Tim Sweeney: Devs must oppose Microsoft Windows 10 UWP

[Vigil]

Yet it's interesting how he doesn't rail against Apple's walled garden...

Edit: I don't see why he would; OSX is not seen as an important gaming platform. Also, are you required to sell games via the App Store if you use e.g. Xcode?

[LSG501]

Well, correct me if I'm wrong .... and I could be, as I gaven't kept on top if Win10 evolution since I dumped it.

As I understand the Pro option, it allows you to "defer" not decline an update. Which means you still get it, whether you want it or not? Yes?

not sure about defer as I looked into setting it to notify before installing it (would have gone win 8 otherwise ). Basically I followed the gpedit bit from this link (scroll to gpedit bit) and at the moment it's just notifying me of updates to install. No direct control of updates to download but the tool is there for that purpose if needed. At the very least it allows me to update when it suits me rather than when it suits them.

Now suppose I have legacy hardware, or software (and I have some of both). Suppose some proposed update renders some such inoperable? It's happened to me in the past with Windows, which is WHY some of my machines are still running XP.
Does it really help me much if the update renders that hardware or software unusable tonight, or next month, because I deferred it?

I can understand that issue, I've had perfectly usable stuff rendered useless in updates due to the manufacturer not updating the version it can install on, had the issue with my HP adf on win 10 but found work arounds by ripping out the 'driver file' and the likes (driverscape was useful for this). I have however kept at least one machine with windows 8 and I've still got my old os versions if I ever need them

Being able to defer is an improvement, and controlling reboot options dertainly is, but it doesn't alter the FACT that MS have grabbed control over what is, or is not, installed on my desktop machines, and tried to sweeten the pot by begrudgingly, after a backlash, giving back a little control over precisely when.

It's about as frienly an act as being carjacked, robbed of my new Merc (if I had one), my wallet, watch and all clothes except my underwear, and then the thief taking pity on me and giving me back enough of my own money for the bus fare home. And expecting gratitude for it

I still prefer the old method but this is currently working for me but as with all things windows 10 you just assume they'll change it at some point lol

That's my real bugbear with MS.

It's not any one thing. It's the pattern.

For instance, the Win8 MUI thing and Start button. It irritated intensely, but it's easy enough to get around. It was also MS's initial stance that "they" couldn't give users the option to select the old UI because Metro/MUI was 'integral'. Then, of course, when third parties developed ways round it, for free, in apparently about 5 minutes, it was "oh".

The REALLY irritating thing, therefore, was not what they did with Start button but the arrogance of mindset betrayed by HOW they did it. Now, having ceded control over updates, MS can alter or amend OS functions, at will, to prevent any future steps to get around their decisions whether we like it or not. Contrast that to the Linux mindset that allows me to pick the entire GUI if I wish to.

You know I actually ended up liking win 8 start menu, it was actually a little faster (and I used to tweak win 7 for performance, easy access to main stuff too) to use once you got used to it, never bothered with metro apps much mind as apart from the hotmail email connection it was pretty useless for 'business' use.

Win 10 isn't really that special overall if I'm honest, in terms of performance it seems no faster than win 8 and I actually prefer the win 8 start to the one in win 10. At the moment win 10 is usable after using everything I can find to turn off the 'junk' but I've kept some older os's on tap just in case, not that you can easily get away from their 'tracking' stuff as it's been stuck in 8.1 and 7 too iirc.


How long it stays usable is the question sadly

[LSG501]

Emigrating and voting are actions you take after voicing your displeasure, no?

you brought up the 'political' angle, I just said about them having options if they're not happy with something they don't have to stay there. No one is forcing them to do something when there are other alternatives but they don't want to have to spend money and change.

Technically they're not making money from their OS's, Windows is Microsoft's 4th biggest earner bringing in just over 10% of their revenue from OEM partners, commercial sales don't even register high enough to warrant reporting.

I never said it was purely down to windows..... I said Microsoft was making profit but you could argue windows is a part of their business model that links the other parts together

Well it seem to be a big enough issue for Valve to invest the time and money into developing their own OS and voice very similar displeasure of the direction Microsoft seems to be heading, yes it's about money but i feel that's over simplifying the issue.

