>>An enforced operating environment.
>Every operating system has rules that you have to follow to
>program in it.
Yup. I'm being forced into an execution state now. I'm no longer limited by the mechanics of the machine, which the OS is supposed to divvy up and distribute as the running applications require. Now I'm put into the position of having a forced suspension, and probable termination without my consent or knowledge. It places update-once-an-hour apps like weather bugs into the same category as my company's real-time production monitor display, which will now be suspended because I'm typing a reply to a co-worker. This is not good.
>But you're not most users, who have no idea how to terminate
>an application.
Then make it easier through a flashy task manager app. The market sorts these things out. People get frustrated with some feature of their phone so they consult their friends, or read online forums, or go to the place they bought the device and say "Hey, my battery is only lasting 3 hours" and they get help.
It should not be forced upon ALL people because SOME people are ignorant. That's pathetic reasoning and has no place on a proper, professional device.
>>So have I. I downloaded an app which terminates them after a
>>few seconds when they are not the foreground app. It's called
>>"Advanced Task Manager." I didn't need the OS to force it upon me.
>You are mixing Modern Apps with WindowsRT. Modern apps run on
>Windows8 too. In fact, you can get a free version of Visual Studio that
>is specifically designed for Windows 8 Modern Apps.
I'm talking about giving anyone running Win8 the ability to have this task manager which can terminate errant, or compute- or power-hungry apps.
>>I
did read that right. I can ONLY do it via the Microsoft Store.
>>Which means I can't write a FLOSS modern UI app and have users
>>download, compile, install, or change, compile, and install, their own
>>versions. We're locked into reporting EVERYTHING we install (for
>>modern UI apps) to Microsoft.
>
>Depends on the user. Again, you're assuming most users will want
>to change the source code.
I'm not assuming that. What it is is this ... it removes the ability to do it. Once again, there's the imposition and limitation forced upon the knowledgeable due to the existence of the others.
>That is plain wrong.
I agree.
>Most users have no idea how to change simple things in a property
>window, let alone the source code.
Correct. So because those kinds of users exist, users like me are put out to pasture. HIDEOUS! And EVIL!
>>Why do you think that is, Craig? User convenience? It's about control.
>Nope, again you're wrong. See above about mixing WIndowsRT and
>Modern Apps.
Nope. It's about one thing: control. ***I*** am being controlled because other types of users exist. It is about control. Period.
>>You're wrong. I can't. Everything I do must go through Microsoft.
>>I have no freedom with modern UI apps, other than to not write them.
I can't write a modern UI app in my spare time and give it to my friends for them to install. I have to give it to Microsoft to let them install it.
!--!--!----- C--O--N--T--R--O--L -----!--!--!
>>They tried to do the same kind of thing with ARM devices ... by locking
>>out any ability to switch out the OS on devices sold with Win8 installed.
>>There was an uproar, and now I can install if I buy a key from Microsoft.
>>Again, control through Microsoft.
>I have no idea what you're talking about here.
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/08/secure-boot/http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot
