I'm sure that you've heard about the new Windows Runtime API in Windows 8, which has to be used in order to write Metro apps. Since this entails using the COM-based functions from this new API, and limited use of Win32-API functions, what's GLBasic's game plan for Windows 8 compatibility?
I have not checked the details, yet.
GLBasic works fine on Windows 8 desktop - all programs revert to using the standard Windows layout when you run a program.
Don't know about Windows On ARM though - that could probably mean a new set of libraries and what not..
Quote from: MrTAToad on 2012-Jun-13
GLBasic works fine on Windows 8 desktop - all programs revert to using the standard Windows layout when you run a program.
Don't know about Windows On ARM though - that could probably mean a new set of libraries and what not..
Yes, but technically that would be running on "compatibility mode", because Windows 8 is Metro based, which is built upon the Windows Runtime. Taking a cue from Apple's App Store, Metro apps can only be sold through the Windows Store, and will otherwise not install on any device. The store will not sell non-Metro apps, but they may be showcased in the Windows Compatibility Center and listed in the store if they are Windows Desktop App Certified. (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh749939.aspx)
This is the new core API for both the Intel (WOI) and Arm (WOA) platforms; only on handheld devices it's called Windows RT, and Metro based code is supposed to be fully portable across these platforms.
Windows 8 actually has two separate APIs, sitting side by side; and logic tells us that one of it will have to go (eventually). Guess which one is more profitable for Microsoft?
If they break backward compatibility, noone will get a new windows. That's why win is the best platform. It runs any windows program ever made ( ok x64 dropped win 16 bit support, but hey)
Certainly be able to save some money if only Metro applications are allowed in the store!
Quote from: Kitty Hello on 2012-Jun-13
If they break backward compatibility, noone will get a new windows. That's why win is the best platform. It runs any windows program ever made ( ok x64 dropped win 16 bit support, but hey)
Hi Gernot. You're right, Windows has always had very strong legacy support; even DOS apps still work today. I'm sure (I hope) that it'll be a while before we actually have to worry about this. But once this new paradigm goes mainstream, there will be no real backward compatibility. The Windows Runtime is a totally different beast from the twenty-five-year old WinAPI; to maintain legacy support will actually involve maintaining two different and separate OS cores. If they do decide to support it, we'd probably be looking at some sort of virtual machine, like they did for DOS and the Win16-API with the NTVDM.
The current WinAPI app base may be quite formidable, but Microsoft is not getting a single cent from that; the 30% incentive will definitely be a huge motivator for them to push this new "jailed" Windows Runtime as the de facto environment, and drop the current WinAPI without a second thought. They know that people are generally adverse to change, and if given the choice, their new cash cow may not float.
While the good news is that the new API favours C++, the old WinAPI-dependent libraries may not comply.
Think of all the big companies that would have to totally rewrite their apps. It's totally impossible.
I don't fully understand all of what you're saying but my general impression is that of a new Microsoft OS which effectively isn't Windows compatible. The worry of backward compatibility is not a problem. To adopt a more layman style approach I have a ZX Spectrum and lots of software blah blah blah, Commodore buy Sinclair and release a new ZX Spectrum 64 (lets say) which is a new machine not compatible with the original ZX Spectrum.
Oh no my software won't work anymore, major financial crisis everywhere..... errr call me foolish but why not use both machines. Tada! lol.
Windows 8 Metro won't have backward compatibility but it will have a optional Windows 7 like user interface where you can run all old (Windows 7!) applications.
Quote from: backslider on 2012-Jun-14
Windows 8 Metro won't have backward compatibility but it will have a optional Windows 7 like user interface where you can run all old (Windows 7!) applications.
Yes, and that's called compatibility mode; and we should survive on that for quite some time. But although we can emulate the Metro style UI, we won't be able to utilise the Metro-centric functionalities, like background mode, Start Screen notifications, etc. We'll be legacy apps.
This kind of industry movements makes me love more and more virtualization...
Micro$oft will die in short time if they break its backward compatibility...
Quote from: DaCarSoft on 2012-Jun-14
Micro$oft will die in short time if they break its backward compatibility...
I agree, and worse for them is that today we have plenty more alternatives, so such a move will get big companies to spend a lot of cash, they might as well spend this cash moving to a time-reliable platform.
I presume there are no plans at the moment to update the Windows executable so that it is Metro compliant (and thus can be sold in the Marketplace) ?
yep, that would precisely be the point I guess. :)
Vista failed, Windows 7 claimed, but Windows 8 might fail due those many chagnes that might been confuce the use and they might have taking too many comprimese which can been quite bad in the end.
Howover Intel Apps should of course run nice on Windows 8 on Intel Machines, but on Arm its require new apps of course and a new platform to been supported (its c++ based, so its should been possible). For that we use in glbasic, there is as I see no need to doing directly Windows 8 compatible as long its run fine with compatible mode on Intel Machines.
Quote from: spacefractal on 2012-Jun-14
.. For that we use in glbasic, there is as I see no need to doing directly Windows 8 compatible as long its run fine with compatible mode on Intel Machines.
The possible marketplace is the only reason I can think, but I actually have no idea if it exists nowadays or is something for the close future. At what stage it is or will be interesting work worth to have it. Any ideas on this?
