Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

forums.unrealengine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 118 posts

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#81

Post by shmerl »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #77
iamcreasy wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't mean 'open' or 'close'. I meant 'less restrictive' or 'more restrictive'. Win32 is less restrictive, and UWP is more restrictive. > The idea that encouraging user level apps to use UWP because it is safer does not inherently mean some draconian lockdown is coming. All market places (google play, steam, apple app store) has restrictions. I haven't made app for any one of them, but I am certain there are polic…

So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? Because that's all UWP is: A more secure design. Win32 is only "less restrictive" than UWP in one particular way: It allows any application to mess with almost anything in your system without warning or user permission. Anyone can download and run UWP without any hiccup. In actuality, Win32 does have hiccups: UAC elevat…

> So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? Because that's all UWP is: A more secure design.

Its development is rather weird though. If I understood correctly, part of the build process is out of developers' hands, and is supposed to be performed by distributor which supports UWP (especially for different architectures). Is UWP backend toolchain and implementation even available for other distributors besides Windows Store? If yes, then it's not a distributor lock-in. But if no, then Tim Sweeney was perfectly right criticizing it.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#82

Post by iamcreasy »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #77
iamcreasy wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't mean 'open' or 'close'. I meant 'less restrictive' or 'more restrictive'. Win32 is less restrictive, and UWP is more restrictive. > The idea that encouraging user level apps to use UWP because it is safer does not inherently mean some draconian lockdown is coming. All market places (google play, steam, apple app store) has restrictions. I haven't made app for any one of them, but I am certain there are polic…

So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? Because that's all UWP is: A more secure design. Win32 is only "less restrictive" than UWP in one particular way: It allows any application to mess with almost anything in your system without warning or user permission. Anyone can download and run UWP without any hiccup. In actuality, Win32 does have hiccups: UAC elevat…

> So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability?

It should, but at this cost.

> Epic Games can merge Microsoft's fork if they want. (Bear in mind, pull requests start as forks.)

Epic games won't. In fact, our conversation starts following the article interviewing Tim Sweeney. I highly doubt if MS will ever be able to convince Epic games to do that.

Also in the future what's stopping MS from forcing developers to use Microsoft store, followed by restriction on the type of content, followed by...more restrictions. The trust issue is very big here.

It's also true that MS have changed their attitude recently after Satya Nadella became the CEO, but when both Tim Sweeney and Gabe Newell is worried about something - I think the issue deserves more attention.

> Tim Sweeney is paranoid in the wrong ways, he's suggesting that you have to leave a poorly secured operating system in order to protect user freedom. That's false.

He is saying it will be wiser for the community at large to choose user freedom over poorly implemented security policies.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#83

Post by shmerl »

iamcreasy wrote: post #82
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? Because that's all UWP is: A more secure design. Win32 is only "less restrictive" than UWP in one particular way: It allows any application to mess with almost anything in your system without warning or user permission. Anyone can download and run UWP without any hiccup. In actuality, Win32 does have hiccups: UAC elevat…

> So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? It should, but at this cost. > Epic Games can merge Microsoft's fork if they want. (Bear in mind, pull requests start as forks.) Epic games won't. In fact, our conversation starts following the article interviewing Tim Sweeney. I highly doubt if MS will ever be able to convince Epic games to do that. Also in the futur…

> He is saying it will be wiser for the community at large to choose user freedom over poorly implemented security policies.

To be honest, he ignores the elephant in the room. Despite his criticism of MS, all his talks assume Windows and MS everywhere. To promote user freedom, he should do more for people to ditch MS for good and to switch to Linux for example. While UE is one of the best engines that support Linux today, it's done as an afterthought, more by contribution of UE community, not so much as a big focus by Epic.

Using Windows and complaining that MS can mess things up at any time is somewhat incoherent. Because MS indeed can do it. Make something to reduce relying on MS, that's a fix for it.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#84

Post by iamcreasy »

shmerl wrote: post #83
iamcreasy wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? It should, but at this cost. > Epic Games can merge Microsoft's fork if they want. (Bear in mind, pull requests start as forks.) Epic games won't. In fact, our conversation starts following the article interviewing Tim Sweeney. I highly doubt if MS will ever be able to convince Epic games to do that. Also in the futur…

> He is saying it will be wiser for the community at large to choose user freedom over poorly implemented security policies. To be honest, he ignores the elephant in the room. Despite his criticism of MS, all his talks assume Windows and MS everywhere. To promote user freedom, he should do more for people to ditch MS for good and to switch to Linux for example. While UE is one of the best engines that support Linux t…

> it's done as an afterthought, more by contribution of UE community, not so much as a big focus by Epic.

I think that's wrong. Linux support was on the road map, but since the engine was open source, the community(done by one person if I remember correctly) beat them to it. And today Linux is a fully supported platform.

