[protocolture]

>Given the current momentum, it feels like (to me) the adage of “Windows is for Games” is going by the wayside.

I think that games have been a strategic priority for Windows for a very long time. Going all the way back to DOS/4GW on Windows 95. But the impression I get from Microsoft is that they kind of don't want the hassle of maintaining a desktop OS anymore, and they would be happier if everyone went elsewhere.

[somenameforme]

I'm not sure. They put a ton of effort into things like DirectX, were outright anticompetitive against OpenGL, and there was an atypically high degree of competence and vision throughout. It probably wasn't about the games but about tying people to Windows. People didn't make games for Linux because there were no gamers on Linux. There were no gamers on Linux because people didn't make games for Linux.

On top of this, gaming used to be (and probably still is) the main reason to cycle through PCs. If you're just going to browse the web, use relatively low resource software, etc then a PC or even laptop from a decade+ ago is 100% fine. The reason consumers upgrade is going to be heavily weighted by games. And each of those upgrades often comes with new OEM software that was licensed and other economic benefits to Microsoft.

---

As for modern Microsoft, I agree with you from an outsider's perspective, but I'd bet internally it's a different game. Microsoft seems to be having major issues with labor competency, on both the implementation and management side, and it's making their entire ecosystem collapse. Anything that has major outward visibility (like desktop OS) is going to make the circus most immediately visible. I have little doubt they have the same stuff going on internally with their other offerings.

[kzrdude]

I think that's the key explanation. Gamers are no longer a mass market user group for microsoft - they target all the casual computer users. Gamers actually want full control of their computer, pay attention to details and care about performance: that's a niche user base, and it's clear why their interests overlap with the linux community: user needs trump everything.

[shaokind]

I don't know if I'd agree with the adage about gamers wanting full control. A subset of gamers, absolutely.

But this excludes the entire console population. This arguably excludes most Steam Deck customers, who picked it because Valve made the Linux experience seamless, so they don't have to pay attention to the details. This excludes many of the PC gamers I know, that do not care beyond whether their computer is capable of playing the games they want to. They won't even reformat their Windows to remove OEM bloat.

[pibaker]

I think you are way overestimating how technically inclined the average gamer is. Most of them just want to play a couple rounds of fifa or madden or call of duty to blow off some steam after work, not to spend extra time and effort optimizing their gameplay experience besides maybe buying a nicer keyboard on Black Friday.

You don't tend to hear them online of course. They are the silent majority keeping the AAA industry alive.

[HerbManic]

The last few years it has felt like that, Microsoft is more than happy to sell to everyone while also having Windows.

I mean Windows is still a huge cash cow for them and is THE desktop OS but the actions they are taking with it sort of makes it feel like a second class citizen.

[swiftcoder]

> and is THE desktop OS

Part of the problem seems to be that desktop OS use as a whole is cratering as more and more folks who grew up in the smartphone era enter adulthood. Outside of tech circles, I meet a lot of folks who have a phone + tablet but no actual computer...

[dosisking]

What's a computer?

[swiftcoder]

It's pretty clear from the context that I meant "general purpose PC". We don't have to get all semantic about everything

[Cockbrand]

I guess this was a quote from this iPad ad: http://youtu.be/Ixy2ql7g3-I