which this is quite clearly not the case.

And technically Hitler might not have invaded Poland but the warning signs were pretty obvious.

sjaak327 said,
Financially, the chances of Micrososoft ditching the desktop are absolutely zero.

Microsoft will be taking a 20-30% cut of every program sold through the Windows Store (the only method of acquiring Metro apps). Once that becomes successful you can bet that Microsoft will want to shut out traditional Windows .exe applications, as they don't make any money from them.

The warning signs are there and people SHOULD be concerned. The only silver lining is that the EU has taken a tough stance on anti-competitive practices and would almost certainly intervene.

theyarecomingforyou said,

And technically Hitler might not have invaded Poland but the warning signs were pretty obvious.

Microsoft will be taking a 20-30% cut of every program sold through the Windows Store (the only method of acquiring Metro apps). Once that becomes successful you can bet that Microsoft will want to shut out traditional Windows .exe applications, as they don't make any money from them.

The warning signs are there and people SHOULD be concerned. The only silver lining is that the EU has taken a tough stance on anti-competitive practices and would almost certainly intervene.

Why should people be concerned, it is not like Windows is the only operating system. It is not like Adobe, Rockstar and other developers are forced to develop on Windows. There are no warning signs, there is no indication whatsoever that Microsoft intends to close down the os, and they will never, as contrary to what you seem to think the people that run Microsoft are not complete ididots. They know why Windows has this hige marketshare and I bet you they are not doing anything to jeopordise this advantage. They merely added a new api, which is clearly geared to mobile applications, following the exact same business model ALL of their mobile competitors are executing, yet all of a sudden it is a warning sign, and we should all be worried.

As to the EU, I think they cannot legally forbid Microsoft to do what all other competitors in the mobile space are doing, certainly not taking in mind the tiny market share Microsoft has in this space.

Great piece and absolutely - neutrally - right. I was thinking of trying Minecraft, but I refuse to give money to devs as hypocritical as this. Similar thing happened with the Doodle Jump devs. I'd rather give my money to nicer people.

Xabier Granja said,
Great piece and absolutely - neutrally - right. I was thinking of trying Minecraft, but I refuse to give money to devs as hypocritical as this. Similar thing happened with the Doodle Jump devs. I'd rather give my money to nicer people.

Standing up for people's right. What a jerk! /s

Xabier Granja said,
Great piece and absolutely - neutrally - right. I was thinking of trying Minecraft, but I refuse to give money to devs as hypocritical as this. Similar thing happened with the Doodle Jump devs. I'd rather give my money to nicer people.

Neutral? Neowin might have been unbiased and impartial... once. Not any more. It's more like an undercover corporate shill now.

That has become pathetically obvious over the course of the last few months.

Just the usual Neowin recipe - see what makes the chimps rattle their cages and dress it up as an 'editorial'. Then wait for the fireworks/love-in to commence.
BTW John, which newspaper did you write for previously. I mean 'Yet, it's so addicting', jeez...

I support Notch. Microsoft is making an overt attempt to turn the PC into a closed platform, which I have no interest in. One of the greatest strengths of the PC is the freedom available and without that we would have never seen the likes of Steam or something as revolutionary as Napster.

If Microsoft allowed you to download Metro apps from competing stores then I wouldn't have a problem with it but Microsoft is trying to take a cut of every program sold on the Windows platform. No thanks. Given all the previous abuses of their market position the last thing people should be doing is giving Microsoft MORE power.

theyarecomingforyou said,
I support Notch. Microsoft is making an overt attempt to turn the PC into a closed platform, which I have no interest in. One of the greatest strengths of the PC is the freedom available and without that we would have never seen the likes of Steam or something as revolutionary as Napster.

If Microsoft allowed you to download Metro apps from competing stores then I wouldn't have a problem with it but Microsoft is trying to take a cut of every program sold on the Windows platform. No thanks. Given all the previous abuses of their market position the last thing people should be doing is giving Microsoft MORE power.


This.

But ignoring valid points like these seems to be ok around here, many people agree, I don't want to take away anyone's opinion, hell no.
It's funny to see how nobody wants to understand him though.
Or how people are so unworried about this. I simply don't get it.

Before people jump at me saying I have a Mac and hence, bla bla bla.
I know OS X has an App Store.
And hell yes I do criticize that Apple is giving those apps stronger restrictions than needed and at the same time access to APIs that are otherwise not available. It's pretty much just the cloud based push notifications though afaik.
Apple is going a way less aggressive way here, now, I don't dare to say they won't tighten the grip, I actually expect them to and in that moment I will cease to buy anything from the App Store, but indeed Microsoft is starting well ahead.

