Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Formally Bans Emulators On Xbox, Windows 10 Download Shops (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the tough-stance dept.

Microsoft is officially banning emulators from Windows Store. The company has updated the Windows Store policy to announce the changes. The new rules bar any applications that emulate pre-existing game systems, resulting in the removal of a popular program that supported games from Nintendo and Sega and other consoles. From a report on ArsTechnica: An affected developer was notified of the change on Tuesday when its product, Universal Emulator, was delisted from the Windows Store. While no proof of a letter or notice from Microsoft was published, the developers at NESBox linked to relevant changes in the Windows Store application rules, dated March 29, which now include this line: "Apps that emulate a game system are not allowed on any device family." This list of general Windows Store rules, written for developers, received a massive update to its "Gaming and Xbox" requirements; these used to contain only one sentence, and it referred hopeful Windows Store game developers to the ID@Xbox program. That existing program requires pre-approval by Microsoft, but developers will soon be able to publish their games directly to both Xbox and Windows 10 marketplaces by paying a one-time fee of $100 or less as part of the Xbox Live Creators Program.

116 comments

  1. What about paid emulations? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    What about paid emulations?

    Will they stay?

    I know of a few and they may have even copied code from other free GPL ones as well.

    1. Re:What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apps that emulate a game system are not allowed on any device family.

    2. Re:What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      should apply to all ports as well.

    3. Re: What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction: if a confirmed big publisher wants to use an emulator, they will pay.... Err get special permission from Microsoft to publish the app on the store.

    4. Re:What about paid emulations? by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...by paying a one-time fee of $100 or less as part of the Xbox Live Creators Program.

      Finally, Microsoft is showing some humility.

      I remember when they were first starting the app store for Windows phone, they would waive the first year of registration for app developers but would tell us that we should expect a fee of $100 for each year after that (when the Android app store only had a one-time fee of $25 and 10+ times the existing market share.)

      However, it is unfortunate that Microsoft is still a bit out of touch. In the case of game system emulators, they should have just said that they're banning the emulation of proprietary game systems (not officially endorsed by the companies owning those game systems in the first place). That policy would have been sensible enough. Instead, they chose to enforce a blanket policy that makes little sense, only attracts bad press, and that provides no significant benefit to their platform.

    5. Re:What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For that price, I might just start quickly developing some impulse-buy garbage "games" for the Windows store. I'll make a few bucks and the Windows store will continue to function as the software landfill that it is.

    6. Re:What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let the Free Market decide.

    7. Re: What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've been talking about that program to allow independents to push games to Xbox like a regular app store for years and it just never comes. It was part of the Xbone marketing material pre-launch and now that entire generation is almost done.

    8. Re:What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should, except for how it matches neither the spirit nor the letter of the rule. But it should! Because I am ANGRY.

    9. Re:What about paid emulations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When starting the app store for Windows phone the presumption by Microsoft may have been that the platform was going to be dominant, and so $100 per year would be a small price to pay for an app serving 90% of smart phones. Android didn't have the potential clout of an incumbent in the OS business, so encouraging developers would have been more critical.

    10. Re:What about paid emulations? by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      It does provide some benefit...Nintendo and other companies like Sega have been looking in to repacking old titles from previous consoles and reselling them on everything from PC to the Playstation, and this would require an internally packed emulator of course. Well, this might be an indication that this actually will be happening and if those titles go on sale in the Windows Store, they certainly don't want competing projects that allow you to play those same titles without paying them, listed.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    11. Re:What about paid emulations? by syntotic · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is in madness. It must be very graduated, very pro. computerallogists following the trend and culture and going against the market with yet another NO, BANNED, LIMITATION strategy like religions do. The bad case is Nintendo, Nintendo DS/DSi is the best portable console you can find despite its software base being very limited. Could have become the first cell videophone, for instance. Those games are the best you can find, even superior to same game PC versions! But the console is leaving the market and you cannot find new consoles. Then comes the emulator to the rescue. Without the emulator that code, graphical and musical base is lost, even when many games are turned (nearly) impossible to play with mouse and controller because of stylus-screen/control designs. And music does falter in the emulator despite the DS/DSi being a superb chip! If you have not tried those games, you are missing the real playable, immersive games. So what MS is doing is not protecting a market in any way whatsoever but limiting the overall code base, AS IF software was like books and could take care if itself alone! Given the delicate and dependent nature of software a better rule is make it as widespread and runnable as possible. In market terms I am _sure_ by intuition that the more runnable software you allow will net you bigger income even at nominally ridiculous prices, than the strategy of going very limited (appropriable) and asking for a high price! MS in game terms is non existent to me, but all other consoles are known to me and have paid for them games because there ARE emulators. Which is why I use PCs: they run emulators, I can get any emulator and use it without limitations, so I just keep buying PC computers but MS consoles... what did you say was the name of the trinket? Windows?