Yes the store may actually help them but at what cost? If you cede all control of your program to a third party is that a price worth paying, if Steam forced developers to use Valve's propitiatory API, developer tools, and files would they be so willing to develop under such restrictions.

and who's to say valve won't change their 'requirements' once they become more established? And in large businesses, especially those with shareholders, it's ALWAYS about the money.

We also don't know how much longer Microsoft are going to support win32, it's highly probable that going forward Microsoft is going to focus on UWP, is that going to be at the cost of win32, are they going to obfuscate being able to run win32 programs much in the same way as Android does, if or when UWP becomes more popular than the now neglected and hidden win32 binaries are Microsoft going to start removing the now outdated and insecure win32?

They're going to have to support it for a fair while yet because I very much doubt the windows store would be suitable for professional programs from the likes of adobe, autodesk or similar without them having to heavily change their code. These are the sorts of programs that their enterprise customers use, not what a home user uses.

Or maybe voice your concerns before going for the nuclear option.

they have been and from what I've read MS have been trying to please them.... yet he still isn't happy which means it's down to money in my view.

Maybe because he doesn't develop software for iOS and because up until now there was an easy way to avoid that particular walled garden.

Also you not getting 6 platforms with UWP, you're getting a single platform that runs on 6 devices, that's a very different kettle of fish.

Epic games do or at least have done, Infinity Blade III was released on iOS by epic .... and I'm pretty sure the t&c's over there are pretty similar to windows store.

As to the six devices versus platforms, I'd still class them as platforms due to their inherent differences in usage/design. You can use the same underlying code on a microwave and a car stereo but they're not the same platform.

[Corky34]

Yet it's interesting how he doesn't rail against Apple's walled garden...

Edit: I don't see why he would; OSX is not seen as an important gaming platform. Also, are you required to sell games via the App Store if you use e.g. Xcode?

Wasn't me that said that.

Admin edit: correct attribution username inserted above

you brought up the 'political' angle, I just said about them having options if they're not happy with something they don't have to stay there. No one is forcing them to do something when there are other alternatives but they don't want to have to spend money and change.

Not a political angle but a moving home angle because the place you used to call home has changed for the worst, wouldn't you attempt to voice your concerns and only emigrate or move home when those concerns go unanswered.

and who's to say valve won't change their 'requirements' once they become more established? And in large businesses, especially those with shareholders, it's ALWAYS about the money.

Maybe because unlike Microsoft they don't have their own API that's used on 90% of desktop PCs with another proprietary API that's used by 95% of gamers, they don't have their own OS (SteamOS is not theirs as it's based on Linux), and they're not the only place where you can buy something, and they've gone on record as saying they want to open up gaming along with actions to backup those claims, in other words their walking the walk and not just talking the talk like Microsoft have done for the last decade.

They're going to have to support it for a fair while yet because I very much doubt the windows store would be suitable for professional programs from the likes of adobe, autodesk or similar without them having to heavily change their code. These are the sorts of programs that their enterprise customers use, not what a home user uses.

Indeed they are, enough time to get people investing time and money into the UWP so when they do start degrading win32 people will think twice about switching to another platform, it's the same model that's used by Google and Apple with Android and iOS.

they have been and from what I've read MS have been trying to please them.... yet he still isn't happy which means it's down to money in my view.

From what Sweeney says they haven't though, they've been listening and doing nothing, by the sounds of it all they've been doing is placating him with kind words and that defiantly sounds like typical Microsoft.

Epic games do or at least have done, Infinity Blade III was released on iOS by epic .... and I'm pretty sure the t&c's over there are pretty similar to windows store.

As to the six devices versus platforms, I'd still class them as platforms due to their inherent differences in usage/design. You can use the same underlying code on a microwave and a car stereo but they're not the same platform.

Infinity Blade III was developed by Chair Entertainment who was bought by Epic in 2008 so technically the don't develop for iOS, it's a subsidiary of theirs that do it.
On the platform thing we'll have to agree to disagree then as myself and most other definitions say a computer platform generally means the operating system and computer hardware only and in the case of Windows that platform would be any device capable of running x86 code, to class 6 devices as platforms would be like saying Linux can run on thousands of platforms like TV's, STB's, routers, firewall, etc, etc.

[LSG501]

Not a political angle but a moving home angle because the place you used to call home has changed for the worst, wouldn't you attempt to voice your concerns and only emigrate or move home when those concerns go unanswered.

ok.. but sometimes moving home can actually turn out to be worse, it might end up costing you more, you find you can't do the same things as before or you lose certain freedoms that you have in your home country. I believe the saying grass is greener on the other side of the fence would be as fitting here as everywhere else.