Seeing how they try to make the desktop a kind of app or mode-esque thing actually fuels the fears of them making it less and less accessible or used by developers, who want to create apps that won't work in the RT environment in the same way.

Props to Notch, he's taking a bullet (probably less sales, who knows... at least it's taking a small risk) for making a statement.
Calling him a hypocrite is ignoring valid points.

People, before calling someone a hypocrite, at least do some serious thinking and trying to "get into a person's mind" and look whether there could possibly reasons to think a certain way.
Whether you agree with the outcome or not is something totally different by the way, but there is little that's so counter-productive and non-contributing to a discussion as calling someone a hypocrite just to stress your own point possibly neglecting valid concerns, that deserve to at least be asked and addressed.

*sigh*
But black/white thinking gets more likes as you can tell from the comments section...

GS:mac

theyarecomingforyou said,
I support Notch. Microsoft is making an overt attempt to turn the PC into a closed platform, which I have no interest in. One of the greatest strengths of the PC is the freedom available and without that we would have never seen the likes of Steam or something as revolutionary as Napster.

If Microsoft allowed you to download Metro apps from competing stores then I wouldn't have a problem with it but Microsoft is trying to take a cut of every program sold on the Windows platform. No thanks. Given all the previous abuses of their market position the last thing people should be doing is giving Microsoft MORE power.


Yeah too bad Metro apps aren't the only apps that can run on Windows (Non-RT). .exes will continue exist and will run just fine far far far into the future.

If you're using Windows RT then yes the only ones available are Metro apps, but just like the iPad and that sells more than well enough.

-Razorfold said,

Yeah too bad Metro apps aren't the only apps that can run on Windows (Non-RT). .exes will continue exist and will run just fine far far far into the future.

Absolutely, but if the Windows Store takes off in a big way then it's entirely possible that Microsoft will drop traditional .exe support. It will probably be done in a subtle way, by claiming that they're a security risk or that it's too much trouble maintaining support for APIs people barely use - we've already seen the start of that with Windows RT, the excuse being that it uses a different architecture. They could have included a processor emulator but they chose not to.

-Razorfold said,
If you're using Windows RT then yes the only ones available are Metro apps, but just like the iPad and that sells more than well enough.

We're talking about hundreds of millions of Windows tablets that won't support traditional Windows applications. That WILL give Microsoft a lot more influence in the market place and it will give them a cut of the profits of every app sold. Then what happens if a company wants to release a rival to Microsoft Office? They might be told there will be a delay in releasing it, or that is violates an agreements or Microsoft will demand a higher cut of the sales - Microsoft could use it to threaten the market (they already have in the past with IE).

theyarecomingforyou said,
Absolutely, but if the Windows Store takes off in a big way then it's entirely possible that Microsoft will drop traditional .exe support.

So basically for the first time since the last century Windows on the PC won't run Windows programs anymore? They may have an odd sense when it comes to design decisions but they're not retarded.. arbitrarily killing off support for essentially what the massive majority of the world runs on the desktop is not going to generate them sales, and they know this. "Gee, we have the most users of any operating system on the planet and our software supports near everything that was written since the mid 90's... lets throw that all away and make everybody start from scratch, I'm sure they won't mind." Yea.. It's not going to happen.

Max Norris said,

So basically for the first time since the last century Windows on the PC won't run Windows programs anymore? They may have an odd sense when it comes to design decisions but they're not retarded.. arbitrarily killing off support for essentially what the massive majority of the world runs on the desktop is not going to generate them sales, and they know this. "Gee, we have the most users of any operating system on the planet and our software supports near everything that was written since the mid 90's... lets throw that all away and make everybody start from scratch, I'm sure they won't mind." Yea.. It's not going to happen.

Why do you only think about the short run?

GS:mac

Glassed Silver said,
Why do you only think about the short run?

Because the whole "Windows isn't going to allow Windows software anymore" argument is just absurd. Common sense (IE Microsoft knows they'll get buried if they tried something that stupid) or fears and maybes, not a hard decision.

theyarecomingforyou said,

Absolutely, but if the Windows Store takes off in a big way then it's entirely possible that Microsoft will drop traditional .exe support. It will probably be done in a subtle way, by claiming that they're a security risk or that it's too much trouble maintaining support for APIs people barely use - we've already seen the start of that with Windows RT, the excuse being that it uses a different architecture. They could have included a processor emulator but they chose not to.