    12. Re:What about paid emulations? by strikethree · · Score: 1

      In the case of game system emulators, they should have just said that they're banning the emulation of proprietary game systems (not officially endorsed by the companies owning those game systems in the first place). That policy would have been sensible enough.

      I disagree. Why should they even care? Are they afraid that original Xbox games will be playable on the Xbone?

      Again, playing in someone elses sandbox is a prescription for trouble for you. For myself, I will never participate in the Microsoft Store.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  2. How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselves by BlytheBowman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I will make sure I will never buy a Windows machine that can't run normal windows *programs* (not just "apps")

  3. Sounds like another lawsuit by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Essentially they are telling you what you can and can't install on your own system.

    The whole, "You're renting", or "You're the product" is BS. It's your system. You paid for it. You can install what you want.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by subanark · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You mean avoiding a lawsuit.There is a lot of emulator use to play pirated old console games. This is a legal gray area.

    2. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      Except they can also be used to play homebrew games, and honestly, the emulator itself is not illegal and it's not up to Microsoft to police that. By that logic, Windows would need to be restricted on what programs you can install, since a person might install pirated software.

    3. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by subanark · · Score: 2

      What is more likely to cause a lawsuit: allowing illegal use, or preventing legal use?

    4. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Emulators are only legal if they don't include the original system's BIOS or other bootstrap software IIRC.

    5. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they're telling you what you can and can't sell (or give away) in their storefront - there's a difference. Now if and when their storefront is the only way to install any program on your PC, then Windows will have ceased to be a general-purpose computing platform.

      I've always thought of the 'Metro/Modern/Universal Apps' side of Windows 8/8.1/10 as a sideshow, inferior to traditional desktop applications and offering no significant value to anyone but Microsoft.

    6. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think banning outside applications is the overall plan, (note how they refer to non store applications as legacy) just they need a critical mass of applications and adoption before they can pull it off.

      They only allowed sideloading after a failed windows 8 and a few windows 10 builds couldn't muster any interest, with several developers being outspoken about Microsoft's tight control of the overall platform.

      For further evidence of what I'm saying, see Windows RT and the upcoming Windows 10 Cloud.

    7. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      By that logic, Windows would need to be restricted on what programs you can install, since a person might install pirated software.

      For that to work, first Microsoft would have to have some really nefarious monitoring built into Windows that keeps tracks of what apps you have installed on the system and report it to them. Also, a something built into Windows that can prevent certain programs from opening if they are deemed a problem, kinda like how antivirus software can stop things from opening and encrypt files so they are unable to be used. Customers would naturally need a way of finding programs for their computer that they can be assured are legitimate, a curated collection, or "marketplace", if you will.

      Finally, a solution like this to curb warez will only really work if all users are on board. It would be in Microsoft's interest to get everyone on a operating system that supports these technologies, I'm not sure what steps they could take to help to increase their adoption, though...

    8. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Emulators are only legal if they don't include the original system's BIOS or other bootstrap software IIRC.

      Correct. And because of the DMCA, they also can't circumvent copy protection schemes, which every modern system has. Thanks Obama^W Clinton.

    9. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      This is a legal gray area.