> Using Windows and complaining that MS can mess things up at any time is somewhat incoherent.

Very true. Our only hope is to talk about it, and hoping that MS would listen.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#85

Post by shmerl »

iamcreasy wrote: post #84
shmerl wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is saying it will be wiser for the community at large to choose user freedom over poorly implemented security policies. To be honest, he ignores the elephant in the room. Despite his criticism of MS, all his talks assume Windows and MS everywhere. To promote user freedom, he should do more for people to ditch MS for good and to switch to Linux for example. While UE is one of the best engines that support Linux t…

> it's done as an afterthought, more by contribution of UE community, not so much as a big focus by Epic. I think that's wrong. Linux support was on the road map, but since the engine was open source, the community(done by one person if I remember correctly) beat them to it. And today Linux is a fully supported platform. > Using Windows and complaining that MS can mess things up at any time is somewhat incoherent. Ve…

> Our only hope is to talk about it, and hoping that MS would listen.

I don't really care much whether MS will listen. What even if they won't? The only proper solution is not to depend on them altogether.

> Linux support was on the road map, but since the engine was open source, the community(done by one person if I remember correctly) beat them to it. And today Linux is a fully supported platform.

I red somewhere, that many merge requests were ignored for a long time, and Linux wasn't really much of a priority for Epic to begin with. They should focus on Linux more IMHO, including in such public statements. Otherwise these criticisms by Tim Sweeney seem more like rants, than any practical proposals on how to improve the situation.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#86

Post by xlayn »

whatshisface wrote: post #20

It is true that Microsoft has been behaving well lately (GWX aside,) but it is also the case that their getting-away-with-it power is at an all time low. Microsoft would benefit if they could do all of these anti-consumer things, but that recent stampede towards Linux proved that the tennantry can be easily spooked and dangerous when on the move. Developers are leaving windows to work on Linux and Mac, to the extent…

You'll stay with the tech you locked yourself in. I work in one of several buildings and macs there are just to let others know that you are a manager and you can get away with anything you want. Beside that everything is a MS pc and will stay that way until the business die.

Getting everyone into the system is infinitively expensive, so is getting everyone out of it.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#87

Post by serge2k »

stryan wrote: post #9
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single Microsoft-related news item does not require mention of a 20-year-old business strategy from before the Internet era.

Actually, this may be a valid concern. It does look like Microsoft is trying harder and harder to lock down PC gaming. See Gabe's [0] and Tim Sweeney's [1] complaints. [0]: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/07/steams-newell-windows-... [1]: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/03/tim-sweeney-to-microso...

The fact that it's from someone well known doesn't make paranoia and FUD any better.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#88

Post by serge2k »

iamcreasy wrote: post #82
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? Because that's all UWP is: A more secure design. Win32 is only "less restrictive" than UWP in one particular way: It allows any application to mess with almost anything in your system without warning or user permission. Anyone can download and run UWP without any hiccup. In actuality, Win32 does have hiccups: UAC elevat…

> So what you're saying is, Windows should not strive to meet any sort of basic security capability? It should, but at this cost. > Epic Games can merge Microsoft's fork if they want. (Bear in mind, pull requests start as forks.) Epic games won't. In fact, our conversation starts following the article interviewing Tim Sweeney. I highly doubt if MS will ever be able to convince Epic games to do that. Also in the futur…

> Gabe Newell

I'm sure his attitude has nothing at all to do with owning steam and worrying that Microsoft might actually become a viable competitor. Oh, and unlike EA he can't rely on a customer base that has rabid hatred for MS.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#89

Post by iamcreasy »

shmerl wrote: post #85
iamcreasy wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's done as an afterthought, more by contribution of UE community, not so much as a big focus by Epic. I think that's wrong. Linux support was on the road map, but since the engine was open source, the community(done by one person if I remember correctly) beat them to it. And today Linux is a fully supported platform. > Using Windows and complaining that MS can mess things up at any time is somewhat incoherent. Ve…

> Our only hope is to talk about it, and hoping that MS would listen. I don't really care much whether MS will listen. What even if they won't? The only proper solution is not to depend on them altogether. > Linux support was on the road map, but since the engine was open source, the community(done by one person if I remember correctly) beat them to it. And today Linux is a fully supported platform. I red somewhere,…

Agreed. But it's not just about games, or about Unreal engine. Its about all user level applications.

And he is just pointing out this general problem.

Re: Microsoft forks Unreal Engine 4 and ports it to Universal Windows Platform

#90

Post by sanxiyn »

kyriakos wrote: post #56
bitmapbrother wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also code that modifies the engine in a way that Epic's founder disagrees with.

the beauty of open source though will let people develop UWP games using epic's engine against its founder's wish.

Unreal Engine 4 is not open source.
Post reply on HN