We're talking about hundreds of millions of Windows tablets that won't support traditional Windows applications. That WILL give Microsoft a lot more influence in the market place and it will give them a cut of the profits of every app sold. Then what happens if a company wants to release a rival to Microsoft Office? They might be told there will be a delay in releasing it, or that is violates an agreements or Microsoft will demand a higher cut of the sales - Microsoft could use it to threaten the market (they already have in the past with IE).

You are kidding right? RIGHT? Microsoft will drop support for EXE files? are you KIDDING? seriously what are you people smoking.... why would MS drop their complete back catalog of software from all companies and their main selling point of comparability? To get a *slice* of apple's app store? are you people f'ing insane?

zeroomegazx said,

You are kidding right? RIGHT? Microsoft will drop support for EXE files? are you KIDDING? seriously what are you people smoking.... why would MS drop their complete back catalog of software from all companies and their main selling point of comparability? To get a *slice* of apple's app store? are you people f'ing insane?

Because without this boogeyman, they wouldn't have a credible conspiracy theory.

Microsoft Windows (even 64bit with HyperV) runs software that is literally 30 years old, but somehow they want to believe that Microsoft is going to close the platform and anger their main enterprise customers.

Dropping support for traditional Desktop Apps will never happen, especially when Enterprise is still running 20-30yr old software applications that do not run in Metro and cannot be distributed through Microsoft's store.

Microsoft has stated that they want NOTHING to do with software distribution beyond the security concerns of Modern UI applications. This is why all other desktop software can be listed with the Microsoft Store but must provide their own distribution store/point as Microsoft does not want to handle this software as there are literally MILLIONS of Applications.


The other thing these people are missing is that they think that the Microsoft Store is the ONLY way to distribute Modern UI Applications. This is not true, as enterprise will be deploying their own Modern Applications outside the Microsoft Store.

Sadly people accept the completely closed model on Android, iOS, OS X every day, but with a tiny concession to server side code security checking in Windows 8, somehow Microsoft is creating a super uber closed platform.

They are idiots...

zeroomegazx said,
are you people f'ing insane?

They're just AMAZINGLY stupid and completely lack any common sense or logic. Atleast they provide lolz.

Glassed Silver said,

This.

But ignoring valid points like these seems to be ok around here, many people agree, I don't want to take away anyone's opinion, hell no.
It's funny to see how nobody wants to understand him though.
Or how people are so unworried about this. I simply don't get it.

Before people jump at me saying I have a Mac and hence, bla bla bla.
I know OS X has an App Store.
And hell yes I do criticize that Apple is giving those apps stronger restrictions than needed and at the same time access to APIs that are otherwise not available. It's pretty much just the cloud based push notifications though afaik.
Apple is going a way less aggressive way here, now, I don't dare to say they won't tighten the grip, I actually expect them to and in that moment I will cease to buy anything from the App Store, but indeed Microsoft is starting well ahead.

Seeing how they try to make the desktop a kind of app or mode-esque thing actually fuels the fears of them making it less and less accessible or used by developers, who want to create apps that won't work in the RT environment in the same way.

Props to Notch, he's taking a bullet (probably less sales, who knows... at least it's taking a small risk) for making a statement.
Calling him a hypocrite is ignoring valid points.

People, before calling someone a hypocrite, at least do some serious thinking and trying to "get into a person's mind" and look whether there could possibly reasons to think a certain way.
Whether you agree with the outcome or not is something totally different by the way, but there is little that's so counter-productive and non-contributing to a discussion as calling someone a hypocrite just to stress your own point possibly neglecting valid concerns, that deserve to at least be asked and addressed.

*sigh*
But black/white thinking gets more likes as you can tell from the comments section...

GS:mac

As I have stated before, his points are not backed up by evidence. Any win32 application can still be installed on Windows 8, and Microsoft has added a new api (WinRT) for which it requires deployment via the app store (with the exceptions of enterprises or programmers that want to sideload their own creations). It is the double standard he is applying that makes him a clear hypocrite. After all Microsoft is marketing Windows 8 as a hybrid desktop/mobile operating system, where on the desktop side, there are no restrictions, and on the mobile side there is the app store deployment restriction, yet somehow Apple, Blackberry and others are getting a free pass doing what Microsoft intends to do with any application that is based on WinRT.