      No, it really fucking isn't. Microsoft has NO RIGHT WHATSOFUCKINGEVER to tell me what I can and cannot do with my property!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    10. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by sexconker · · Score: 1

      They only allowed sideloading after a failed windows 8 and a few windows 10 builds couldn't muster any interest

      Bullshit. It's always been allowed on non-RT devices, and it's not referred to as "sideloading". Further, RT is dead, dead, dead.

      I hate MS more than most (check my post history), but stop spouting bullshit. MS has done nothing to lock down Windows to their store. The closest thing to that were the locked-down RT shits, which were aimed at the mobile market.

    11. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by subanark · · Score: 1

      It's their store, they can choose what to host on it. Letting people install non-approved software is a different topic of discussion, and is not limited to just Microsoft in the console market.

    12. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the announcement of a version of Windows 10 that only runs store apps? Its the corpse of RT re-animated once again.

      --
      Good-bye
    13. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Letting people install non-approved software is a different topic of discussion

      Except it isn't, because this store is run by the same company that controls the whole platform, the platform in question is has by far the largest market share of any general-purpose computing platform, and the company has the power (because of the DMCA) to destroy the open nature of that platform at a whim.

      The issues are inextricably related because we are one step away from an "only criminals would run non-approved software" endgame.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    14. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by subanark · · Score: 1

      My comment only applies to XBox, which Microsoft isn't as big in. For Windows, you are free to install anything you want and for the most part pretty easily. That's not going to change anytime soon.

    15. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By that logic, What right do you have to tell MS what they can do with their property? Last I heard, they owned the copyright to their Windows OS. Did you get the federal government to recognize you as the copyright owner?

      No? You are a full of shit troll? Oh, carry on then, whining about how you sort of bought a disc. But not really and have a license. But didn't actually pay for that either, bc you are elite and abused a visibility impairment charity link to get it for free.

    16. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by Megol · · Score: 1

      While that may be your impression it doesn't fit the data we have here in the real world. Windows have always supported installation of programs from several sources and the addition of the application store didn't change that.

    17. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      That's not going to change anytime soon.

      Microsoft is doing literally everything in its power -- and several things that should be beyond its power -- to change that ASAP.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    18. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

      By that logic, What right do you have to tell MS what they can do with their property? Last I heard, they owned the copyright to their Windows OS.

      Copyright is not property. Windows -- like all creative works -- inherently belongs to the Public Domain. All Microsoft has is temporary permission from the government to control copying and distribution of it.

      Individual copies of software, on the other hand, are property -- and are owned by the end-user who legally obtained the copy, not Microsoft. Those individual owners can use their individual property however the fuck they want and Microsoft has no right to interfere.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    19. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      While that may be your impression it doesn't fit the data we have here in the real world. Windows have always supported installation of programs from several sources and the addition of the application store didn't change that.

      And how do you reconcile this statement (in your absolute terms) with Windows RT, Windows 8 app framework, Xbox (which Microsoft claims is a Windows 10 device in its propagandized statistical reports,) Windows Phone/Mobile, and the upcoming Windows 10 Cloud only permitting Windows Store applications? Every single one of these examples is real world, and it deeply contrasts with your statement.

    20. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by tepples · · Score: 1

      Copyright is not property.

      Before we can continue this line of questioning, I must first understand your words. What does "property" mean other than "the subject of some exclusive right"?

    21. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

      What does "property" mean other than "the subject of some exclusive right"?

      That's a reasonably good definition, but it hinges, in turn, on what the words "exclusive" and "right" mean. In this context I interpret "right" as natural rights, not legal rights, implying a labor theory of property (which, by the way, I would argue encompasses possession, i.e., control over the thing, as a prerequisite). "Exclusive" is a little trickier, because we have to consider the question of what is the exclusivity an aspect of -- the owner, or the thing owned? I'd argue, both: the good itself must be excludable too.

      In other words, it is simply not possible to have an exclusive natural right of ownership over a non-excludable good, since you can't establish exclusive possession of it on your own.

