14 comments

[ 5.9 ms ] story [ 52.7 ms ] thread
...if the app arrived on the device from the app store.
What exactly is the point of this?

If it's to protect users from malicious code then make it an opt out policy.

If it's to allow them to just remove stuff at their whim then why does it exist?

this is why I don't like app stores. We are taking steps backwards with this garbage.

These terms are absolutely unacceptable: "We may change or discontinue certain apps or content offered in the Windows Store at any time, for any reason."

Reminds me of the Nintendo and Sega emulators in the Android market[1]. Microsoft will be more than willing to comply with takedown requests -- regardless of how legitimate they are -- if it gives them even the slightest potential to put another dime in their pocket. Why would they ever favor consumers who are locked into their devices for 2 years at a time? Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

[1] http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2011/06/gaming-system-em...

Except Google doesn't give refunds for those apps. The money and apps are gone from your posession forever, whereas under these terms Microsoft gives you your money back.

  It might sound both harsh and draconian, 
Yes, it certainly does.

  but it’s a necessary feature of a modern app store.
Really? I don't see anything in the article to support that conclusion.
I think they defer to the fact that both Apple[1] and Google[2] also have the same feature in their App Stores.

Edit: [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/3358134/Apples-Jobs-co...

[2] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/07/google_remotely_kill...

"Everyone else is doing it" doesn't cut it with Mom or with me. :)
Maybe not for you, but I'm willing to bet "same as Apple and Google" does cut it for Mom.

(Note: I'm talking about the figurative mom, not your biological mother.)

Its not a function of a modern app store; its a function of mass-producing IT administration.

For better or worse, Apple and Microsoft are moving into a world where they're managing higher-level aspects of computing, like apps. I do think this is better for most users. Its why I recommend iPad's to non-savvy users who just want to check email, surf the web, and install a few apps; they don't need to worry about peripheral crap like malware, antivirus software, etc.

These moves will more likely aliente users like ourselves. I predict open-source operating systems will matter more as mainstream OS vendors worry less about mass-producing operating systems and more about mass-producing home IT management.

So, since I hate giving Microsoft money, they won't get any for their app store with this decision.

Same with Amazon and their kindle/ebooks. If you can delete my stuff I don't buy from you.

I honestly wasn't surprised to read this, I mean I'm not in favor of it, but look at Apple and the iPhone. They have the same ability, and unless I'm mistaken so does Google and Android.

Precedence (of cultural acceptance, not legal standing) on this has been set for awhile now.

Programs doing stuff against the user's will on his/her computer are what generally is classified as malware.