5 ms·

Sadly MS is hardly the first to have done something like that, but they are the biggest and most prominent name right now. People avoid doing firmware updates

Sadly MS is hardly the first to have done something like that, but they are the biggest and most prominent name right now. People avoid doing firmware updates on various devices for the same reason, as there is no indication what will change or go missing (never mind that it likely will reset the device, and thus require a full reconfigure before being useful again). The basic problem of our world is that it is ruled by 20-sometings that loath working on "old" tech. The epitome of this is the FOSS world that goes through a wrenching rewrite churn every 5 years or so as new heads take over "old" projects. For all their antics, one reason MS is still top dog is that they support APIs and ABIs first introduced with Windows 95 (or even older, if you manage to do a 32-bit install). Never mind that MS did offer XP updates, for a price. One reason the NHS got hit hard was that some penny pinching bureaucrat decided they could not afford to pay said price.

Qwertious 9y ago
"The basic problem of our world is that it is ruled by 20-sometings that loath working on "old" tech. The epitome of this is the FOSS world that goes through a wrenching rewrite churn every 5 years or so as new heads take over "old" projects." Disagree thoroughly. The reason why people push shit through the security-updates channel is because of money and structural pressure from management to ensure adoption of the company's new $THING.
- freehunter 9y ago
  It's funny that I see the general sentiment over Windows 10 to be the opposite of Python 3. "Everyone" is mad Microsoft pushed Windows 10 too hard, meanwhile "everyone" is trying to get people to adopt Python 3 and wondering why it took big name libraries so long to convert. It's a big problem in tech, trying to get people to update. We might like to think of ourselves as progressive, but a lot of people in our world tend to be very conservative and resistant to change. Microsoft knows that as well as anyone else. The only way to ensure people are using the latest version is to stop giving them a choice. You can't always rely on people making the best choice for themselves. That sounds super authoritarian, sure, but the nice thing about technology? Microsoft isn't the only game in town. They can do whatever they want with their platform and you're free to leave. You don't need a passport, or any more money, or really even any additional knowledge at this point. You're only locked in if you choose to be locked in. *with "everyone" being the typical Internet strawman that only actually exists in a random selection of HN comments.
  - a_imho 9y ago
    The only way to ensure people are using the latest version is to stop giving them a choice. You can't always rely on people making the best choice for themselves. Agree with the first part, the second needs a very twisted definition of best or themselves. Offer something people want and they will upgrade. This alone tells very much about the win10 situation. Microsoft game is lock-in, if the cost of leaving their garden is trivial they are doing something wrong!
    - freehunter 9y ago
      I have a friend who buys $20 shoes. They last him a year, and then he has to buy another pair of shoes. He laughs when I buy $70 shoes, but those $70 shoes last me four years. Over that four year period, he's spent $80 on shoes and I spent $70. I have a friend who buys $500 laptops. They last him a year, and then he has to buy another laptop. He laughs when I buy $1000 laptops, but those $1000 laptops last me three years. Over that three year period, he's spent $1500 on laptops and I spent $1000. I have a friend who uses Windows XP. Windows XP is better, it's faster, it's leaner, Aero is garbage, Metro is garbage. DirectX 12 is just a scam to get you to upgrade, there's no reason Windows XP isn't the best. But once a month he's calling me about some kind of virus he's gotten even though he runs Symantec every day. Relying on an outdated piece of software is never the best decision. If Microsoft's updates bother you that much, stop using Microsoft software. Microsoft can't lock you in to anything, and there's very little that Windows offers that OSX, or to a lesser extent Linux, doesn't offer. The arguments against switching come down to "I hate Apple/Linux", in which case you've locked yourself into one vendor for irrational reasons, or "Apple is too expensive", in which case you have to wonder if that's actually true considering you're spending hours complaining about Microsoft updates, or the worst one, "I'm a Windows developer", which... why? If you hate Microsoft enough to want to switch but Visual Studio is the only thing holding you back, I don't feel bad for you. The only slightly legitimate complaint is the lack of games, but there are a ton of games for Mac these days and consoles do exist. It's not really lock-in if you choose to be locked in.
      - a_imho 9y ago
mjw1007 9y ago
Microsoft may put a great deal of effort into supporting old APIs and old ABIs, but it turns out that that effort has not been enough for us to be able to tell everyone "Yes, go ahead and upgrade to a new Windows version, nothing will break".
tetraodonpuffer 9y ago
> The basic problem of our world is that it is ruled by 20-sometings that loath working on "old" tech. disagree completely, it's not the 20-somethings that come to you and say "the budget we have is limited, and we have to prioritize, feature X might get us more exposure, so work on that and it doesn't matter if it breaks backwards compatibility, users will adapt" If upper mgmt goes after "oh shiny" there's not you can do at the individual contributor level, and if you know you are in a "oh shiny" management situation there is also no incentive whatsoever in spending time making sure you think about the future when developing, since you're going to have to throw everything away anyways in a few months or a year at the most. It's all about "being nimble" and "velocity" and "being innovative", where all of them are more or less shorthands for "churn things quickly until something sticks". Stable, reliable, dependable software is unsexy, if the company you work for is large enough you might be able to find a team that works along those lines and be happy, otherwise it's fighting fires all the time.
- digi_owl 9y ago
  Then why oh why do i keep seeing FOSS projects with limited to no commercial interest keep doing rewrites with the latest "shiny" in mind?!
  - panzagl 9y ago
    Because writing software is a fun hobby, maintaining it is work.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
      That's just a misunderstanding. There is a lot of fun to be had in maintaining others' code and there's nothing like finding a stupid bug (and fixing it) to boost your self-esteem as a programmer. But maintaining code (especially shitty code) gets you much fewer rewards and recognition than writing new code from scratch (including shitty code) -so that may be a better explanation of why most people don't like being "maintainers".
valuearb 9y ago
Apple makes more off PCs than every other PC maker combined, and continues to gain market share. MSFTs main goal seems to be getting people to buy more Macs, like their new crippled MacBook Air clone without a full OS (and the dirt magnet fabric covering).