Maybe because unlike Microsoft they don't have their own API that's used on 90% of desktop PCs with another proprietary API that's used by 95% of gamers, they don't have their own OS (SteamOS is not theirs as it's based on Linux), and they're not the only place where you can buy something, and they've gone on record as saying they want to open up gaming along with actions to backup those claims, in other words their walking the walk and not just talking the talk like Microsoft have done for the last decade.

but who's to say they won't change that, you can say whatever you like to get people to join in, just look how well marketing and/or saying the right thing in events can work to a companies advantage. We all know apple uses a lot of branded terms to refer to generic things like retina for a hi dpi screen or lightning port for their propriety and expensive only fits us socket when it's little better than a usb3 socket and look how well that's worked out for them. Or even better 'you're holding it wrong' when they had antenna issues.

Indeed they are, enough time to get people investing time and money into the UWP so when they do start degrading win32 people will think twice about switching to another platform, it's the same model that's used by Google and Apple with Android and iOS.

and like I said I don't have an issue with it for games but I do for work programs. I wouldn't want my work programs run this way as that just wouldn't work in my opinion, especially if you need to transfer a license between pc's let alone support issues for specific user usage scenarios. Games on the other hand are a consumer item and it makes sense to have these come through a protected/standardised setup like the store because of all the protection etc it offers.

From what Sweeney says they haven't though, they've been listening and doing nothing, by the sounds of it all they've been doing is placating him with kind words and that defiantly sounds like typical Microsoft.

he's been asking for some stupid stuff to be fair (guardian article) -
- download and install a UWP application from the web without any warnings... virus/malware heaven, not to mention there is technically side loading available albeit tucked away deep in settings
- That any company can operate a store for PC Windows games and apps in UWP format – as Valve, Good Old Games, Epic Games, EA, and Ubi Soft do today with the win32 format, and that Windows will not impede or obstruct these apps stores, relegating them to second-class citizenship. - um why after all this is MS's OS and store, build/compile their own os with their own money if they want their own store and I doubt MS would obstruct them doing their own store for windows as it would probably cause issue with the EU's we want free money department.
- That users, developers, and publishers will always be free to engage in direct commerce with each other, without Microsoft forcing everyone into its formative in-app commerce monopoly and taking a 30% cut. - see it's all about the money

Infinity Blade III was developed by Chair Entertainment who was bought by Epic in 2008 so technically the don't develop for iOS, it's a subsidiary of theirs that do it.
On the platform thing we'll have to agree to disagree then as myself and most other definitions say a computer platform generally means the operating system and computer hardware only and in the case of Windows that platform would be any device capable of running x86 code, to class 6 devices as platforms would be like saying Linux can run on thousands of platforms like TV's, STB's, routers, firewall, etc, etc.

A subsiduary it may be but it is/was still part of Epic .
And yeah we'll disagree on platform versus device because I suspect we're coming at it from a different perspective (ie work backgrounds etc)

[Lucio]

We can only hope that this idea gets crushed by an anti-trust lawsuit, because it sounds like Microsoft is once again pushing it's monopoly over the home PC market for it's own benefit.

[Corky34]

ok.. but sometimes moving home can actually turn out to be worse, it might end up costing you more, you find you can't do the same things as before or you lose certain freedoms that you have in your home country. I believe the saying grass is greener on the other side of the fence would be as fitting here as everywhere else.

That's why you do research into your intended new home, like i wouldn't move to North Korea because it would be a fairly safe bet that it would be worse, the grass is always greener is just a saying, with the amount of information available in today's world you can actual compare their grass with yours beforehand.

but who's to say they won't change that, you can say whatever you like to get people to join in, just look how well marketing and/or saying the right thing in events can work to a companies advantage. We all know apple uses a lot of branded terms to refer to generic things like retina for a hi dpi screen or lightning port for their propriety and expensive only fits us socket when it's little better than a usb3 socket and look how well that's worked out for them. Or even better 'you're holding it wrong' when they had antenna issues.

