Do I need to sign my code which means having to purchase a signing cert? The costs for code signing are prohibitive for some small devs.
Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
11–20 of 158 posts
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#12OK. So I converted our app from MSI to AppX (using Advanced Installer so it was just another output from the same project). Publishing to Store is underway. What next? What are the UWP APIs/functionality worth adding to an existing Win32 app?
Seamless updates, sandboxed registry, notifications API all seem to add some value to UX.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#13So if I understand it right, this is basically running apps in a Win32-emulator/sandbox where all 'unsafe' Win32 file and registry accesses are redirected into sandboxed locations.
I wonder why MS didn't go this way from the beginning instead of pushing that Frankensteinian half-desktop/half-mobile monstrosity called WinRT^H^H^H UWP on us.
The UWP application model has been modelled after the (now 10 years old) iOS/Android app model, created in a time when mobile devices had a lot less memory and performance than notebooks. Win32 is a pretty bad desktop API, but UWP somehow managed to be even worse because it is an outdated mobile OS ported back into the traditional desktop environment, and everything that is not 'mobile' (mouse, keyboard, window management, ...) has been implemented as an afterthought. For games (which I guess are the main usage for old-school desktop computers now), UWP is an especially bad fit.
I'm all for increasing security by running applications in a sandbox with granular permissions. However I am against 'walled gardens' curated by platform owners, this closed-platform model kills innovation. Unfortunately these two different things got thrown into the same pot by Apple, Google, and now MS. UWP somehow manages to combine the worst aspects of a dead app shop, a dead mobile platform, and walled-garden power phantasies.
All of these problems aren't fixed with the Win32 sandbox though, I'm pretty sure this is just an emulation layer on top of UWP, so all UWP limitations would still apply.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#14OK. So I converted our app from MSI to AppX (using Advanced Installer so it was just another output from the same project). Publishing to Store is underway. What next? What are the UWP APIs/functionality worth adding to an existing Win32 app?
Tile functionality.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#15The day will come when you won't be able to install an "app" from anywhere other than the Windows Store. Microsoft will want a big cut of the sale price.
Bad security is a feature. If platforms were secure against hostile applications, we wouldn't need app stores.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#16Do I need to sign my code which means having to purchase a signing cert? The costs for code signing are prohibitive for some small devs.
You don't need to buy a signing cert; the Store signs the appx for you for installation. (Though you sign or self-sign the package https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh4...)
You may need to buy one if you distribute the appx outside the store and you want it to be automatically trusted? (As you don't need to distribute the appx via the Store or install via the Store)
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#17So if I understand it right, this is basically running apps in a Win32-emulator/sandbox where all 'unsafe' Win32 file and registry accesses are redirected into sandboxed locations. I wonder why MS didn't go this way from the beginning instead of pushing that Frankensteinian half-desktop/half-mobile monstrosity called WinRT^H^H^H UWP on us. The UWP application model has been modelled after the (now 10 years old) iOS/A…
The introductory phrase of UWP explains why they pushed it: "A Universal Windows Platform (UWP) app can run on any Windows-based device, from your phone to your tablet or PC". The point was getting more applications for their mobile platform by coaxing developers who might have otherwise built a desktop-only application. I'd say this new development is essentially an admission of defeat on mobile.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#18OK. So I converted our app from MSI to AppX (using Advanced Installer so it was just another output from the same project). Publishing to Store is underway. What next? What are the UWP APIs/functionality worth adding to an existing Win32 app?
Tiles and notifications might be the most obvious ones.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#19So if I understand it right, this is basically running apps in a Win32-emulator/sandbox where all 'unsafe' Win32 file and registry accesses are redirected into sandboxed locations. I wonder why MS didn't go this way from the beginning instead of pushing that Frankensteinian half-desktop/half-mobile monstrosity called WinRT^H^H^H UWP on us. The UWP application model has been modelled after the (now 10 years old) iOS/A…
The introductory phrase of UWP explains why they pushed it: "A Universal Windows Platform (UWP) app can run on any Windows-based device, from your phone to your tablet or PC" . The point was getting more applications for their mobile platform by coaxing developers who might have otherwise built a desktop-only application. I'd say this new development is essentially an admission of defeat on mobile.
The problem is that it may take their desktop with it. The industry doesn't want to invest in a desktop windows app because there is no clear direction. WPF/Win32 etc seem to be getting deprecated, but UWP is too limited.
Re: Win32 and .NET desktop apps can now be published in the Windows Store
#20So if I understand it right, this is basically running apps in a Win32-emulator/sandbox where all 'unsafe' Win32 file and registry accesses are redirected into sandboxed locations. I wonder why MS didn't go this way from the beginning instead of pushing that Frankensteinian half-desktop/half-mobile monstrosity called WinRT^H^H^H UWP on us. The UWP application model has been modelled after the (now 10 years old) iOS/A…
> old-school desktop computers
I'm very sad about how accurate this generalization is.