Microsoft’s attempt to build a safe, centralized app ecosystem for Windows began as an inspired idea and then spent more than a decade bouncing between half-measures, bad product bets, and shifting incentives — but over the last two years Microsoft has quietly rebuilt the plumbing and the economics that could finally make the Microsoft Store useful for real Windows users and IT departments.
From the beginning the underlying idea was sound: a single, curated repository for apps that could simplify discovery, remove dangerous installer bundles and fake downloads, and centralize updates so users and administrators didn’t have to fight a forest of updaters. Apple’s App Store and the package managers popular in Linux distributions provided clear models for what a modern app marketplace could deliver, but Microsoft repeatedly misread the lessons and mis-executed the implementation. (theverge.com)
Windows 8 (2012) introduced the Windows Store alongside a radical, touch-first UI and a new class of sandboxed “Windows Store apps” (originally called “Metro-style” apps). That launch is widely remembered as a mismatch: the Store promoted touch-optimized apps that often lacked parity with established desktop software, and the desktop ecosystem largely ignored the new model. Microsoft changed the naming, the UI, and the policies many times, but the impression stuck: the Store lacked the mainstream apps Windows users wanted. (rcpmag.com)
Project Centennial (the Desktop Bridge) and the Universal Windows Platform (UWP) were efforts to reconcile desktop and Store-style apps. The Desktop Bridge — announced and iterated on around 2015–2016 — offered tooling to package existing Win32/.NET apps so they could be distributed through the Store, but the approach did not make a mass migration of developers inevitable. Over the course of Windows 10 and into Windows 11, Microsoft continued to loosen constraints and add support for Win32, PWA, UWP, and other app types; yet discovery, update mechanics, and developer incentives still lagged behind other major platforms. (blogs.windows.com)
Why it matters: letting developers publish Win32 apps without forcing a rewrite means the Store can finally host the actual software Windows users care about — not reduced-feature “modern” clones. It also reduces friction for ISVs that need enterprise-friendly deployment and telemetry. (developer.microsoft.com)
Why it matters: the ability to keep full revenue if you use your own system removes a major barrier for SaaS vendors, enterprise software companies, and subscription services that historically avoided the Store to preserve pricing and billing control.
Why it matters: if implemented and widely adopted, this will dramatically reduce the update surface admins and users must manage. Instead of each vendor running its own background updater or a third-party agent, Windows can become the single, polite updater that installs app updates at appropriate times and provides a consistent audit trail.
However, execution risk is non-trivial. Centralized update orchestration is a massive engineering undertaking with real security and reliability stakes; developers must change long-standing update habits; and Microsoft must keep the Store’s curation and certification process fast and transparent. Business politics also matter: the Store must compete with established distribution channels and with developer tooling (winget, Chocolatey, direct downloads) that many developers already use and trust. Microsoft is no longer trying to force a new app model, but that also means the company must earn distribution — which can take a long time. (theregister.com)
That said, success is not guaranteed. The Store will need multi-year, consistent execution; predictable developer policies; robust security and reliability in update orchestration; and vendor adoption at scale. If Microsoft sustains the technical quality and proves that the Store reduces complexity for users and administrators alike, then it may finally be fixed. Until then, cautious optimism is warranted: the architecture and incentives are in place, but history shows the hardest part is making the ecosystem believe and act on those incentives. (techcommunity.microsoft.com)
Source: PCMag Microsoft’s App Store Has Been Broken Since Windows 8. Can It Finally Be Fixed?
From the beginning the underlying idea was sound: a single, curated repository for apps that could simplify discovery, remove dangerous installer bundles and fake downloads, and centralize updates so users and administrators didn’t have to fight a forest of updaters. Apple’s App Store and the package managers popular in Linux distributions provided clear models for what a modern app marketplace could deliver, but Microsoft repeatedly misread the lessons and mis-executed the implementation. (theverge.com)Windows 8 (2012) introduced the Windows Store alongside a radical, touch-first UI and a new class of sandboxed “Windows Store apps” (originally called “Metro-style” apps). That launch is widely remembered as a mismatch: the Store promoted touch-optimized apps that often lacked parity with established desktop software, and the desktop ecosystem largely ignored the new model. Microsoft changed the naming, the UI, and the policies many times, but the impression stuck: the Store lacked the mainstream apps Windows users wanted. (rcpmag.com)