Microsoft is clearly doing what all the others are doing in the mobile space, that mobile space where this hypocrite also makes money from. The fear that Microsoft will do away with win32 is so hillarious that I certainly doubt the guys knowledge. It simply will not happen. You can call Microsoft anything under the sun, but stupid is not a term that relates to Microsoft. The desktop (win32) is what gives Windows the legg up, it is where all major MS applications run and there is no way in hell they will even be inclined to restrict it. It is therefore hardly surprising that ALL of their big money makers (of which Windows itself isn't the biggest one) run on win32. Office, Exchange, Sharepoint, Lync, Sql and even their development system (Visual Studio).

The desktop isn't going away anytime soon, and it will never be a appstore only proposition.

You need to explain your viewpoints on Windows 8 more clearly. At the moment, your opinions are in direct contradiction to your actions.
'Nuff said.

Favorite part is that Minecraft is 100% Java. The same thing that runs on Java on my PC can be run a Mac or even android OS. He can not want it to work all he wants but Minecraft will run on Win 8.

Billaguana said,
Favorite part is that Minecraft is 100% Java. The same thing that runs on Java on my PC can be run a Mac or even android OS. He can not want it to work all he wants but Minecraft will run on Win 8.

Now that haters have semi succesfully killed Flash, Java is next on the killing block based on comments here alone

Notch does not dislike closed system on the whole... all developers are worried that Windows will become a completely closed system, where Metro is a first step.

It is not about him being worried about Micdcraft doing well. It is about how developers have freedoms to experiment with litt;le cost to develop for a MS PC. If it becomes closed like Xbox (which is an extreme if you consider it now) then that will close a lot of doors for indie developers in general, or even hobbists.

Again we are far from it, and I do think most of the out bursts about Windows 8 is too early.

mranderson1st said,
Notch does not dislike closed system on the whole... all developers are worried that Windows will become a completely closed system, where Metro is a first step.

It is not about him being worried about Micdcraft doing well. It is about how developers have freedoms to experiment with litt;le cost to develop for a MS PC. If it becomes closed like Xbox (which is an extreme if you consider it now) then that will close a lot of doors for indie developers in general, or even hobbists.

Again we are far from it, and I do think most of the out bursts about Windows 8 is too early.

First we have to see how Apple does closing up their system more, they have a head sart on Microsoft, and even if succesful that's no guarantee it will work for MS, their vocal userbase is much larger than Apple's overall marketshare

You pointed out how his position is irrational, hypocritical, and most likely based on emotion rather than fact.

His response is also likely to be irrational, hypocritical, and based on emotion rather than the facts you've stated.

That's if he even answers, since he's probably just going to hide under his desk from any rational criticism of his opinion.

Notch is really wrong on this one in my opinion. Windows 8 is still open. The only apps that need to be certified/verified are the apps on the store. Unless you're making apps for Windows RT, you shouldn't be concern about anything on Windows 8.

I completely disagree with notch. Not only is Windows 8 just as open as it ever was before, but the requirements for getting certified (if you so chose to do so, it just makes people more confident to run your application) are SO BASIC that why wouldn't you bother?

Just another person (albeit a bit more "respected" in the community, if you want to say that...) jumping on the "hate Windows 8" bandwagon.

Great article!

Maybe this guy is just disapointed that JAVA apps aren't supported in the Windows Store and won't run on Windows RT

Anyway it's not surprising for a JAVA developer to prefer outdated platforms and bash windows 8.

Time to stop living in the past dude!

Forcing your users to install java and be vulnerable to the frequent 0day flaws of java is not something you should be proud of!

Shut up Notch and come back when you've stopped using Java and learnt how to make new features for your game instead of copying other people's mods (and somehow making them worse in the process). Maybe then I'll take you seriously.

Not to mention Windows 8 isn't closed off at all. You can still download and install your .exes from the billions of sites on the internet. The ONLY difference is that there's now an official store / repository for those apps too, giving developers and users an easy and efficient way of finding apps.

It's not that I agree with either side.. but I like how people tend to over look there being a difference between supporting a "closed" system that has always been that way, and is advertised as being that way.. vs supporting what was the standard "open" system, that many fear is becomming more and more closed..

I can support iOS being closed, and not support Windows becomming closed, because I use each for different things. I had different ideas in mind when I went to each system.

Now I'm not sure if MS is moving that way, I hope they aren't. But there is a lot of fear that they are, so I'm not gonna jump down the throat of anyone who is against it.

In the end, it's his game, and if he doesn't want it to be certified to work in Windows 8, then that's his call, and his soap box to use.

That said, if MS is offering to help, I for one would have jumped on it.. got the help, AND got the chance to voice my views to people that may be able to report back.. I doubt MS will ever want to work with him again now, even if the next version of Windows is as open as can be and he loves it..

Ryoken said,
It's not that I agree with either side.. but I like how people tend to over look there being a difference between supporting a "closed" system that has always been that way, and is advertised as being that way.. vs supporting what was the standard "open" system, that many fear is becomming more and more closed..

I can support iOS being closed, and not support Windows becomming closed, because I use each for different things. I had different ideas in mind when I went to each system.

Now I'm not sure if MS is moving that way, I hope they aren't. But there is a lot of fear that they are, so I'm not gonna jump down the throat of anyone who is against it.

In the end, it's his game, and if he doesn't want it to be certified to work in Windows 8, then that's his call, and his soap box to use.

That said, if MS is offering to help, I for one would have jumped on it.. got the help, AND got the chance to voice my views to people that may be able to report back.. I doubt MS will ever want to work with him again now, even if the next version of Windows is as open as can be and he loves it..

+1

Ryoken said,
It's not that I agree with either side.. but I like how people tend to over look there being a difference between supporting a "closed" system that has always been that way, and is advertised as being that way.. vs supporting what was the standard "open" system, that many fear is becomming more and more closed..

I can support iOS being closed, and not support Windows becomming closed, because I use each for different things. I had different ideas in mind when I went to each system.

Now I'm not sure if MS is moving that way, I hope they aren't. But there is a lot of fear that they are, so I'm not gonna jump down the throat of anyone who is against it.

In the end, it's his game, and if he doesn't want it to be certified to work in Windows 8, then that's his call, and his soap box to use.

That said, if MS is offering to help, I for one would have jumped on it.. got the help, AND got the chance to voice my views to people that may be able to report back.. I doubt MS will ever want to work with him again now, even if the next version of Windows is as open as can be and he loves it..


Shi*... Combo breaker on seeing only black or white...

Y U APPLY COMMON SENSE IN FPN COMMENTS SECTION?!

GS:mac
PS: sorry for caps lock, that meme only works in caps lock though

Ryoken said,
It's not that I agree with either side.. but I like how people tend to over look there being a difference between supporting a "closed" system that has always been that way, and is advertised as being that way.. vs supporting what was the standard "open" system, that many fear is becomming more and more closed..

I can support iOS being closed, and not support Windows becomming closed, because I use each for different things. I had different ideas in mind when I went to each system.

Now I'm not sure if MS is moving that way, I hope they aren't. But there is a lot of fear that they are, so I'm not gonna jump down the throat of anyone who is against it.

In the end, it's his game, and if he doesn't want it to be certified to work in Windows 8, then that's his call, and his soap box to use.

That said, if MS is offering to help, I for one would have jumped on it.. got the help, AND got the chance to voice my views to people that may be able to report back.. I doubt MS will ever want to work with him again now, even if the next version of Windows is as open as can be and he loves it..

X86 Windows will never be locked down or lose the Desktop UI. There is just too much invested into it and businesses would never run a version of Windows without the Desktop and the ability to run unsigned programs. We run and make custom programs for lab work all the time at my job and if that wasn't possible, we'd use another OS.

Ryoken said,
In the end, it's his game, and if he doesn't want it to be certified to work in Windows 8, then that's his call, and his soap box to use.

True, but he's making it a freaking religion. Sure, you can have your own opinions and say "I'm not gonna support this". But don't go around and say "Hey everyone! Support me in this case for NOT using Windows 8". What happened to no manipulation and people's own opinions?

That's what I don't like. Reminds me too much of how many religious people feel like they're forced to convert others, as if there's only one right or wrong. I'm 100% scientific. I don't believe in a religion, but I sure respect others religions, and I will certainly not try to convince them that they are wrong. We're all just humans. Our purpose doesn't matter in the end.

As a wise man once said: "Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one and it's fine to be proud of it, but please don't whip it out in public and start waving it around... and PLEASE don't try to shove it down my child's throat."

The W8 closed system though is only the RT version like IOS.
Windows 8 x86/x64 can run apps like normal, its not a closed system at all.
If he wants to deploy a metro tech based game then he has to play by the rules of the store like Apples app store. There is little difference.

Ryoken said,
I can support iOS being closed, and not support Windows becomming closed, because I use each for different things. I had different ideas in mind when I went to each system.

Now I'm not sure if MS is moving that way, I hope they aren't. But there is a lot of fear that they are, so I'm not gonna jump down the throat of anyone who is against it.


I think the point many of us are trying to make that sure, you might fear MS moving towards closed as you say, but as of yet it isn't closed, nowhere near it, so what's the point of whining about it now and screaming and kicking about Windows 8 when it's simply not the case and only something that "might happen"?