      Now, here's the unique thing about expressions of ideas (which is what copyright purports to cover): not only can they be trivially copied, but the act of copying is intrinsic to the very definition of "expression!" Conveying an idea to someone else -- surrendering exclusive possession -- is what causes the idea to have value. Or conversely, an idea never expressed is inherently worthless. That means expressions of ideas are clearly not excludable and therefore cannot be property.

      Now, you can establish exclusive right to a non-excludable good, but exclusive right without exclusive possession requires the existence and intervention of a government for enforcement. That means any right such gained must be a legal right, not a natural one. Legal rights are not intrinsic; they must be justified e.g. by social contract. And that brings us to the U.S. Constitution: it assumes property rights preexist (i.e., as natural rights), as seen in e.g. the Fifth Amendment. In contrast, it establishes a power of Congress to grant copyright, and justifies that power "[only] for limited times" in order "to promote the progress of science and the useful arts" -- clearly a social contract.

      In summary, property is a natural right applied to excludable goods, while copyright is the government-granted imposition of excludability onto ideas, which would otherwise be public goods, in return for a public benefit. Property and copyright are totally different things.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    22. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by Calydor · · Score: 1

      I'm impressed. I have no idea after reading your post if you actually don't know that Windows 10 has those capabilities, or if you're using reverse psychology to make other people realize it does ...

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    23. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allowing the simple act of putting software on your computer to be tagged with a term like "side loading" is a slippery slope. To a normal user, the term "side loading" implies you're doing something non-standard, or even slightly grey/dodgy.

      This kind of crap has come from the mobile world where it can stay as far as I'm concerned.

    24. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      The latter.

      I was pointing out that Microsoft is quietly walking towards that future already. They only have to get all their building blocks in position (which is easy when you can change things in the operating system down the line without having to get the user's consent first). Most of these things (built-in antivirus, an App Store), looks fairly innocuous or downright decent at first (why pay a yearly fee for Norton when Redmond has you protected?). Their main hurtle is getting everyone onto a platform that supports this future (I doubt Win 7-8.1 with backported telemetry is enough). So they institute forced upgrades when possible, then attempt to cut short existing support responsibilities on those pesky "freer" versions of Windows. Eventually the problem will solve itself as old computer die out and new ones will not run older versions of Windows (because they made them not work in a fully patched form).

      Then they can just flip that last switch that causes pirated videos to be treated like "suspicious" files, warez to not launch, etc.
      What are people going to do? Complain their stolen goods aren't working?

    25. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes people look at me funny when I tell them that Windows 10 is part of a larger industry thrust to attempt to literally own all the computers (and I do mean ALL the computers).

      I wonder how much of this crap will have to come up for them to start thinking maybe I was right.

      In the meantime I'm not going to run a desktop OS that tells me I can't run an emulator, because then it's not a desktop OS, and it's not my computer. I'll buy used eBay equipment before it comes to that.

    26. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Essentially they are telling you what you can and can't install on your own system.

      Essentially they are doing no such thing. They are only telling developers what they can and can't sell through the official channel. The end user doesn't come into it.

    27. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      This is a legal gray area.

      The existence of an emulator is not a legal grey area. But hey, MAME is only 20 years old and hasn't been sued, and every other emulator even ones for specific consoles which has been sued has won in court.

    28. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Your history speaks against you. Windows RT never banned sideloading. You could install what you want for it. Whether you could find anything compiled for ARM on Windows is a completely different question as to whether you were allowed to install a program. The fundamental issue is developers gave the platform, however open it may have been, the finger. Also no windows 10 builds every disallowed sideloading (I prefer to think of it as "installing") programs.

      As for Windows 10 cloud, there's nothing but speculation at the moment, but something about the name much like "Chrome OS" says that it's not a platform for running native x86 apps, and the future existence of a low cost non PC platform has nothing to do with the rest of Windows 10.

    29. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Emulators themselves are 100% legal. There are only "legal problems" if the firmware is copied (note - copied, not reimplemented as part of the emulator) and included in the product as opposed to loaded by the end user.

    30. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think banning outside applications is the overall plan, (note how they refer to non store applications as legacy) just they need a critical mass of applications and adoption before they can pull it off.