Project Centennial (the Desktop Bridge) and the Universal Windows Platform (UWP) were efforts to reconcile desktop and Store-style apps. The Desktop Bridge — announced and iterated on around 2015–2016 — offered tooling to package existing Win32/.NET apps so they could be distributed through the Store, but the approach did not make a mass migration of developers inevitable. Over the course of Windows 10 and into Windows 11, Microsoft continued to loosen constraints and add support for Win32, PWA, UWP, and other app types; yet discovery, update mechanics, and developer incentives still lagged behind other major platforms. (blogs.windows.com)
How the Store broke: the technical and product mistakes
A platform-first, developer-hostile launch
Microsoft’s earliest Store strategy treated the app model as a platform-first construct — a new programming model (UWP/Metro) that developers were expected to adopt — rather than as an end-to-end distribution service that respected legacy desktop workflows. That made the Store deeply unattractive for the large ecosystem of existing Windows developers who had working installers, auto-updaters, and commerce systems. Developers had little reason to retool or repackage their code if the majority of Windows customers still used traditional installers and the Store lacked reach. (rcpmag.com)Fragmented update mechanisms and poor discoverability
Because early Store models insisted on specific packaging and update paths, the Store could not simply become the single place users relied on for updates. For much of its life, some Store listings were little more than download mirrors: installers that did not integrate with the Store update model, or apps that deliberately kept their own updaters. The result was duplication: dozens of different auto-updaters running on many machines, or worse, apps that never received updates unless users reinstalled them manually. That fragmentation undermined the Store’s core security and maintenance promise. (ghacks.net)Economics that punished developers (at least early on)
Microsoft’s revenue-share and commerce policies looked unattractive compared to the status quo for many developers, especially when the Store added friction without meaningful distribution benefits. Even when Microsoft later lowered revenue shares and opened the Store to more app types, the long memory of the ecosystem—of limitations, of rejected apps, of low conversions—kept many companies and indie developers away. That trust problem was as much human psychology as a product issue. (theverge.com)What Microsoft changed — and why it matters
In the last two years Microsoft moved away from forcing a single app model and instead rebuilt the Store around three pillars that actually matter to users and developers: packaging flexibility, update orchestration, and developer-friendly commerce. Each change is technical and economic; together they close the loop on the Store’s original promise.1) Packaging and distribution: Win32 welcome, multiple packaging formats supported
Windows 11’s Microsoft Store officially supports traditional desktop apps alongside UWP and PWAs. Microsoft made clear that developers could publish Win32 apps (packaged as MSIX or even unpackaged in some workflows) so that mainstream desktop software could appear in the Store catalog without rewriting UIs for a touch-first model. That move removed the core friction that kept major desktop apps off the Store for years. (theverge.com)Why it matters: letting developers publish Win32 apps without forcing a rewrite means the Store can finally host the actual software Windows users care about — not reduced-feature “modern” clones. It also reduces friction for ISVs that need enterprise-friendly deployment and telemetry. (developer.microsoft.com)
2) Commerce: flexible revenue models, including keeping 100% for non‑games
Microsoft changed Store economics to give developers real choices. Developers can now use their own commerce and payment systems and, for non-gaming apps, keep 100% of revenue when they do so. When Microsoft’s commerce platform is used, it still charges a lower cut (15% for apps, 12% for games in many configurations), but the fundamental shift is that Microsoft stopped treating its payment rails as mandatory. This policy reversal flipped the Store from a gatekeeper model to a marketplace-with-options model. (theverge.com)Why it matters: the ability to keep full revenue if you use your own system removes a major barrier for SaaS vendors, enterprise software companies, and subscription services that historically avoided the Store to preserve pricing and billing control.
3) Update orchestration: a unified platform for app updates
One of the most consequential technical moves is Microsoft’s work to centralize update orchestration on Windows. The company has been building a Windows-native update orchestration platform — sometimes described publicly as a “Windows Update orchestration platform” or unified update orchestrator — that allows third-party apps to register so their updates can be coordinated alongside Windows updates. The platform is designed to schedule installs intelligently (based on user activity, battery status, and system performance), provide consistent telemetry and diagnostics, and reduce the proliferation of independent background updaters. Microsoft has invited developers into private previews of this orchestrator and published guidance on the APIs and supported packaging formats. (techcommunity.microsoft.com)Why it matters: if implemented and widely adopted, this will dramatically reduce the update surface admins and users must manage. Instead of each vendor running its own background updater or a third-party agent, Windows can become the single, polite updater that installs app updates at appropriate times and provides a consistent audit trail.