I very much doubt MS would close down their OS but if they do, if they do, that is the time for outrage and boycotting and I'll gladly help handing out the pitchforks if that would ever happen, but until then there is no pointing screaming about it.

Ryoken said,
It's not that I agree with either side.. but I like how people tend to over look there being a difference between supporting a "closed" system that has always been that way, and is advertised as being that way.. vs supporting what was the standard "open" system, that many fear is becomming more and more closed..

I can support iOS being closed, and not support Windows becomming closed, because I use each for different things. I had different ideas in mind when I went to each system.

Now I'm not sure if MS is moving that way, I hope they aren't. But there is a lot of fear that they are, so I'm not gonna jump down the throat of anyone who is against it.

In the end, it's his game, and if he doesn't want it to be certified to work in Windows 8, then that's his call, and his soap box to use.

That said, if MS is offering to help, I for one would have jumped on it.. got the help, AND got the chance to voice my views to people that may be able to report back.. I doubt MS will ever want to work with him again now, even if the next version of Windows is as open as can be and he loves it..


The fact remains that Windows 8 is not in any way a more closed system than Windows 7. It only offers an additional Api, for which application deployment is controlled (via the app store and enterprise sideloading). If Microsoft ever will really make Windows more closed, we can massively choose to not purchase it, and we don't need some developer to make us aware of it, we will find out ourselves through running the generally available pre-release versions of the operating system.

Of course it is not his choice alone, he is selling his sandbox for money, and since it technically runs on Windows 8 without code changes, he is obliged to certify it, or refund the people that paid for his game.

I couldn't agree with you more. He's only using Twitter as an outlet to push his agenda.

Hey guys screw Windows 8, right? It's a closed platform while iOS, OS X, and Xbox Live clearly aren't...right? And let's not forget the Yogscast outcry. Those guys are "total dicks"!

BoneyardBrew said,
I couldn't agree with you more. He's only using Twitter as an outlet to push his agenda.

Hey guys screw Windows 8, right? It's a closed platform while iOS, OS X, and Xbox Live clearly aren't...right? And let's not forget the Yogscast outcry. Those guys are "total dicks"!


He's just trying to get into Gabe's sandwich club.

Little does he know, Gabe does not share his sandwiches.

Joshie said,

He's just trying to get into Gabe's sandwich club.

Little does he know, Gabe does not share his sandwiches.

I think you're right about that one!

Joshie said,

He's just trying to get into Gabe's sandwich club.

Little does he know, Gabe does not share his sandwiches.

That's really really funny good one my friend

nub said,
iOS is a phone/tablet OS. Windows is a full fledged OS.

That's not the point, Minecraft has been ported onto three Operating systems that have a default store/marketplace moderated and owned by the creator of the operating system.

Because Microsoft make an internet browser for windows does that mean that websites are in a closed system, no because there are alternatives.

I just hope that Microsoft allow rival marketplaces to create metro apps like Steam to compete with the store in the same format.

Gaffney said,

That's not the point, Minecraft has been ported onto three Operating systems that have a default store/marketplace moderated and owned by the creator of the operating system.

Because Microsoft make an internet browser for windows does that mean that websites are in a closed system, no because there are alternatives.

I just hope that Microsoft allow rival marketplaces to create metro apps like Steam to compete with the store in the same format.

They won't allow that, and that's part of the reason he's protesting. Sure they have gotten popular and ported Minecraft, but look where it started. Also, RT won't be able to run stuff that's for x86, so it's very restrictive already. It's the start of MS turning into Apple. For some that might be fine. For others it's not. Of course you can't have an unpopular opinion here. God forbid.

Edited by farmeunit, Sep 28 2012, 4:22am :

farmeunit said,

They won't allow that, and that's part of the reason he's protesting. Sure they have gotten popular and ported Minecraft, but look where it started. Also, RT won't be able to run stuff that's for x86, so it's very restrictive already. It's the start of MS turning into Apple. For some that might be fine. For others it's not. Of course you can't have an unpopular opinion here. God forbid.

Windows RT is a cut down version for ARM devices. They COULD have made a whole new OS for tablets that was just as or more restricted than Windows RT, but they didn't for simplicity's sake.

X86 Windows will never be locked down or lose the Desktop UI. There is just too much invested into it and businesses would never run a version of Windows without the Desktop and the ability to run unsigned programs. We run and make custom programs for lab work all the time at my job and if that wasn't possible, we'd use another OS.

