Microsoft Formally Bans Emulators On Xbox, Windows 10 Download Shops (arstechnica.com) 116
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.
What about paid emulations? (Score:2)
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.
what do they class a game system? (Score:2)
what do they class a game system? as?
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re:What about paid emulations? (Score:5, 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 $25 and 10+ times the existing market share.)
However, it is unfortunate that Microsoft is still a bit out of touch. In the case of game system emulators, they should have just said that they're banning the emulation of proprietary game systems (not officially endorsed by the companies owning those game systems in the first place). That policy would have been sensible enough. Instead, they chose to enforce a blanket policy that makes little sense, only attracts bad press, and that provides no significant benefit to their platform.
Re: (Score:1)
It does provide some benefit...Nintendo and other companies like Sega have been looking in to repacking old titles from previous consoles and reselling them on everything from PC to the Playstation, and this would require an internally packed emulator of course. Well, this might be an indication that this actually will be happening and if those titles go on sale in the Windows Store, they certainly don't want competing projects that allow you to play those same titles without paying them, listed.
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of game system emulators, they should have just said that they're banning the emulation of proprietary game systems (not officially endorsed by the companies owning those game systems in the first place). That policy would have been sensible enough.
I disagree. Why should they even care? Are they afraid that original Xbox games will be playable on the Xbone?
Again, playing in someone elses sandbox is a prescription for trouble for you. For myself, I will never participate in the Microsoft Store.
Re: (Score:1)
How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselves (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselve (Score:5, Informative)
This is just banning emulators from the Microsoft store. You can still download and install (sideload) on PCs like you've always been able to do.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
> You can still download and install (sideload) on PCs like you've always been able to do.
For now. " I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further. "
Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv (Score:3)
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.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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... [zdnet.com]
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themselv (Score:2)
I'm talking about old school applications (not appx). There is no opt out for sideloading those.
Re: (Score:2)
Err you've not been paying attention to the Insider releases have you. That lovely new option that they introduced: "Allow apps from the Store only". The ones that block any exe not signed by Microsoft.
That is definitely opting out of old school applications.
Re: How about I tell Micro$oft to go fuck themsel (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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 [windowscentral.com]. 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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Sounds like another lawsuit (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.
Re:Sounds like another lawsuit (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
What is more likely to cause a lawsuit: allowing illegal use, or preventing legal use?
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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 a
Re: (Score:2)
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 ...
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
No, it really fucking isn't. Microsoft has NO RIGHT WHATSOFUCKINGEVER to tell me what I can and cannot do with my property!
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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" [gnu.org] e
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft is doing literally everything in its power -- and several things that should be beyond its power -- to change that ASAP.
Re: (Score:3)
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 indivi
Re: (Score:2)
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"?
Re: (Score:3)
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 [wikipedia.org], not legal rights, implying a labor theory of property [wikipedia.org] (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
Re: (Score:2)
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 [wikipedia.org]. 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 come
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: Sounds like another lawsuit (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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 specu
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Because who liked the old games anyway? (Score:2)
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.
What? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Those fart apps don't write themselves!
What about computer emulators? (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.
Re: (Score:2)
The copyright totalitarians have already destroyed those [eff.org].
Dosbox rapped games? (Score:3)
What about Dosbox rapped games?
Re: (Score:2)
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 ch
5 More Years Of These Wonderful Policies... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Only Stand Alone or Everything? (Score:3)
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... [reddit.com]
Windows App Store? (Score:3)
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)
They should ban web browsers (Score:1)
I'm fairly certain at least some of those emulators exists as javascript and can run in any web browser.
Re: (Score:2)
They're working on exactly that [defectivebydesign.org].
First they came for the game emulators... (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 !!!
What does this do for Sony's box? (Score:2)
Old news (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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!
Microsoft....... (Score:2)
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."
Glad I use an Android (Score:2)
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... [slashdot.org] will take you to 30+ gigs of free ROMS for Mame.
Re: (Score:2)
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.