I didn't mean 'open' or 'close'. I meant 'less restrictive' or 'more restrictive'. Win32 is less restrictive, and UWP is more restrictive.
> The idea that encouraging user level apps to use UWP because it is safer does not inherently mean some draconian lockdown is coming.
All market places (google play, steam, apple app store) has restrictions. I haven't made app for any one of them, but I am certain there are policies people disagree with, and policies that has lead an app to be removed from the store or some app not getting past the the screening process.
On Win32 you don't have that. You can build something, post it anywhere, anybody can download and run it without any hiccup. This fluidity has made PC where it is today.
Also there are trust issues. Sweeney said, "The risk here is that, if Microsoft convinces everybody to use UWP, then they phase out Win32 apps. If they can succeed in doing that then it’s a small leap to forcing all apps and games to be distributed through the Windows Store."
> If Microsoft is going to lock the platform down, they're going to lock the platform down. There's nothing you can do about it.
Yes there is. In fact that's why this thread exists. MS has added UWP feature because Epic games won't do it. Steam has also released SteamOS.
It's more users that MS wants. Security comes later. And as long as the developers are taking a stand against restrictive UWP, MS will leave UWP behind. And hopefully next time they will take a different route.
Least restrictive nature is the hallmark of PC. I can't stress it enough.