The open source license says they can't, Valve uses a Debian based distro under an open source license so unlike Microsoft SteamOS can't be locked down to just the steam client, unless they start development of their own propitiatory OS i think it's safe to say Valve has no intentions and exhibits no signs of wanting to create a walled garden, like i said they're not only talking the talk they're walking the walk, whereas Microsoft is just talking the talk and hasn't walked the walk in over a decade.

and like I said I don't have an issue with it for games but I do for work programs. I wouldn't want my work programs run this way as that just wouldn't work in my opinion, especially if you need to transfer a license between pc's let alone support issues for specific user usage scenarios. Games on the other hand are a consumer item and it makes sense to have these come through a protected/standardised setup like the store because of all the protection etc it offers.

That's the problem with a proprietary system that you don't have control over, if Microsoft changed your work programs to run this way what choice would you have, would you do as many people are doing re:UWP and start complaining in the hope that they changed their minds, or would you stay silent?

he's been asking for some stupid stuff to be fair (guardian article) -
- download and install a UWP application from the web without any warnings... virus/malware heaven, not to mention there is technically side loading available albeit tucked away deep in settings
- That any company can operate a store for PC Windows games and apps in UWP format – as Valve, Good Old Games, Epic Games, EA, and Ubi Soft do today with the win32 format, and that Windows will not impede or obstruct these apps stores, relegating them to second-class citizenship. - um why after all this is MS's OS and store, build/compile their own os with their own money if they want their own store and I doubt MS would obstruct them doing their own store for windows as it would probably cause issue with the EU's we want free money department.
- That users, developers, and publishers will always be free to engage in direct commerce with each other, without Microsoft forcing everyone into its formative in-app commerce monopoly and taking a 30% cut. - see it's all about the money

If he was asking for some stupid stuff (in your opinion) then why did Microsoft placate him, why didn't they just say no we're not going to do that.

Not allowing downloading and installing UWP applications from the web is why people think Microsoft are building a walled garden, and why there's strong indications that win32 programs are slowly going to be phased out in favor of the supposedly more secure and safe UWP variant.

That any company should be able to run their own Store is perfectly reasonable IMO seeing as Microsoft have said Windows is an open eco-system, it's that talking the talk but not walking the walk thing, I've got no beef with Microsoft if they want to create a walled garden but if that's what they want they should be honest with people and not say one thing and do another.

And IMO users, developers, and publishers should be allowed to engage in direct commerce with each other, that's what drives innovation and competitive prices, to not allow that your basically saying that it's OK for a company to abuse its monopoly, monopolist companies normally create an unhealthy market, yes it's all about money but as i said that's over simplifying it to the extreme.

EDIT: I think the opening reply in an interview Sweeney did with Gamebeat sums up why many people are concerned with this new direction Microsoft are taking.

My concern is, if you extrapolate that spirit of how Microsoft is running the platform to their strategy with applications, then it looks like it’ll be very easy for them to do to Win32 apps in the future what they’re doing to Chrome and Mozilla today. Making it very inconvenient to do anything outside of Microsoft’s ecosystem. While Microsoft isn’t closing down Windows today, they’re taking steps that appear to go in that direction on many different fronts.

[SineWave]

Windows is for wimps anyway. Who's using Windows? Kids, old people, and ignorant people. No intelligent person uses Windows.

[LSG501]

That's why you do research into your intended new home, like i wouldn't move to North Korea because it would be a fairly safe bet that it would be worse, the grass is always greener is just a saying, with the amount of information available in today's world you can actual compare their grass with yours beforehand.

so you could argue that Tim Sweeney did the comparisons and found that MS is still the best option...

The open source license says they can't, Valve uses a Debian based distro under an open source license so unlike Microsoft SteamOS can't be locked down to just the steam client, unless they start development of their own propitiatory OS i think it's safe to say Valve has no intentions and exhibits no signs of wanting to create a walled garden, like i said they're not only talking the talk they're walking the walk, whereas Microsoft is just talking the talk and hasn't walked the walk in over a decade.

you mean like how google and android isn't locked down but if you want to use anything 'google' it suddenly becomes more locked down because it requires certain features.... As far as I'm aware there is nothing stopping a linux os having propriety elements which are not open source added on top of the open source bits, this is what google is basically doing.