      They're already laying the groundwork by setting it up so that Win32 programs can't run because they're considered a "security risk." As I understand it, they're going to be making a version of Windows 10 where this is baked into the cake and can't be turned off, and from a technical point of view it would be trivial to put that into just about every non-hacked copy of Windows 10 whenever Microsoft sees fit.

      The thing that a lot of the people on this thread refuse to acknowledge is that this is all a gradual plan moving to a rather obvious end game. I suspect they're sticking their heads in the sand, or they're the sort who say "you're free to do whatever you want!" and espouse the virtues of a world where your choices are to sell yourself to a corporation for life or live in the woods on remote public land completely cut off from modern technology trying to eat squirrels and dying of some disease at 25 .

    31. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by subanark · · Score: 1

      Bleem! may have won in court, but the legal costs are one of the reasons they went out of business. Microsoft just doesn't want to be involved in any potential legal challenges.

    32. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by tepples · · Score: 1

      the good itself must be excludable

      How excludable is, say, your land while you are temporarily away from home?

      Conveying an idea to someone else -- surrendering exclusive possession -- is what causes the idea to have value. Or conversely, an idea never expressed is inherently worthless.

      Copyright doesn't apply to ideas, only to specific expressions of a particular idea.

      That means expressions of ideas are clearly not excludable and therefore cannot be property.

      United States copyright law distinguishes an idea from particular expressions thereof. This distinction is referred to as the idea-expression divide. One consequence is that if there is only one practical way to express a given idea, you are correct that the merger doctrine rules out copyright in said expression. The trouble with a merger defense comes when the judge thinks the idea is less specific than the alleged infringer thought and rules that key aspects belong properly to a particular expression rather than to the generic idea.

      exclusive right without exclusive possession requires the existence and intervention of a government for enforcement.

      It's hard to define "exclusive possession" for anything that isn't small enough to be carried on your person.

    33. Re:Sounds like another lawsuit by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Bleem! may have won in court, but the legal costs are one of the reasons they went out of business. Microsoft just doesn't want to be involved in any potential legal challenges

      Microsoft? THE Microsoft? The company with armies of lawyers perpetually at work? The company that has spent 15 years fighting legal battles against various states? The company that takes on governments rather than just handing over a bit of consumer data? The company who's litigation has its own wikipedia entry (I am not kidding). hahhahahahahahahahh you had me there. +1 funny to you.

      Sorry but your comment is horseshit. Bleem as well as others have provided a lovely bit of prior art. Combined with the fact that Microsoft's EULA basically shields them from much of what goes on in their store, and the fact that most major emulators have never had so much as a legal challenge, forgive me for not believing that one of the richest and litigious companies in the world is quaking in their boots at potentially going to court.

    34. Re: Sounds like another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, all those who do not pirate will file complaints about what they can no longer do.

      If you're squeeky clean you will have the power to do something. If you're not then you won't have power.

      Make sure you're on the right side of the law (remove the beam from your own eye) and then you are free to go after MS for unfairness (then you can remove the more from your brother's eye).

  4. Because who liked the old games anyway? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    Amirite?

    Seriously this is going after "pirates" as in anyone who would dare play a game that's not for one of their current systems.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  5. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wait, there's someone who develops for the Windows App store?

    1. Re:What? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Those fart apps don't write themselves!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  6. What about computer emulators? by LocalH · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Would a Commodore 64 or Apple II emulator be acceptable? They're not defined as "game systems" as there is a significant non-game use.

    --
    FC Closer
    1. Re: What about computer emulators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah!
      And what about server emulators for dead online games that actually still have fans?
      Not all the good stuff at ragezone runs on Linux :(

    2. Re:What about computer emulators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hail to you for mentioning the hallowed Commodore 64!

      *confetti, champagne, and praise for thee

    3. Re: What about computer emulators? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      And what about server emulators for dead online games that actually still have fans?

      The copyright totalitarians have already destroyed those.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    4. Re: What about computer emulators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WoW emulators are a dime a dozen.
      That lawsuit really worked out for them.