Evidence that the Store is getting healthier
- App availability: The Store now lists many mainstream apps that were previously absent — Slack, Spotify, Discord (via wrappers/packaged installers), OBS Studio, and more — and several major publishers publish through the Store or make the Store a supported install channel. That catalogue expansion addresses the primary reason average users ignored the Store for years. (theverge.com)
- Developer economics and onboarding: Microsoft has removed developer registration friction in recent rounds of policy changes and lowered or removed certain onboarding fees in many markets, while also offering free app signing and binary hosting for packages such as MSIX. Those changes lower the barrier for independent developers to test Store distribution. (blogs.windows.com)
- Update tooling: Microsoft has integrated the Windows Package Manager (winget) and the Store in subtle ways so that Win32 apps installed from the Store can be updated more consistently, and the new centralized orchestrator preview is explicitly intended to let developers register their app’s update provider with Windows. Early coverage and Microsoft’s own IT-pro posts describe the private preview and the vision to bring third-party apps under a single update umbrella. (windowslatest.com)
Where risks still remain
1) Adoption is not guaranteed — the Store must earn trust again
Even with improved policies, large vendors remember broken experiences and stalled initiatives. Reengaging those developers requires not just words, but years of reliable behavior: consistent certification timelines, transparent review processes, and predictable distribution quality. The Store’s reputation is scar tissue; Microsoft must avoid sudden policy shifts or confusing technical changes that could re-traumatize vendors. Users and enterprises will only switch en masse if the Store demonstrably reduces pain and doesn’t introduce new unknowns.2) Update orchestration is technically hard and inherently risky
Centralizing updates sounds ideal, but it creates a high-impact attack surface. A single orchestrator that performs updates for hundreds of millions of devices must be extraordinarily robust and secure. Integration challenges will appear when independent installers and legacy update logic must interoperate with the orchestrator’s APIs. Microsoft’s cautious private-preview stance is correct; broad enterprise adoption will require comprehensive testing, rollback capabilities, and transparent failure modes. Early reporting shows the orchestrator currently supports MSIX/APPX and custom Win32 providers, but the onus is on Microsoft and app vendors to iron out corner cases. (theregister.com)3) Regulatory and competition dynamics
Policy changes that allow developers to keep all revenue if they use their own commerce system have drawn regulatory attention elsewhere in the app ecosystem. The devil is in the detail: carve-outs (games vs. non-games), platform behavior in regulated markets (for example, EEA-specific rules under the Digital Markets Act), and how Microsoft implements discoverability and ranking all affect whether the Store becomes a genuinely open marketplace or simply a more permissive gate. Microsoft’s public commitments to “open app store principles” are helpful but will be tested as the Store grows. (blogs.microsoft.com)Practical advice for readers (users, developers, and IT teams)
For everyday users
- Revisit the Microsoft Store for mainstream software you trust: you’ll increasingly find authentic installers for real desktop apps. But check the listing details — Microsoft indicates whether the app’s updates are managed by the Store or by the app itself. If you rely on automatic updates, prefer apps that either update through the Store or declare a dependable in-app updater. (developer.microsoft.com)
For independent developers and ISVs
- Evaluate publishing to the Store as part of your distribution mix. It offers trusted discovery signals, free signing, and optional hosting services for MSIX packages.
- Choose your commerce strategy deliberately: if you want to retain 100% revenue for non-game apps, plan on using your own payment flows and ensure compliance with Store policies.
- Join the Windows Update orchestration preview if your product’s update story would benefit from centralized scheduling — but test extensively in lab environments first. (blogs.windows.com)
For enterprise IT administrators
- Plan for an evolution in update management: pilot the Windows Update orchestrator in controlled groups and validate that your line-of-business apps behave as expected when updates are orchestrated by Windows.
- Re-evaluate packaging: MSIX packaging simplifies management and integrates with Microsoft’s hosting and signing services; packaging may reduce your operational overhead for internal apps. (learn.microsoft.com)
Measurable indicators to watch over the next 12–24 months
The Microsoft Store can only be judged by outcomes. Watch these signals to see if the platform is actually turning the corner:- Catalog breadth: Are major ISVs (Adobe, Autodesk, core enterprise productivity vendors) regularly publishing through the Store?
- Update consolidation: Do telemetry and third-party surveys show fewer distinct auto-updaters running per machine over time?
- Enterprise adoption: Are Intune and SCCM/ConfigMgr workflows integrating Store-packaged apps and the new orchestrator for enterprise deployments?
- Developer sentiment: Do independent developers report that Store distribution saves resources and gains meaningful new users?
- Policy stability: Are Microsoft’s developer terms and certification processes predictable and stable, or do frequent changes reintroduce friction?
Critical analysis: can Microsoft finish the job?
The good news is that Microsoft has done the practical engineering and the policy work that was missing for years. The Store now supports real desktop apps, has economic incentives aligned for many developers, and is building an update orchestration platform that could finally centralize patching. Those are the three pillars that a centralized Windows app marketplace needs to succeed. (developer.microsoft.com)However, execution risk is non-trivial. Centralized update orchestration is a massive engineering undertaking with real security and reliability stakes; developers must change long-standing update habits; and Microsoft must keep the Store’s curation and certification process fast and transparent. Business politics also matter: the Store must compete with established distribution channels and with developer tooling (winget, Chocolatey, direct downloads) that many developers already use and trust. Microsoft is no longer trying to force a new app model, but that also means the company must earn distribution — which can take a long time. (theregister.com)
Bottom line
Microsoft has moved the Microsoft Store from an ideologically driven, app-platform-first product to a pragmatic, developer-centric distribution hub. The combination of Win32 support, flexible commerce policies, and a unified update orchestration platform address the three structural failures that kept the Store marginal for years: restrictive packaging, poor economics, and fractured update mechanisms. Those changes give Microsoft a credible path to deliver the original promise: a trusted, centralized repository for discovery and safe updates on Windows.That said, success is not guaranteed. The Store will need multi-year, consistent execution; predictable developer policies; robust security and reliability in update orchestration; and vendor adoption at scale. If Microsoft sustains the technical quality and proves that the Store reduces complexity for users and administrators alike, then it may finally be fixed. Until then, cautious optimism is warranted: the architecture and incentives are in place, but history shows the hardest part is making the ecosystem believe and act on those incentives. (techcommunity.microsoft.com)
Source: PCMag Microsoft’s App Store Has Been Broken Since Windows 8. Can It Finally Be Fixed?