Just to clear up a couple of things.
Backwards compatibility will NOT EXIST for ALL Windows 8 devices. The new Windows 8 will have a "Home Edition" for consumers that will run on cheaper ARM architecture devices. This will ONLY support the new windows runtime API, and this is the device most consumers will be using so currently GLBasic will NOT WORK on these devices.
There will be a "Premium Edition" that will continue to run on Intel based processors. This will be slightly more expensive hardware, but will be able to continue backwards compatibility. This is what businesses will adopt.
Most of the predictions for these devices is that they are going to see an accelerated adoption rate; and based on just some personal experience I believe this is true. I have had numerous people tell me they are holding off from buying the new iPad because they will buy a Windows 8 tablet instead.
When these release it could be like the early days of iPhone. A few game devs with software out early for these new devices could make a lot of money. It is extremely unfortunate that there are no plans for GLBasic to support this. This truly makes me wish I had not paid money for GLBasic. I find it very discouraging that lots of time has been spent adding in support for hardware with little to no market space such as Palm Pre and Gamepark, but now there is a serious platform coming along and nothing is even planned...
QuoteIt is extremely unfortunate that there are no plans for GLBasic to support this.
How do you know this? GLB apps already support ARM hardware (Pandora, Caanoo). I'd be very surprised if Gernot did not offer the ability to compile GLB apps for Windows 8 hardware. GLBasic itself may be a different story, but I'm not sure I'd want to code on a tablet anyway...
I definitely will try to support this thing. I hope the new visual studio versions allow me to port the Editor over.
Making games for Win8 might not be too hard at all - I can think of a few solutions here.
I never doubted you (or GLB) for a second Gernot =D
Quote from: bigtunacan on 2012-Jun-25
Just to clear up a couple of things.
Backwards compatibility will NOT EXIST for ALL Windows 8 devices. The new Windows 8 will have a "Home Edition" for consumers that will run on cheaper ARM architecture devices. This will ONLY support the new windows runtime API, and this is the device most consumers will be using so currently GLBasic will NOT WORK on these devices.
There will be a "Premium Edition" that will continue to run on Intel based processors. This will be slightly more expensive hardware, but will be able to continue backwards compatibility. This is what businesses will adopt.
Most of the predictions for these devices is that they are going to see an accelerated adoption rate; and based on just some personal experience I believe this is true. I have had numerous people tell me they are holding off from buying the new iPad because they will buy a Windows 8 tablet instead.
When these release it could be like the early days of iPhone. A few game devs with software out early for these new devices could make a lot of money. It is extremely unfortunate that there are no plans for GLBasic to support this. This truly makes me wish I had not paid money for GLBasic. I find it very discouraging that lots of time has been spent adding in support for hardware with little to no market space such as Palm Pre and Gamepark, but now there is a serious platform coming along and nothing is even planned...
To say that most consumers will opt for the WOA Surface, which hardly has a hundred ready apps, over the third generation iPad, with its superior display and more than two hundred thousand ready apps (not counting universal apps), is simply naive. The only advantage Surface has over the iPad would be legacy compatibility with the plethora of existing Windows apps, and that would be with the WOI model. And with WOI, our apps live on.
IMHO, the WOA model does not seem to hold much hope.
@Gernot,
So sorry! From a previous post of your's I thought you were indicating you currently had no plans to support Windows 8. Great to hear you are planning this.
@TI-994A,
Microsoft has publicly stated more than 100K apps by year end. Given that this will do double duty as a tablet and a laptop, so you have both at the price of a tablet, why wouldn't someone choose this over a tablet? We aren't talking about another entrance to the space by a relative newcomer/underdog such as HP Touchpad who had nothing else aside from the already proven failure the Palm Pre, or another Blackberry Playbook; this is Microsoft, the #1 OS on PCs and laptops for both businesses and consumers. Windows 8 is going to sell just on that alone.
Quote from: bigtunacan on 2012-Jun-25Microsoft has publicly stated more than 100K apps by year end. Given that this will do double duty as a tablet and a laptop, so you have both at the price of a tablet, why wouldn't someone choose this over a tablet? We aren't talking about another entrance to the space by a relative newcomer/underdog such as HP Touchpad who had nothing else aside from the already proven failure the Palm Pre, or another Blackberry Playbook; this is Microsoft, the #1 OS on PCs and laptops for both businesses and consumers. Windows 8 is going to sell just on that alone.
If you're talking about the Intel version of Surface, then yes. But not the ARM version; it will run only Metro apps, which is only available from the new Windows Store, and there're currently only about a hundred apps available. The 100K apps that you're referring to is in the Windows Phone Marketplace, which are not Metro compatible.
Microsoft may be a formidable giant, but they have failed big time in the mobile phone market, losing to the iPhone, and more recently, Android. Now, they're taking another big gamble with this proprietary new platform, which, at the moment, offers absolutely no advantage over their stronger competitors, who have better hardware and a bigger ready-app base.
The question they have failed to ask is,
"What can Surface ARM do that other tablets can't?" And the answer is
nothing, and in fact, apps-wise, even
less. Ask the same question about Surface Intel, and you have a clear winner!