7 ms·

Operation successful, patient dead... It's kind of tragic that much of this effort may never pay off: in the process of merging platforms and restructuring API

Operation successful, patient dead... It's kind of tragic that much of this effort may never pay off: in the process of merging platforms and restructuring API's (that started with Vista and is still going) Microsoft lost the connection to many of its developers, who went to build Web, iOS and Android apps. WPF, Silverlight, WinRT, XAML, UWP: there were too many changes, rewrites and deprecations. Windows Phone, brilliant as it is, did never reach mass adoption and all the effort that went into unifying it with Windows has probably been wasted. I think developers prefer a crappy but stable technologies with a proven market over uncertain and fast-moving technologies. It takes many years for a new platform to mature and settle down. Microsoft really needs to stop introducing "upgrades" that require application rewrites in Windows for the next 3-5 years, and focus on getting the Windows Store going.

sandworm101 10y ago
>>Microsoft really needs to stop introducing "upgrades" that require application rewrites in Windows for the next 3-5 years, and focus on getting the Windows Store going. Those application rewrites are part of the Windows Store push. Want the latest version of X, then you need the latest version of Windows which, if all goes to plan, will only run software from the windows store. MS has always been very good at turning the updating of third party software into new sales for windows.
userbinator 10y ago
As a long-time Win32 programmer (over a decade), I can safely say that the vast majority of existing applications still remain (for the time being) forward-compatible. Here's some examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOj-bAZBhnE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOj-bAZBhnE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRfn4M5DXTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRfn4M5DXTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqFWuNmWbHk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqFWuNmWbHk The reasons people hold off on "upgrading" Windows versions is not mainly because of compatibility, but other factors like unwanted UI changes and removed features, and particularly with Windows 10, the increased data-collection intrusiveness and "we own your machine" attitude: http://www.howtogeek.com/243581/windows-10-may-delete-your-programs-without-asking/ http://www.howtogeek.com/243581/windows-10-may-delete-your-p...
- yuhong 10y ago
  Yes, the name "Windows as a service" was coined for a reason.
- nhebb 10y ago
  The deprecation of SHA-1 is an issue, though. Timestamps after January 1, 2016 must be SHA-256, and SHA-1 signed files will be blocked after January 1, 2017. However, Microsoft has blogged that they may block them starting this June. Pre-Win7 systems don't recognize SHA-256, so you have to dual sign the files if you want backward compatibility. Except, MSI files can't be dual signed. I'm also finding that more Win7 users than I would expect don't have the proper updates, so their systems don't recognize SHA-256. In short, it's a mess.
  - yuhong 10y ago
    You can sign with a SHA1 hash but a SHA256 certificate, and have it work on unpatched Win7 and even Vista SP2 with a hotfix installed (to fix a minor problem).
- piyush_soni 10y ago
  That's great! I didn't know about it. Would anyone happen to know how does it compare with the applications on Linux? Are they similarly forward compatible?
  - copperx 10y ago
    Oh, in no way, shape, or form, unless the application was statically linked, which is uncommon.
    - wz1000 10y ago
      You could always run them in a container.
    - creshal 10y ago
      Closed source programs usually are, exactly for that reason. (Or at least ship all libraries they link to, up to and including the libc.) Go also makes it relatively easy to statically compile everything, one of the reasons why it's gaining popularity. Apart from those two it's highly uncommon: You're supposed to ship sources and compile them on the target system. To get a sort of forward compatibility you'd need to find compatible sources for all involved userland, or ship them with your sources. The latter is sometimes used in larger projects, to work around distributions having wildly incompatible versions of whatever library you need (Samba, Firefox, LibreOffice e.g.).
statictype 10y ago
I think developers prefer a crappy but stable technologies with a proven market over uncertain and fast-moving technologies. Businesses - yes. Developers - my experience says no (myself included).
- riffraff 10y ago
  I think developers like uncertain and fast technology IFF they get to choose. New web framework comes out? Cool I'll try it. Web framework version I am using is suddenly EOL'd and I have to upgrade to something radically different? Curse upstream!
- beobab 10y ago
  As a developer, I prefer technologies which don't plunge me into the "abyss of uselessness", where I know enough to know that something should be possible, and how it's done in the "old way" but have no idea how to do it in the "new way".
- taneq 10y ago
  I'd prefer to use a functional API with a few warts and limitations over having to learn yet another goddamn 'fast-moving modern' interface which will disappear within five years. Churn might be great for job security but it's a huge waste of everyone's time and efforts.
  - creshal 10y ago
    Five years? I'd be glad if we stopped moving to a new Javascript stack every six months.
feelin_googley 10y ago
http://www.computerworld.com/article/3070460/windows-pcs/microsoft-makes-final-aggressive-windows-10-upgrade-push.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/3070460/windows-pcs/mic...
- userbinator 10y ago
  the upgrade and its scheduled implementation is approved when the user either clicks the "OK" button or the "X" in the upper right corner of the notification This reminds me the many stories about those shady popups that show a fake dialog box where clicking on the 'X' in an attempt to close it actually does something very, very unintended, perhaps even downloading and running some sort of malware. MS is getting pretty desperate.
- joosters 10y ago
  I despise Microsoft for this. Two days ago, my dad accidentally triggered an upgrade to Windows 10. In a panic, he switched the computer off, and now it no longer boots. It's now down to me to repair the computer. Apparently, months of dismissing the pop up invitations to upgrade to Windows 10 were not enough for Microsoft, they had to go and practically force it down people's throats. And my family is paying the price. Microsoft, you are utter scum. You have wasted my time, my dad's time, and cost him hours of lost work.
  - ekianjo 10y ago
    Time to consider an OS change maybe?
    - joosters 10y ago
      I wish I could, but you and I both know that's a massive amount of time and work.
    - willtim 10y ago
      If only it were that simple. Even if we restrict ourselves to open cross platform software, hardware support remains a big issue. I have a Skylake laptop with which I daisy chain two external monitors via displayport. Linux doesn't even support Skylake properly, let alone my dual monitor configuration.
kabes 10y ago
Well, if they moved on to web, they certainly didn't choose for stable technologies over uncertain and fast-moving ones.
pjmlp 10y ago
> Microsoft really needs to stop introducing "upgrades" that require application rewrites in Windows for the next 3-5 years, and focus on getting the Windows Store going. You mean like the "Framework of the day" on web land? Or the "rewrite your app with each Android version" that you cannot get? Or "your language just got replaced" on iOS land?
- taneq 10y ago
  It wasn't always like this. The Windows API was fairly stable from the mid-late 90s for at least a decade. They decided to start breaking that compatibility in the name of 'progress' at around the time they started trying to squidge together their touchscreen and desktop interfaces, but this API stability used to be one of the huge drawcards of the Windows platform.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    My Windows coding experience goes back to Windows 3.0 and I am looking forward to the day Win32 and Hungary notation are nothing more than plain maintenance coding, replaced by a proper type safe OO ABI like WinRT.
    - userbinator 10y ago
      My past experience with others "OO-ifying" APIs (e.g. MFC) makes me think that'll just end up being worse because it tends to add a lot of complexity that gets in the way and obfuscates the flow of the code. Besides, Win32 is implicitly quite OO already and can be used from a variety of languages because it's based on C. Not everyone wants to use C++.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        MFC is not a good example. OWL, VCL are much better approaches to Windows frameworks. Not everyone wants C to stay around.
- creshal 10y ago
B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
> Windows Phone, brilliant as it is, did never reach mass adoption Being kicked in the nuts by the 'cloud' division does not help either. Because it was the free 15 GB storage from all those phone buyers that was dragging them down. "Adult supervision, can I haz it?"

