"Traditional Win32 games could, and often do, take over as much of the computer as they need, but UWP games, which are generally less demanding, When Windows 10 launched, UWP games could only access 4 shared cores, 1 GB of RAM, and 50% of a DX11 GPU."
There's a thought missing from that line and probably a comma where a period ought to go so it doesn't make as much sense as it could.
I just don't see AR and VR taking off. Movement is slow because of a variety of factors like the cost in terms of graphical processing capabilities, nausea, deprivation of sensory input from the rest of the world, a lack of killer apps, additional display hardware that can't function as full replacements for existing displays, the primitive state of the new display hardware, and a broad societal shift away from desktops and laptops to mobile devices that function poorly or not at all as AR/VR devices. All of those issues and more are barriers to widespread adoption which makes development of software unappealing. Look at the already sharp decline in the number of Steam releases that stress Vive or Rift compatibility and you'll see the few game developers that did jump onboard aren't realizing sales that return profit for the expense.
Let's be totally honest, this latest VR push (and subsequently AR as well) rode in on the tide of 3DTV that produced derived products like the Nintendo 3DS and games like Pokemon Go (if you consider that as augmented reality anyway which is arguable) and that tide has long since gone back out, leaving us with a beach of unappealing flotsam and product debris. We didn't have the techology to properly execute VR when 3DTV had a little momentum and I'd contend we're still not there even now. Granted, this latest wave is much bigger and better than it was when Forte released the VFX1 in 1995 and Microsoft is in a position where it can't risk leaving a potential growth segment to competitors like it did with mobile phones, but I don't think Hololens, the Rift, or anything else is here to stay this time around. The next iteration, something that will probably come after a number of quiet years where the technology is developed in a much less public manner, will probably be the one that finally nets broad VR/AR adoption.
Pretty much everything you list here are technical reasons, not conceptual ones. Some of them are already solved by using AR rather than VR. Technical limits may get solved with time & money, but not if the software basis is lacking.
We're at the point where there's little reason not to run things at 120 Hz at least, and at that point you can more easily do things with 3D or VR. We're just not quite there, yet.
The day KDE Plasma Desktop stops supporting QT3 will be the last day I'll use it as my main desktop. And they are certainly pushing for it to go in that direction.
I know what you're trying to get at with this statement, but the case with win32 apps is much different than the scenarios you're listing. While it's always possible to provide updates to big applications that people use on a regular basis, the same is not true about the vast library of games that exists on windows. The sheer fact that 99.99% of new game releases on windows still continue to be primarily win32 means any shift away from win32 is *at least* decades away and would require backwards compat via some means of emulation in the new environment. Otherwise there is no way people are going to completely give it up.
I can totally see them shifting to a model where there are specific SKUs of windows where "legacy win32 mode" is an optional component that you can upgrade/purchase on top of the base OS. But it'll never be removed entirely.
The day Mac OS X stops supporting PowerPC will be the last day I'll use it as my main desktop. And they are certainly pushing for it to go in that direction.
Nah, I'll give it a couple more years. UWP isn't there yet, got burnt before. The .NET Framework is still going strong, and high in demand. Not so much with .NET Core and UWP. I'm already a bit familiar with the basics, but not ready to go full throttle.
Project Centennial should do the trick for now if I get interested in the store.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
12 Comments
Back to Article
BrokenCrayons - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
"Traditional Win32 games could, and often do, take over as much of the computer as they need, but UWP games, which are generally less demanding, When Windows 10 launched, UWP games could only access 4 shared cores, 1 GB of RAM, and 50% of a DX11 GPU."There's a thought missing from that line and probably a comma where a period ought to go so it doesn't make as much sense as it could.
BrokenCrayons - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
I just don't see AR and VR taking off. Movement is slow because of a variety of factors like the cost in terms of graphical processing capabilities, nausea, deprivation of sensory input from the rest of the world, a lack of killer apps, additional display hardware that can't function as full replacements for existing displays, the primitive state of the new display hardware, and a broad societal shift away from desktops and laptops to mobile devices that function poorly or not at all as AR/VR devices. All of those issues and more are barriers to widespread adoption which makes development of software unappealing. Look at the already sharp decline in the number of Steam releases that stress Vive or Rift compatibility and you'll see the few game developers that did jump onboard aren't realizing sales that return profit for the expense.Let's be totally honest, this latest VR push (and subsequently AR as well) rode in on the tide of 3DTV that produced derived products like the Nintendo 3DS and games like Pokemon Go (if you consider that as augmented reality anyway which is arguable) and that tide has long since gone back out, leaving us with a beach of unappealing flotsam and product debris. We didn't have the techology to properly execute VR when 3DTV had a little momentum and I'd contend we're still not there even now. Granted, this latest wave is much bigger and better than it was when Forte released the VFX1 in 1995 and Microsoft is in a position where it can't risk leaving a potential growth segment to competitors like it did with mobile phones, but I don't think Hololens, the Rift, or anything else is here to stay this time around. The next iteration, something that will probably come after a number of quiet years where the technology is developed in a much less public manner, will probably be the one that finally nets broad VR/AR adoption.
MrSpadge - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link
Pretty much everything you list here are technical reasons, not conceptual ones. Some of them are already solved by using AR rather than VR. Technical limits may get solved with time & money, but not if the software basis is lacking.mkozakewich - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link
We're at the point where there's little reason not to run things at 120 Hz at least, and at that point you can more easily do things with 3D or VR. We're just not quite there, yet.I mean, HD only took ten years!
baka_toroi - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
The day Windows stops supporting Win32 will be the last day I'll use it as my main OS. And they certainly are pushing for it to go in that direction.lmcd - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
The day KDE Plasma Desktop stops supporting QT3 will be the last day I'll use it as my main desktop. And they are certainly pushing for it to go in that direction.inighthawki - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link
I know what you're trying to get at with this statement, but the case with win32 apps is much different than the scenarios you're listing. While it's always possible to provide updates to big applications that people use on a regular basis, the same is not true about the vast library of games that exists on windows. The sheer fact that 99.99% of new game releases on windows still continue to be primarily win32 means any shift away from win32 is *at least* decades away and would require backwards compat via some means of emulation in the new environment. Otherwise there is no way people are going to completely give it up.I can totally see them shifting to a model where there are specific SKUs of windows where "legacy win32 mode" is an optional component that you can upgrade/purchase on top of the base OS. But it'll never be removed entirely.
lmcd - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
The day Mac OS X stops supporting PowerPC will be the last day I'll use it as my main desktop. And they are certainly pushing for it to go in that direction.star-affinity - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
@lmcd:D
codedivine - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
UWP on PC didn't really have RAM or core limitations afaik. Limitations such as 1GB of RAM only existed for UWP on Xbox.Brett Howse - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
You are correct as far as I can tell. Thanks for the tip I updated the post.lilmoe - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
Nah, I'll give it a couple more years. UWP isn't there yet, got burnt before. The .NET Framework is still going strong, and high in demand. Not so much with .NET Core and UWP. I'm already a bit familiar with the basics, but not ready to go full throttle.Project Centennial should do the trick for now if I get interested in the store.