Hi Rick,

>"As a side note, I've gone down this path at some point with a commercial product I sell - Markdown Monster - which is a specialized Markdown editor with focus on typical developer scenarios. As such it requires integration with a bunch of related technologies on the desktop which was one of the main reasons this is a desktop application in the first place rather than an online tools. Turns out for the Windows Store a bunch of things I've been doing (shelling out to command line, opening other applications, allowing for addins) is not allowed in the Windows Store. So basically most of the things that made a desktop application the right choice weren't actually allowed in the store. So I ended up nixing that idea no less due to the snotty Microsoft enforcers trying their best to be unhelpful through the validation process. The ironic thing is I was able to package my app (as an APPX) and it runs and works perfectly that way, but all the constraints were around what you were allowed or not allowed to do with a Store app."

Thanks the feedback on the Store This is quite useful indeed:-)

The bunch of things you mention, such as shelling out to command line, opening other applications and more, is also what our application is offering. So the chances that we can develop a "Windows Store" application are definitely limited.

Anyway I reckon the "big IT" within our corporate clients may not really like the idea that their jobs may limited to offering corporate end-user pickup access to the "Windows Store" any time soon! That MS is still trying to confuse both corporate workstation with student ones into a single "app world" can be understood. But this may have a limit...

>"We were having discussions about desktop development options a few weeks ago and there were a lot of good points of view raised from all angles. Dig through the history to find that thread if you want some interesting reading..."

I'll try to! When it comes to changing platform - this oldish code base size is alas daunting as most old ones - I reckon we will move onto QT+python in the end or of course some sort of MS-accross-the-board-solution. But for the current time, we can still consider alternatives. The best time is always before committing to some platform... Then you are stuck. Happy I did go the Java one back in times.

Just one last question about "code signing". I feel no compelling reason to add this extra step to our deployment routine (VFP exe building+refoxing+boxedapp virtualization). But I'd be glad to get your take on "code signing".

I wonder whether signing this app may reduce "AV false positive" signaling in some way or another. I also wonder whether paying for a "high grade" certificate from a "reputable (ie costly) vendor" would make a difference. What is your view on this?

Daniel