sandworm101 10y ago

>>Microsoft really needs to stop introducing "upgrades" that require application rewrites in Windows for the next 3-5 years, and focus on getting the Windows Store going. Those application rewrites are part of the Windows Store push. Want the latest version of X, then you need the latest version of Windows which, if all goes to plan, will only run software from the windows store. MS has always been very good at turning the updating of third party software into new sales for windows.

userbinator 10y ago

As a long-time Win32 programmer (over a decade), I can safely say that the vast majority of existing applications still remain (for the time being) forward-compatible. Here's some examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOj-bAZBhnE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOj-bAZBhnE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRfn4M5DXTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRfn4M5DXTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqFWuNmWbHk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqFWuNmWbHk The reasons people hold off on "upgrading" Windows versions is not mainly because of compatibility, but other factors like unwanted UI changes and removed features, and particularly with Windows 10, the increased data-collection intrusiveness and "we own your machine" attitude: http://www.howtogeek.com/243581/windows-10-may-delete-your-programs-without-asking/ http://www.howtogeek.com/243581/windows-10-may-delete-your-p...

yuhong 10y ago
Yes, the name "Windows as a service" was coined for a reason.
nhebb 10y ago
The deprecation of SHA-1 is an issue, though. Timestamps after January 1, 2016 must be SHA-256, and SHA-1 signed files will be blocked after January 1, 2017. However, Microsoft has blogged that they may block them starting this June. Pre-Win7 systems don't recognize SHA-256, so you have to dual sign the files if you want backward compatibility. Except, MSI files can't be dual signed. I'm also finding that more Win7 users than I would expect don't have the proper updates, so their systems don't recognize SHA-256. In short, it's a mess.
- yuhong 10y ago
  You can sign with a SHA1 hash but a SHA256 certificate, and have it work on unpatched Win7 and even Vista SP2 with a hotfix installed (to fix a minor problem).
piyush_soni 10y ago
That's great! I didn't know about it. Would anyone happen to know how does it compare with the applications on Linux? Are they similarly forward compatible?
- copperx 10y ago
  Oh, in no way, shape, or form, unless the application was statically linked, which is uncommon.
  - wz1000 10y ago
    You could always run them in a container.
  - creshal 10y ago
    Closed source programs usually are, exactly for that reason. (Or at least ship all libraries they link to, up to and including the libc.) Go also makes it relatively easy to statically compile everything, one of the reasons why it's gaining popularity. Apart from those two it's highly uncommon: You're supposed to ship sources and compile them on the target system. To get a sort of forward compatibility you'd need to find compatible sources for all involved userland, or ship them with your sources. The latter is sometimes used in larger projects, to work around distributions having wildly incompatible versions of whatever library you need (Samba, Firefox, LibreOffice e.g.).

