3 ms·

Not defending Microsoft's behaviour with Windows 10, but I'm guessing that an app that replaces parts of windows' shell is not exactly using public Windows API

by edp 10y ago

Not defending Microsoft's behaviour with Windows 10, but I'm guessing that an app that replaces parts of windows' shell is not exactly using public Windows API to do so. It's often using hacks and workarounds instead. There's no backward compatibility here because there wasn't any compatibility to begin with. The same thing is happening on MacOS when applications use undocumented private APIs and for some reason Apple decides to take them away. Unless the updates really uninstalled the application instead of just breaking it, and that's really (another) bad decision from Microsoft.

ntauthority 10y ago
'Just breaking it' in the case of these shell enhancers would result in the user having no user interface whatsoever after the upgrade. Windows' upgrade process could in theory disable the shell extension, but that would be even worse than uninstalling the program given how programs on Windows do not take kindly to being 'half-installed' (case in point: uninstallers that break when some application files are removed). This is what backwards compatibility leads to, and there is no way all parties can win in this scenario.
- edp 10y ago
  I didn't think about this, uninstalling it is better in that case. However based on coderjames' comment, I guess it wasn't completely uninstalled, and, as you said, left him without a usable system. I agree, backwards compatiblity is a double edged sword.
  - ntauthority 10y ago
    I presumed from the context of the comment that 'usable' was rather loaded language used to denigrate the built-in Start menu in Windows 10. The interpretation works both ways, however.
    - coderjames 10y ago
      I meant that I literally did not have a visible Start Menu that I could interact with because Windows 10 uninstalled the version of Classic Shell[1] I was using as part of installing the Anniversary Edition upgrade. I actually had that message pop up, "Windows has uninstalled this program because it is known to be incompatible." Luckily there was an Anniversary Edition-compatible version available that I could reinstall. Note also that I don't especially consider Classic Shell to be an odd program given that when I briefly worked at Microsoft a few years ago (Win 8.1 was current), my manager actually recommended I install it on my second day there on the company-provided computer in order to retain the classic UI because that group found the Win8 touch UI to be unusable on the desktop. [1] http://www.classicshell.net http://www.classicshell.net

by edp 10y ago

ntauthority 10y ago

'Just breaking it' in the case of these shell enhancers would result in the user having no user interface whatsoever after the upgrade. Windows' upgrade process could in theory disable the shell extension, but that would be even worse than uninstalling the program given how programs on Windows do not take kindly to being 'half-installed' (case in point: uninstallers that break when some application files are removed). This is what backwards compatibility leads to, and there is no way all parties can win in this scenario.

edp 10y ago
I didn't think about this, uninstalling it is better in that case. However based on coderjames' comment, I guess it wasn't completely uninstalled, and, as you said, left him without a usable system. I agree, backwards compatiblity is a double edged sword.
- ntauthority 10y ago
  I presumed from the context of the comment that 'usable' was rather loaded language used to denigrate the built-in Start menu in Windows 10. The interpretation works both ways, however.
  - coderjames 10y ago
    I meant that I literally did not have a visible Start Menu that I could interact with because Windows 10 uninstalled the version of Classic Shell[1] I was using as part of installing the Anniversary Edition upgrade. I actually had that message pop up, "Windows has uninstalled this program because it is known to be incompatible." Luckily there was an Anniversary Edition-compatible version available that I could reinstall. Note also that I don't especially consider Classic Shell to be an odd program given that when I briefly worked at Microsoft a few years ago (Win 8.1 was current), my manager actually recommended I install it on my second day there on the company-provided computer in order to retain the classic UI because that group found the Win8 touch UI to be unusable on the desktop. [1] http://www.classicshell.net http://www.classicshell.net