  7. Do people buy things from MS stores? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are people actually using these MS stores? If computing were a choice of one walled garden vs. another, Apple would be the one you'd pick. Fortunately, it's not, and it boggles my mind that MS doesn't see that. Put me in charge and I'd shut that shit down on the first day, and go back to an honest "the software is the product" business not a "customer is the product" business, which other companies are doing better than MS. I swear, it's like MS is the superbowl champ that's trying so, so, hard to win a World Series..

    1. Re:Do people buy things from MS stores? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      I for one haven't used it. The store has advantages, in theory, provided they don't lock down the rest of the machine (c.f. Windows RT)...

      1) Windows has no package manager, so a lot of freeware software utilities come from some dodgy download site that may bundle malware in the installer.
      2) The update mechanisms for popular vendors run an update service in the background, which no one wants clogging up their machine
      3) Applications in the store presumably run in a sandbox, which may improve security.

      I'm a cheapskate, so I've never *paid* for any app on Google Play, so from the revenue side 30% of $0.00 is still $0.00

  8. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by bondsbw · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is just banning emulators from the Microsoft store. You can still download and install (sideload) on PCs like you've always been able to do.

    --
    All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
  9. Denying that the Xbox is Turing Complete? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like they're issuing a challenge.

  10. 5 More Years Of These Wonderful Policies... by dryriver · · Score: 2

    ... and Microsoft Windows will become a dead consumer OS. I used to game a lot on Windows PCs. For the first time I'm considering buying a Playstation 4 Pro instead.

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:5 More Years Of These Wonderful Policies... by rajafarian · · Score: 2

      I deleted Windows from my computer altogether this year after dual-booting to play game in Windows since... a long time ago. Although I don't get all the games I want to play in Linux (Fallout 4, The Witcher 3, Battlefield), there are enough games that I do want to play.

    2. Re:5 More Years Of These Wonderful Policies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and Microsoft Windows will become a dead consumer OS.

      When all is said & done, it will be an OS for unicorns.

    3. Re:5 More Years Of These Wonderful Policies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry; Fallout 4 isn't much more playable in Windows.

  11. Only Stand Alone or Everything? by skipkent · · Score: 2

    Games like "Mega Man Legacy Collection" use emulators.

    "After digging around the engine in a disassembler, yup, there's a NES emulator in here. (The classes that "hold" the games are even called bs::nes::MegaMan which implements a bs::nes::NESSystem class too :P)"

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Megam...

  12. Windows App Store? by decipher_saint · · Score: 2

    Oh yeah that horrible abortion nobody uses.

    The real news is that there were Emulators there (I mean, I guess? Or is this a preemptive strike against having fun with Windows 10)

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  13. what do they class a game system? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    what do they class a game system? as?

    1. Re:what do they class a game system? by lgw · · Score: 2

      They're trying to distinguish between selling a game that happens to run on emulation (e.g., all the old games on GOG), and an app that is an emulator and can emulate a variety of games.

      From the point of view of the big game companies, "emulator" is just a euphemism for "piracy". I hate it, but it's no surprise at all MS caved on this - it's not like the xbone is in the lead these days, and MS can afford to piss off the AAA game publishers.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:what do they class a game system? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DOSBox is an emulator used primarily for games. GOG even sells games with DOSBox prepackaged and configured for specific games. Essentially, it "Emulates a game system" so they should also be banned to remain consistent.

    3. Re:what do they class a game system? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Did you even read my comment?

      It doesn't matter whether the product uses emulation, as long at it doesn't expose that to the customer.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  14. Dosbox rapped games? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    What about Dosbox rapped games?

    1. Re:Dosbox rapped games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to beatbox rapped games? ;)

      (apologies - I couldn't resist)

    2. Re:Dosbox rapped games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about Dosbox rapped games?

      The fresh beats of DJ DOSbox feat. Salacious SoundBlaster?

  15. They should ban web browsers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm fairly certain at least some of those emulators exists as javascript and can run in any web browser.

    1. Re:They should ban web browsers by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      They're working on exactly that.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  16. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > You can still download and install (sideload) on PCs like you've always been able to do.

    For now. " I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further. "

  17. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

    Except on WinRT style devices, which I think is what GP is referring to, including the upcoming sequel that is trying to be a ChromeOS clone. (I believe the code name is Windows 10 Cloud, which is just windows 10 except you can only install stuff from the store.)

  18. Re:"devloper" was affected by skipkent · · Score: 1

    It was simply GPL existing emulator that was wrapped up and sold. Honestly it's a good thing as it will only shut down the scum that takes someone elses work and sells it.

    Isn't that kinda the way it's meant to work? As long has he provides the source he can charge as much as he likes.

  19. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just banning emulators from the Microsoft store. You can still download and install (sideload) on PCs like you've always been able to do.

    Why do you fellate so many njgger penises anyway?

  20. First they came for the game emulators... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Doing this sort of thing on XBOX sucks, but is par for the course for a game system.

    You sign up to live in a walled garden when you buy an XBOX (hint: don't buy one).

    Doing this to desktop Windows is UN-FUCKING-ACCEPTABLE !!!

  21. What does this do for Sony's box? by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    Not sure if the Playstations allow emulators, but whether they do or not I'm guessing Sony will increase its gaming platform adoptions over Microsoft's product even more than its current ~2:1 advantage.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
  22. Old news by puddingebola · · Score: 1

    Alot of the complaining seems a bit disingenuous. Game consoles have always been locked down, proprietary, restrictive devices. Remember when Sony removed the Other OS option? They reserve the right to change the playing field whenever they choose. If you don't like this type of behavior, don't buy their console.

    1. Re:Old news by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You do understand that in the event you cite Sony was slapped hard in court for, right? It was an ILLEGAL action. They had no such right to remove OtherOS in the manner they did. You should construct better arguments.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:Old news by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      They reserve the right to change the playing field whenever they choose. If you don't like this type of behavior, don't buy their console.

      NO, GODDAMNIT!

      Sony's (or any other company's) right to control the product it sells fucking ENDS the nanosecond after the sale is completed. Companies do not have the right to hack into, vandalize or destroy people's property, nor do they have the right to dictate how the property owner can use it.

      This is nothing less than AN ATTACK ON THE RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY ITSELF, and "if you don't like it, don't buy it" is not a sufficient or appropriate defense. Copyright leveraged as a weapon of tyranny must be opposed at all costs!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re: Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is Microsoft are seen to be trying to close the gap between devices such as a desktop PC and the XBox as they all fall under this "universal Windows 10" stuff.

      In persuit of this they aren't going to make the XBox more like the PC, but they sure as hell might make the PC more like the X-Box (less control Over the OS, app stores,advertisements etc.).

      Some feel that general purpose computing is under siege by corporations that feel the need to make money from every single interaction with an electronic device and the evidence seems to suggest this is the case.

    4. Re:Old news by puddingebola · · Score: 1

      You're right. The other os lawsuit won a settlement for those effected. People should assert their right to use the hardware as they choose. But game consoles are built around the concept of restricting the use of the hardware and forcing developer to pay the manufacturer for the right to create software for it. Why support this model of hardware manufacture? Aren't you just giving them more motive to do this again. It won't surprise me at all if game console manufacturers do this again, even if there's a lawsuit. I think (from their perspective) the cost of the lawsuit is minimal compared to their assertion of IP rights.

    5. Re:Old news by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Why support this model of hardware manufacture?

      What? Not only do I not support it, I'm saying that merely "not supporting it" doesn't go far enough and the entire business model should be fucking outlawed!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  23. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    I like the name Tim Sweeney gave it. Windows 10: Crush Steam Edition

    --
    Good-bye
  24. what could possibly go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Video games are dumb, and promote everything thats wrong with western society. Just Say No(R).

  25. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by ckatko · · Score: 1

    Windows RT is depreciated, as are the tablets.

    Ask me now I know this complete bullshit. I love explaining to clients they got fucked because they bought a product that Microsoft halfheartedly supported.