Microsoft controls the Metro UI and store, but the desktop is still a free-for-all

mrp04 said,

Windows RT is a cut down version for ARM devices. They COULD have made a whole new OS for tablets that was just as or more restricted than Windows RT, but they didn't for simplicity's sake.

X86 Windows will never be locked down or lose the Desktop UI. There is just too much invested into it and businesses would never run a version of Windows without the Desktop and the ability to run unsigned programs. We run and make custom programs for lab work all the time at my job and if that wasn't possible, we'd use another OS.

Microsoft controls the Metro UI and store, but the desktop is still a free-for-all


It's also very important to note the popularity of virtual machines. This category of software is religiously ignored by people who whisper of the doom the world will face if Windows 8 is successful.

By Windows 9, if not sooner, there is zero doubt in my mind that RT-compatible virtual machine apps will be available, and total access to ANY desktop software will be as simple as it needs to be.

RT will get its Dosbox, its ScummVM, and more. There's no reason to suspect such applications are permanently barred from the future of Windows.

farmeunit said,

They won't allow that, and that's part of the reason he's protesting. Sure they have gotten popular and ported Minecraft, but look where it started. Also, RT won't be able to run stuff that's for x86, so it's very restrictive already. It's the start of MS turning into Apple. For some that might be fine. For others it's not. Of course you can't have an unpopular opinion here. God forbid.

Than his criticism should be geared towards Windows RT, yet he is complaining about Windows 8, on which his own application can run and can be distributed in the exact same way as on previous versions of Windows.

In other words, he is flat out lying about Windows 8 and he is also a hypocrite, a apparently he does have no problem with ios, on which he has released his game, yet he critiscises Microsoft for doing the exact same thing on Windows RT, compared to IOS. Amazing simply amazing. He does not have much credibility left of course !

sjaak327 said,

Than his criticism should be geared towards Windows RT, yet he is complaining about Windows 8, on which his own application can run and can be distributed in the exact same way as on previous versions of Windows.

In other words, he is flat out lying about Windows 8 and he is also a hypocrite, a apparently he does have no problem with ios, on which he has released his game, yet he critiscises Microsoft for doing the exact same thing on Windows RT, compared to IOS. Amazing simply amazing. He does not have much credibility left of course !

Except that iOS has ALWAYS been closed and he knew that going in. He also didn't START on iOS. If it was a closed system and harder for indie developers to get on, then it might not have been as big as it is.

Also, just because it's ONLY RT that is closed now, doesn't mean that MS isn't headed that direction. He's standing up for a LOT of people, not just himself. Since when does taking a stand mean losing credibility? If it's a lot of "faceless people" complaining, no one notices, when it's major players, then companies take notice, sometimes. I think it took some guts to say what he did and people like you just go along with everything until no one has any rights left. Congrats on that one.

farmeunit said,

Except that iOS has ALWAYS been closed and he knew that going in. He also didn't START on iOS. If it was a closed system and harder for indie developers to get on, then it might not have been as big as it is.

Also, just because it's ONLY RT that is closed now, doesn't mean that MS isn't headed that direction. He's standing up for a LOT of people, not just himself. Since when does taking a stand mean losing credibility? If it's a lot of "faceless people" complaining, no one notices, when it's major players, then companies take notice, sometimes. I think it took some guts to say what he did and people like you just go along with everything until no one has any rights left. Congrats on that one.

So lets get this straight, just because IOS has always been closed, it is okay ? Indeed he does not have a problem with it being closed as witnessed by releasing and making money on the platform. So an operating system being closed is not really a problem now is it. In fact, Apple (just as Microsoft) let people build applications on these operating systems, the only difference is that they don't allow sideloading (in normL circumstances). This is exactly the problem, he isn't standing up for us, but for his own wallet, nothing more and nothing less.

The fact that he does not seem torealise that win32 is not closed, and probably never will (unless Microsoft likes a game of self destruction) indicates his motives even more. He knows damm well he is lying through his teeth, but he likes to gets the message accross, not because out of his goodness but plain self interest.

In fact, I believe the guy is ultimitely doing himself and his company a great disservice, as effectively he is telling his paying customers not to use Windows 8 because it is closed (which it is quite clearly not), and he makes that decision for them, by not being prepared to certify a game that technically runs without problems on the operating system. If I were a customer, I would demand my money back and tell him to mind his own business, as contrary to some people apparently, I am quite capable of judging the operating system for what it really is, instead of falling for the utter ******** some people (this guy included) are uttering.

farmeunit said,

They won't allow that, and that's part of the reason he's protesting. Sure they have gotten popular and ported Minecraft, but look where it started. Also, RT won't be able to run stuff that's for x86, so it's very restrictive already. It's the start of MS turning into Apple. For some that might be fine. For others it's not. Of course you can't have an unpopular opinion here. God forbid.