That's the problem with a proprietary system that you don't have control over, if Microsoft changed your work programs to run this way what choice would you have, would you do as many people are doing re:UWP and start complaining in the hope that they changed their minds, or would you stay silent?

use a different os... even under windows we can go back to an older version without future updates, yeah it's not ideal but it's a what a lot of businesses do already. You have linux and to be fair linux apps are getting better. You also in a way have os-x as an option at the moment although technically they're no better than windows in the 'store' stakes.

If he was asking for some stupid stuff (in your opinion) then why did Microsoft placate him, why didn't they just say no we're not going to do that.

because most of the issues are already solved... you can sideload modern apps, you can install other stores albeit not as a UWP app (which I think is fine by the way) and there's nothing currently stopping you can from selling on your site as a direct customer.

Not allowing downloading and installing UWP applications from the web is why people think Microsoft are building a walled garden, and why there's strong indications that win32 programs are slowly going to be phased out in favor of the supposedly more secure and safe UWP variant.

As I said UWP won't really work with professional programs, well not without some serious changes, due to different requirements that a professional has over a consumer. If using a store makes it safer for consumers to use their computer for gaming, while potentially removing pirated games etc, I don't see what the issue is really other than the fact that the game dev's don't like the 30% fee.

That any company should be able to run their own Store is perfectly reasonable IMO seeing as Microsoft have said Windows is an open eco-system, it's that talking the talk but not walking the walk thing, I've got no beef with Microsoft if they want to create a walled garden but if that's what they want they should be honest with people and not say one thing and do another.

the thing is the current design isn't truly a walled garden, you can already side load a UWP app (admittedly they may take this away from the home version but thats fair in my opinion) so from what I can see there isn't really an issue. Even the MS dev that replied to his post on the Guardian highlighted the fact you can side load.

And IMO users, developers, and publishers should be allowed to engage in direct commerce with each other, that's what drives innovation and competitive prices, to not allow that your basically saying that it's OK for a company to abuse its monopoly, monopolist companies normally create an unhealthy market, yes it's all about money but as i said that's over simplifying it to the extreme.

but it wouldn't be seen as monopolistic, well unless the eu needs some extra cash, as you have google and apple doing the same thing while there is linux as an 'open' alternative if the dev's chose to develop for it like they do with windows... oh wait a lot don't because it's costs money.

[Corky34]

so you could argue that Tim Sweeney did the comparisons and found that MS is still the best option...

The way things are ATM it probably is the best option, but he didn't just say everyone should avoid UWP like the plague, even though that's what most people seem to have taken away from what he said, what he's said is that the direction of travel seems to be towards a walled garden eco-system and he want's Microsoft to unequivocally say that's not where the once open eco-system of Windows is heading, to make a very clear statement and not the usual Microsoft platitudes.

BTW i don't personally think we'll get a unequivocal statement from Microsoft as it seems highly likely that they're indeed heading down the path to a walled garden, i would be extremely shocked if they did issue a very clear statement and not just the usual boiler plate answer that they gave in their initial response to Sweeney.

you mean like how google and android isn't locked down but if you want to use anything 'google' it suddenly becomes more locked down because it requires certain features.... As far as I'm aware there is nothing stopping a linux os having propriety elements which are not open source added on top of the open source bits, this is what google is basically doing.

Indeed, but Google, legally, can't remove the feature to run other programs, all they can do is what Microsoft have done so far and obfuscate the option to do so, unlike Google though Microsoft doesn't have to bother with the legally bit as they own the OS so at a latter date they could remove that feature. Besides the whole Valve could do the same thing is besides the point because they've made an unequivocally statement that's not their intention and all their actions speak of that, unlike Microsoft.

use a different os... even under windows we can go back to an older version without future updates, yeah it's not ideal but it's a what a lot of businesses do already. You have linux and to be fair linux apps are getting better. You also in a way have os-x as an option at the moment although technically they're no better than windows in the 'store' stakes.

That just goes back to how much people have invested in the 20 years of Windows being an open eco-system, yes someone could use a different OS just like someone could just emigrate, but if you've invested 20 years into something you're not going just go quietly into the night.

because most of the issues are already solved... you can sideload modern apps, you can install other stores albeit not as a UWP app (which I think is fine by the way) and there's nothing currently stopping you can from selling on your site as a direct customer.

That just goes back to at the moment you can, everything seems to indicate that may not be how things are in the future, and without an unequivocal statement from Microsoft saying that's not where they're heading i see no reason to think otherwise.

