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

101–110 of 118 posts

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

#101

Post by DigitalJack »

r00fus wrote: post #99
xlayn wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I work in a large 5000+ software company and were honestly about 30-40% macs. An MBPr is a good investment - I figure my 3yo machine will easily retain about 35-50% of its value if resold.

That's an odd definition of an investment. My MBPr was definitely an expense, and I love it.

I suppose the enjoyment I have received from using it could be considered dividends of sorts, and so I could see calling it an investment from that perspective. But not financially.

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

#102

Post by RCortex »

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…

> (GWX aside,)

Really, that lawsuit not enough to convince you it's a big deal? They're "upgrading" users without their consent/knowledge using ui dark patterns.

At least be honest if you work for Microsoft.

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

#103

Post by hirsin »

shmerl wrote: post #81
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? 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 implementat…

I think you may be misinformed. You can build an app and install it using VS. You don't even need VS, apps are just exe's in zip files. Compile and lay it out right and you're done. The Store isn't required to do any of that, so I don't know what the "UWP backend" is. You might look at Hockey app (pre acquisition) for evidence of an app distributor that wasn't Microsoft.

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

#104

Post by shmerl »

hirsin wrote: post #103
shmerl wrote: post #81

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. 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 implementat…

I think you may be misinformed. You can build an app and install it using VS. You don't even need VS, apps are just exe's in zip files. Compile and lay it out right and you're done. The Store isn't required to do any of that, so I don't know what the "UWP backend" is. You might look at Hockey app (pre acquisition) for evidence of an app distributor that wasn't Microsoft.

How does UWP achieve architecture agnostic releases then? They claimed it's part of the UWP design.

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

#105

Post by arpa »

luckman212 wrote: post #94
R_haterade wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Look at this thread. Its 90% conspiracy theories and axe grinding from things a decade out. To be fair, M$ earned this.

Are we still writing "M$" in 2016? G$$g£€ or A$$$on seem more appropriate based on growth and profits.

We do not forget what the M$ stands for. Nor should we. Sure there are others, who are admittedly more evil, but M$ is no angel and it never was.

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

#107

Post by mobiuscog »

FLGMwt wrote: post #91

Only because it hasn't been mentioned, I'll remind everyone that they recently did the same with React Native https://github.com/ReactWindows/react-native-windows Cool stuff.

Equally cool (and with Ubuntu, react-native is really becoming a useful 'standard' for cross platform GUI work)

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

#108

Post by douche »

r00fus wrote: post #99
xlayn wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I work in a large 5000+ software company and were honestly about 30-40% macs. An MBPr is a good investment - I figure my 3yo machine will easily retain about 35-50% of its value if resold.

Is that one of the ones that is old enough that it can actually be opened up and have components upgraded?

I've been hearing about used 2012 MBPs selling for more than they cost new.

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

#109

Post by bluedino »

douche wrote: post #108
r00fus wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in a large 5000+ software company and were honestly about 30-40% macs. An MBPr is a good investment - I figure my 3yo machine will easily retain about 35-50% of its value if resold.

Is that one of the ones that is old enough that it can actually be opened up and have components upgraded? I've been hearing about used 2012 MBPs selling for more than they cost new.

>> I've been hearing about used 2012 MBPs selling for more than they cost new.

Where? They go for $700 at the most on for sale forums.

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

#110

Post by kayoone »

shmerl wrote: post #31
kayoone wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you are writing your own, all the major game engines support multiple graphics apis anyway.

It doesn't contradict what I said above. Supporting multiple APIs is a burden, whether it falls on those who write their own engines, or those who write those engines for others to use. You can view it as a tax which increases costs and reduces efficiency. The point of lock-in is exactly such tax, which will deter some from using anything else, or at the very least make it more expensive for those who will use someth…

i would argue that having only one universal graphics api would hurt innovation and progress, so it's not perfect either. MS is not even the worst anyway, Apple is even forcing Vulkan do use Metal under the hood.
Post reply on HN