statictype 10y ago

I think developers prefer a crappy but stable technologies with a proven market over uncertain and fast-moving technologies. Businesses - yes. Developers - my experience says no (myself included).

riffraff 10y ago
I think developers like uncertain and fast technology IFF they get to choose. New web framework comes out? Cool I'll try it. Web framework version I am using is suddenly EOL'd and I have to upgrade to something radically different? Curse upstream!
beobab 10y ago
As a developer, I prefer technologies which don't plunge me into the "abyss of uselessness", where I know enough to know that something should be possible, and how it's done in the "old way" but have no idea how to do it in the "new way".
taneq 10y ago
I'd prefer to use a functional API with a few warts and limitations over having to learn yet another goddamn 'fast-moving modern' interface which will disappear within five years. Churn might be great for job security but it's a huge waste of everyone's time and efforts.
- creshal 10y ago
  Five years? I'd be glad if we stopped moving to a new Javascript stack every six months.

feelin_googley 10y ago

http://www.computerworld.com/article/3070460/windows-pcs/microsoft-makes-final-aggressive-windows-10-upgrade-push.html http://www.computerworld.com/article/3070460/windows-pcs/mic...

userbinator 10y ago
the upgrade and its scheduled implementation is approved when the user either clicks the "OK" button or the "X" in the upper right corner of the notification This reminds me the many stories about those shady popups that show a fake dialog box where clicking on the 'X' in an attempt to close it actually does something very, very unintended, perhaps even downloading and running some sort of malware. MS is getting pretty desperate.
joosters 10y ago
I despise Microsoft for this. Two days ago, my dad accidentally triggered an upgrade to Windows 10. In a panic, he switched the computer off, and now it no longer boots. It's now down to me to repair the computer. Apparently, months of dismissing the pop up invitations to upgrade to Windows 10 were not enough for Microsoft, they had to go and practically force it down people's throats. And my family is paying the price. Microsoft, you are utter scum. You have wasted my time, my dad's time, and cost him hours of lost work.
- ekianjo 10y ago
  Time to consider an OS change maybe?
  - joosters 10y ago
    I wish I could, but you and I both know that's a massive amount of time and work.
  - willtim 10y ago
    If only it were that simple. Even if we restrict ourselves to open cross platform software, hardware support remains a big issue. I have a Skylake laptop with which I daisy chain two external monitors via displayport. Linux doesn't even support Skylake properly, let alone my dual monitor configuration.

kabes 10y ago

Well, if they moved on to web, they certainly didn't choose for stable technologies over uncertain and fast-moving ones.

pjmlp 10y ago

> Microsoft really needs to stop introducing "upgrades" that require application rewrites in Windows for the next 3-5 years, and focus on getting the Windows Store going. You mean like the "Framework of the day" on web land? Or the "rewrite your app with each Android version" that you cannot get? Or "your language just got replaced" on iOS land?

taneq 10y ago
It wasn't always like this. The Windows API was fairly stable from the mid-late 90s for at least a decade. They decided to start breaking that compatibility in the name of 'progress' at around the time they started trying to squidge together their touchscreen and desktop interfaces, but this API stability used to be one of the huge drawcards of the Windows platform.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  My Windows coding experience goes back to Windows 3.0 and I am looking forward to the day Win32 and Hungary notation are nothing more than plain maintenance coding, replaced by a proper type safe OO ABI like WinRT.
  - userbinator 10y ago
    My past experience with others "OO-ifying" APIs (e.g. MFC) makes me think that'll just end up being worse because it tends to add a lot of complexity that gets in the way and obfuscates the flow of the code. Besides, Win32 is implicitly quite OO already and can be used from a variety of languages because it's based on C. Not everyone wants to use C++.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      MFC is not a good example. OWL, VCL are much better approaches to Windows frameworks. Not everyone wants C to stay around.
creshal 10y ago

B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago

> Windows Phone, brilliant as it is, did never reach mass adoption Being kicked in the nuts by the 'cloud' division does not help either. Because it was the free 15 GB storage from all those phone buyers that was dragging them down. "Adult supervision, can I haz it?"