Qwertious 9y ago

"The basic problem of our world is that it is ruled by 20-sometings that loath working on "old" tech. The epitome of this is the FOSS world that goes through a wrenching rewrite churn every 5 years or so as new heads take over "old" projects." Disagree thoroughly. The reason why people push shit through the security-updates channel is because of money and structural pressure from management to ensure adoption of the company's new $THING.

freehunter 9y ago
It's funny that I see the general sentiment over Windows 10 to be the opposite of Python 3. "Everyone" is mad Microsoft pushed Windows 10 too hard, meanwhile "everyone" is trying to get people to adopt Python 3 and wondering why it took big name libraries so long to convert. It's a big problem in tech, trying to get people to update. We might like to think of ourselves as progressive, but a lot of people in our world tend to be very conservative and resistant to change. Microsoft knows that as well as anyone else. The only way to ensure people are using the latest version is to stop giving them a choice. You can't always rely on people making the best choice for themselves. That sounds super authoritarian, sure, but the nice thing about technology? Microsoft isn't the only game in town. They can do whatever they want with their platform and you're free to leave. You don't need a passport, or any more money, or really even any additional knowledge at this point. You're only locked in if you choose to be locked in. *with "everyone" being the typical Internet strawman that only actually exists in a random selection of HN comments.
- a_imho 9y ago
  The only way to ensure people are using the latest version is to stop giving them a choice. You can't always rely on people making the best choice for themselves. Agree with the first part, the second needs a very twisted definition of best or themselves. Offer something people want and they will upgrade. This alone tells very much about the win10 situation. Microsoft game is lock-in, if the cost of leaving their garden is trivial they are doing something wrong!
  - freehunter 9y ago
    I have a friend who buys $20 shoes. They last him a year, and then he has to buy another pair of shoes. He laughs when I buy $70 shoes, but those $70 shoes last me four years. Over that four year period, he's spent $80 on shoes and I spent $70. I have a friend who buys $500 laptops. They last him a year, and then he has to buy another laptop. He laughs when I buy $1000 laptops, but those $1000 laptops last me three years. Over that three year period, he's spent $1500 on laptops and I spent $1000. I have a friend who uses Windows XP. Windows XP is better, it's faster, it's leaner, Aero is garbage, Metro is garbage. DirectX 12 is just a scam to get you to upgrade, there's no reason Windows XP isn't the best. But once a month he's calling me about some kind of virus he's gotten even though he runs Symantec every day. Relying on an outdated piece of software is never the best decision. If Microsoft's updates bother you that much, stop using Microsoft software. Microsoft can't lock you in to anything, and there's very little that Windows offers that OSX, or to a lesser extent Linux, doesn't offer. The arguments against switching come down to "I hate Apple/Linux", in which case you've locked yourself into one vendor for irrational reasons, or "Apple is too expensive", in which case you have to wonder if that's actually true considering you're spending hours complaining about Microsoft updates, or the worst one, "I'm a Windows developer", which... why? If you hate Microsoft enough to want to switch but Visual Studio is the only thing holding you back, I don't feel bad for you. The only slightly legitimate complaint is the lack of games, but there are a ton of games for Mac these days and consoles do exist. It's not really lock-in if you choose to be locked in.
    - a_imho 9y ago

mjw1007 9y ago

Microsoft may put a great deal of effort into supporting old APIs and old ABIs, but it turns out that that effort has not been enough for us to be able to tell everyone "Yes, go ahead and upgrade to a new Windows version, nothing will break".

tetraodonpuffer 9y ago

> The basic problem of our world is that it is ruled by 20-sometings that loath working on "old" tech. disagree completely, it's not the 20-somethings that come to you and say "the budget we have is limited, and we have to prioritize, feature X might get us more exposure, so work on that and it doesn't matter if it breaks backwards compatibility, users will adapt" If upper mgmt goes after "oh shiny" there's not you can do at the individual contributor level, and if you know you are in a "oh shiny" management situation there is also no incentive whatsoever in spending time making sure you think about the future when developing, since you're going to have to throw everything away anyways in a few months or a year at the most. It's all about "being nimble" and "velocity" and "being innovative", where all of them are more or less shorthands for "churn things quickly until something sticks". Stable, reliable, dependable software is unsexy, if the company you work for is large enough you might be able to find a team that works along those lines and be happy, otherwise it's fighting fires all the time.

digi_owl 9y ago
Then why oh why do i keep seeing FOSS projects with limited to no commercial interest keep doing rewrites with the latest "shiny" in mind?!
- panzagl 9y ago
  Because writing software is a fun hobby, maintaining it is work.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
    That's just a misunderstanding. There is a lot of fun to be had in maintaining others' code and there's nothing like finding a stupid bug (and fixing it) to boost your self-esteem as a programmer. But maintaining code (especially shitty code) gets you much fewer rewards and recognition than writing new code from scratch (including shitty code) -so that may be a better explanation of why most people don't like being "maintainers".

valuearb 9y ago

Apple makes more off PCs than every other PC maker combined, and continues to gain market share. MSFTs main goal seems to be getting people to buy more Macs, like their new crippled MacBook Air clone without a full OS (and the dirt magnet fabric covering).