As I said UWP won't really work with professional programs, well not without some serious changes, due to different requirements that a professional has over a consumer. If using a store makes it safer for consumers to use their computer for gaming, while potentially removing pirated games etc, I don't see what the issue is really other than the fact that the game dev's don't like the 30% fee.

That's what you think and i would be inclined to agree, but Microsoft thought, and attempted to force, everyone into using a MUI and modern apps that are arguably inferior to their desktop counterparts, phones and desktop PCs have different requirements but that didn't seem to matter at the time.

the thing is the current design isn't truly a walled garden, you can already side load a UWP app (admittedly they may take this away from the home version but thats fair in my opinion) so from what I can see there isn't really an issue. Even the MS dev that replied to his post on the Guardian highlighted the fact you can side load.

One word, currently.
In more than one word everything seems to point to that possibly not being the case in the future.

but it wouldn't be seen as monopolistic, well unless the eu needs some extra cash, as you have google and apple doing the same thing while there is linux as an 'open' alternative if the dev's chose to develop for it like they do with windows... oh wait a lot don't because it's costs money.

Apologises i though we were discussing the monopolistic practice of wanting to own and control all software sold and used on the Windows platform and not monopolistic in the greater scheme of things.

[peterb]

There was some confusion over comment attribution earlier in the thread. I have corrected this.

[LSG501]

snip
One word, currently.
In more than one word everything seems to point to that possibly not being the case in the future.

yes currently and at the moment there is no direct comment on direction just assumptions based on what 'might happen' about heading in a certain direction where you can only use the MS store. Admittedly the lack of comments from MS don't help but you could argue that some of it's down to the possibility MS isn't 100% sure what it's going to do with consumers. Business users are pretty much the same as before plus extending their other 'services' to increase business revenue but I'm not sure MS really know what to do about selling to consumers and part of this is down to the lack of better hardware slowing upgrades and as such reducing consumer sales.

Apologises i though we were discussing the monopolistic practice of wanting to own and control all software sold and used on the Windows platform and not monopolistic in the greater scheme of things.

Can go both ways really. Grand scheme they won't be deemed monopolistic unless EU wants money but that would also impact Apple and to a point Google who already have their own monopolistic stores for their own devices. Having said that as long as MS keep the sideload option then realistically there shouldn't be an issue and I can't see that being removed from the Pro/Enterprise, ie the people creating the UWP software, versions although the home version, being aimed at consumers, might lose it eventually.

Like I said earlier it basically boils down to the game dev's either need to decide over adapting to the new rules to use MS software, which they have every right to define, or spend some money and change their business model to include another OS like linux.

[Saracen]

... but if you've invested 20 years into something you're not going just go quietly into the night ...

I suppose I could say I just went into the night, but that 20 years is why I don't feel inclined to be very quiet about it.

[Corky34]

yes currently and at the moment there is no direct comment on direction just assumptions based on what 'might happen' about heading in a certain direction where you can only use the MS store. Admittedly the lack of comments from MS don't help but you could argue that some of it's down to the possibility MS isn't 100% sure what it's going to do with consumers. Business users are pretty much the same as before plus extending their other 'services' to increase business revenue but I'm not sure MS really know what to do about selling to consumers and part of this is down to the lack of better hardware slowing upgrades and as such reducing consumer sales.

Having thought about it some more what you say kind of boils it down into it's essence, in the past people knew if they bought a copy of Windows they would have a fixed platform (software wise) for a good 10 years but now who knows what may happen tomorrow, yes Windows theoretically still has a decades worth of support but without a statement from Microsoft saying what direction they're heading or what their plans are for Windows anything and everything could change in that decade, the Windows you install today is probably going to be very different than Windows in 10 years.

While Enterprise users are largely shielded from that it still leaves an awful lot of people and small businesses standing on very shaky ground, without knowing what Microsoft's plans are for Windows (if they even know themselves) it's difficult to invest the time and money into it (IMHO).

[AGTDenton]

"while unfairly disadvantaging competing app stores"
Outside of gaming, are there any other App Stores to rival Microsofts own for Windows?

[spacein_vader]

"while unfairly disadvantaging competing app stores"
Outside of gaming, are there any other App Stores to rival Microsofts own for Windows?

Steam does software now as well as games, people like Adobe & AutoCAD have their own storefronts too. In fact I'd imagine most downloadable software is purchased direct from the vendors website except games.