|
|
The closest link I can come up with, after an admittedly brief search, is this[^].
|
|
|
|
|
A site search for any Microsoft.com pages gave out nada, not a single hint that they are planning to abandon XNA: Search[^]
Veni, vidi, caecus | Everything summarizes to Assembly code
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read these[^].
Honestly, when has Microsoft EVER resurrected anything??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting to compare this to SilverLight's (subtle) death.
There weren't a lot of facts about whether or when or how or if not or anything from Microsoft either.
Basically, they just started removing all their samples and any parts of their web site which heavily depended upon SilverLight.
I don't want to scare investors, you know? So, as far as anyone who is asking, we still support everything, including ActiveX, but if you really, really, really want to know, then try writing something that uses old technology like SilverLight.
The rumors of XNA's death have been grossly exaggerated, until you just can't use it anymore.
That's how it was with SilverLight. Now, what I've heard is that Microsoft Word will no longer be in Office in late 2014...Word is being phased out, because the Ami Pro team has taking over. Oh, you don't know Ami Pro, well then it's the WordPerfect team that is taking over, so MS-Word is gone. For sure. 
|
|
|
|
|
It's official: XNA is dead
February 2, 2013 6:00 PM | Staff
Microsoft has confirmed that it does not plan to release future versions of the XNA development toolset.
A blog post from developer Promit Roy earlier this week apparently detailed Microsoft's plans to fully retire the XNA Game Studio tools on April 1, 2014, while also suggesting that the future of API collection DirectX is uncertain.
The company has now further explained the situation to Polygon, assuring developers that DirectX development will continue, but stating that XNA has received its last update.
"XNA Game Studio remains a supported toolset for developing games for Xbox 360, Windows and Windows Phone," said the representative. "Many developers have found financial success creating Xbox LIVE Indie Games using XNA. However, there are no plans for future versions of the XNA product."
Numerous developers took to Twitter to mourn the death of the platform -- or otherwise. Unity CEO David Helgason in particular tweeted, "Farewell XNA, you were never quite the worthy opponent I expected, though you hit some high notes along the way."
He later added, "XNA was originally announced GDC 2005, just 3 months before Unity 1.0. I remember being quite worried at competing with all of Microsoft's might (remember, they really mattered back then). However they never really loved their own platform, and this closure isn't really a surprise if you followed them closely (like I did)"
"Microsoft have essentially turned their backs on 10,000 developers on one of the most promising gaming APIs available today," said Dominique Louis of MonoGame, the Open Source implementation of the XNA Framework.
"Everyone knew it was coming," they added, "but were secretly hoping that Microsoft were going to spring a surprise XNA 5 on them. Essentially, with no movement on XNA for more than a year and the key Microsoft developers moving on to other projects, it was wishful thinking to expect anything but this."
Hope for XNA developers
The news isn't all bad. While XNA is officially dead as far as Microsoft is concerned, MonoGame says it will continue to support XNA developers going forward. XNA devs can continue using the same tools they already have and, thanks to its SharpDX backend, can even publish to Windows 8, which otherwise doesn't support XNA.
"So far we have close to 20 MonoGame powered games on the Windows Store," Louis tells us. One of these -- Skulls of the Shogun -- was even published by Microsoft, which has given its blessing. The company even had MonoGame speak at its //Build summit.
XNA developers left in limbo are encouraged to check out the MonoGame site for more information.
and...
http://ventspace.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/directxxna-phase-out-continues/[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collin Jasnoch wrote: If I claim Objective C is dead will it make it true?
How much will it cost me to make that the case?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sweet. Sounds good to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, I can now write a blog post saying Obj-C is being retired and the announcement slipped out on CP.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a slightly better "confirmation" though:
Leakety[^]
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft, naturally, have denied they intend to discontinue XNA, but I remember them saying much the same for Silverlight.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
If I find multiple resources that are talking to internal Microsoft people, that's enough for me.
Microsoft doesn't really kill off products publicly. It's not unheard of find the occasional official obituary for a product, but for most part, MS kills stuff off quitely.
There is nothing that says Silverlight is dead, nothing that said Flight Simluator is dead, nothing that really said Bob was dead, ... and the list goes on and on and on.
There comes a point where you just have to accept it based on the paultry evidence you have.
XNA is dead. Everyone knows it. It's just a matter of those who are going to accept that fate or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collin Jasnoch wrote: As I implied elsewhere I really do not care either way. I am not an XNA dev. But
it is tiring to hear XYZ is dead. Especially with no actually evidence other
than blogs from non MS employees.
Are you going to put resources into a product that you are uncertain of the future of?
That's the entire point.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess that would be just more reason for using OpenGL?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Simple. Alternate between (a) feeling sorrow for those that were caught-out and had invested much time/effort into using the framework, and (b) feeling smug that such a demise seemed like such a likely prospect to me at its inception that I never bothered to take a look.
I.e, precisely the same reaction as was had towards Silverlight.
|
|
|
|
|
All eyes are on Node.js, TypeScript, CoffeeScript, ClojureScript, and Dart, but they're shaping up as transitional tech at best. Bonus #0: it's the only one installed on your client's computers already
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm, that's a very strange little blog post. I'm not sure why Node is lumped in with the others as it is JavaScript. Also, as at least some of the others output JavaScript at the end, the "Target audience" argument is specious at best.
|
|
|
|
|
The Node.js reference is probably just to get extra page views; it's not relevant to the article's main points.
I think the author is secretly a journalist stuck writing about software development to earn a paycheck despite neither knowing nor caring much about it. Most likely, he spends a few hours a day rewording controversial technology opinions of more knowlegable people for his articles while spending the rest of the day writing sci fi and fantasy novels, hoping that one of them may eventually sell big so he can quit his day job.
See his profile.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