The RT is the only one competing with the iPad directly and as far as I can see, the OS in both is very restrictive. What's the difference? If Microsoft were turning into Apple then we wouldn't have a full-fledged OS available on a tablet. Microsoft would only be charging $600-700 for ARM based toy tabs.

The fact that they are able to develop Win7 into a touch-based OS that runs on x86 is brilliant. Personally I think that's giving everyone a nice choice.

I've been waiting for a nicely optimized computer for my fingers, not my stupid Galaxy Tab Toy or eyepad

b10h4z4rd said,
Great editorial John!

For one, I very much disagree. With W8, Windows are turning to the wicked path of a closed tightly controlled platform. It is the change Notch is trying to fight. Even though it is a bit of windmill fight he has my full support.

BTW, the editorial is not correct -- no matter how funny it sounds, it is OSX by Apple and not W8 who is the second most open platform, W8 is much more tightly controlled than OSX.

And as a side note, over the last month I am feeling the Neowin turning from an independent news site into a kind of Microsoft fancamp. It is just a personal feeling, yet an unpleasant one...

Jugger.naut said,

For one, I very much disagree. With W8, Windows are turning to the wicked path of a closed tightly controlled platform. It is the change Notch is trying to fight. Even though it is a bit of windmill fight he has my full support.

BTW, the editorial is not correct -- no matter how funny it sounds, it is OSX by Apple and not W8 who is the second most open platform, W8 is much more tightly controlled than OSX.

Not true. Osx cannot legally be installed on non Apple hardware. Windows 8 can be installed on all pc hardware including Apple hardware. By default, you cannot run unsigned software on Mountain Lion, which again is not the case on Windows 8.
And as a side note, over the last month I am feeling the Neowin turning from an independent news site into a kind of Microsoft fancamp. It is just a personal feeling, yet an unpleasant one...


sjaak327 said,

Not true. Osx cannot legally be installed on non Apple hardware. Windows 8 can be installed on all pc hardware including Apple hardware. By default, you cannot run unsigned software on Mountain Lion, which again is not the case on Windows 8.

It is not about where you can install the OS, but how much control over it you can have as a user. On OSX you can run unsigned applications, allowing that is just a few clicks. Tell me how you will do that with the W8 Metro apps.

Jugger.naut said,

It is not about where you can install the OS, but how much control over it you can have as a user. On OSX you can run unsigned applications, allowing that is just a few clicks. Tell me how you will do that with the W8 Metro apps.

For the moment you can install unsigned apps. However wait for Apple to make changes to force enable gatekeeper, that choice is gone.

For the moment you can install unsigned apps on Windows 8. To the desktop. In future, that option could be gone.

There is ZERO difference in my eyes here.

Jugger.naut said,

It is not about where you can install the OS, but how much control over it you can have as a user. On OSX you can run unsigned applications, allowing that is just a few clicks. Tell me how you will do that with the W8 Metro apps.

Double click install, and run the application. Are you claiming I cannot run unsigned applications on Windows 8 ? I have yet to find any apllication that does not run, including my own, which are definitely not signed. On ML I indeed had to change the setting to "allow all" as plenty of applications didn't run.

Of course limiting the devices on which an os can be installed is a very big deal, you can only legally install Osx on Apple computers, which severly limits your choices. Yet I can install Windows 8 on any x86 device, including Apple computers..

Jugger.naut said,

It is not about where you can install the OS, but how much control over it you can have as a user. On OSX you can run unsigned applications, allowing that is just a few clicks. Tell me how you will do that with the W8 Metro apps.

Sorry, I did not see your point about metro applications, which indeed need to be signed. Of course your point would be valid if metro applications were the only applications I could run. Which is the case for Windows RT. of course this article is about Windows 8, and on Windows 8 the millions of win32 (or desktop apps) all run, regardless if they are signed or not, right out of the box, without the user having to adjust a single setting.

Jugger.naut said,

On OSX you can run unsigned applications, allowing that is just a few clicks. Tell me how you will do that with the W8 Metro apps.

On OSX by default unsigned apps are blocked but even after changing settings only signed apps can use certain APIs.

On Windows by default unsigned apps will run but only signed apps can use certain APIs.

Basically if you have the knowledge you can get OSX to the same state as the default on Windows...how is that more open??