  26. Microsoft....... by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Microsoft: "Hey, that's pretty cool. We wish we'd thought of that...but we didn't, so now we're going to stop you from doing it."

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  27. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    Windows RT is depreciated, as are the tablets.

    Microsoft still has a hard-on for the concept though, and it seems that they are wanting to bring it back from the dead:

    http://www.zdnet.com/article/m...

  28. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    seems pretty slippery slope to me

  29. If you play in a crumbling walled garden, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it reasonable to expect a wall to fall on you from time to time.

    So don't play.

  30. Glad I use an Android by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

    I've just always used a MAME emulator on my phone, just about any of the old ROMs are available for it. They don't phone home, just a bit of work getting used to playing them (Bubble Bobble).

    https://games.slashdot.org/sto... will take you to 30+ gigs of free ROMS for Mame.

  31. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    But you'll keep buying systems to run Microsoft Windows. I see your comment was moderated as "insightful". Your comment doesn't live up to the subject header. Your critique gives a mild bit of chastisement to a narrow problem ("can't run normal windows programs") while giving money and power to Microsoft overall ("buy a Windows machine"). This view will help keep them in charge, not challenge them in any serious way. That's not insightful, it's forgoing freedom while complaining about smaller matters better viewed as details. Certainly not "telling Microsoft to go fuck themselves". We're all better off seeking freedom from masters, not switching from one master to another.

    --
    Digital Citizen
  32. Microsoft is simply ensuring a better experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want game emulation you'll be offered Microsoft Hyper-V Game Enterprise Edition 2017. Your save games will be attached to your Active Directory account and it requires only two domain controllers, a saved game witness server and only 12GB RAM and a quad core CPU to run a NES emulator. You can upload certified signed ROMS using a web portal hosted in IIS and it requires SharePoint 2015 or above as a platform dependency.

    it will only be available on Windows Server 2018 or Azure but TCO is guaranteed to be lower than any other competing enterprise game emulation platform!

  33. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    You can still download and install (sideload) on PCs like you've always been able to do.

    You can right now. It may be interesting to see what direction MS take in the future. After all they have already made side-loading opt-out with a setting in Windows 10.

    I for one welcome our new PC controlling overlords, and then I will spit in their coffee.

  34. Red: Sounds likI e another lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WinCE Mk IV
    This is an old idea.

  35. Re:Microsoft is simply ensuring a better experienc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You joke, but a lot of the features we took for granted in Windows 2000, moved to Windows XP _Pro_, and stuff like multiple logons to a file server, that you take for granted in Linux-land as just being consuming a small increase in resources, are outright blocked by license policies on Window server XXXX.

  36. Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a slippery slope. A lot of slopes are slippery, such as this one, and pretending otherwise is idiotic.

  37. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by bondsbw · · Score: 1

    I'm talking about old school applications (not appx). There is no opt out for sideloading those.

    --
    All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
  38. Yes, Give me more reasons not to buy! :-) by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 0

    Dear Microsoft.... Thank you for giving me yet another SET of reasons, NOT to buy ANYTHING from your "Store".... Never have, and Now its a Guarantee, I Never Will! :-D

  39. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Sideload"

    Also known as installing software downloaded from the web, as some of us have been calling it since...well, forever.

  40. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Err you've not been paying attention to the Insider releases have you. That lovely new option that they introduced: "Allow apps from the Store only". The ones that block any exe not signed by Microsoft.

    That is definitely opting out of old school applications.

  41. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themsel by bondsbw · · Score: 1

    Right, it is in prerelease builds. Not anything mainstream, and no guarantee that the feature will remain in the final release or if it will work the same.

    --
    All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
  42. Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themsel by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Right, it is in prerelease builds. Not anything mainstream, and no guarantee that the feature will remain in the final release or if it will work the same.

    You do know the final build of creators update was released 4 days ago as manual download and will hit windows update to start being automatically applied on Monday right?

    Some lovely setting screenshots. Scroll almost exactly half way down to find your guarantee that this is in build 1703 which most people will get whether they want it or not within the coming few weeks.

  43. Re: Only APPS can app apps! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a load of app!