4 ms·

I think this is entirely due to backwards compatibility.

Arnt 8y ago
Are you suggesting that Windows requires about 3700 additional MB of RAM to be backwards compatible with Windows versions that ran on devices with 32MB RAM?
uygihvh 8y ago
Except wine can now run more windows program then any version bof windows. Wine better at windows than windows itself.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Can WINE run on Windows eg via WSL?
  - fasafsaf3 8y ago
    Wine can probably run on Windows natively.
reaperducer 8y ago
I think this is entirely due to backwards compatibility. That's the current conventional wisdom. But it's more like an excuse. Windows got bloated because Microsoft relied(s) on cheap masses of mediocre programmers, backed by equally mediocre managers. A pattern that Windows application developers copied. Yes, Microsoft has some really talented people. I knew a good number of them from the Bing and Xbox group when I lived in Bellevue. They would talk about amazing things. But then they would always follow those tales with internal Microsoft horror stories.
- supernovae 8y ago
  This isn't true at all. The ENTIRE industry had to re-invent itself MANY times - and MANY companies failed and have long since shutdown. Microsoft on the other hand has survived - and not only maintained backwards compatibility but embraced new technologies - and is doing so at a breakneck pace today. Microsoft research is a top notch research company. Microsoft is also a large, if not the largest, contributor to Linux & Open source. Horror stories aren't unique to Microsoft... The industry of the 80s/90s and early 2000s was something i'd never want to go back to - but its also something i suffered through and that suffering didn't matter what OS you ran. If you chose Irix it sucked paying 600 bucks for MEDIA to update your OS, if you ran HPUX it sucked having to buy a support contract to update your OS, if you ran Solaris, you were proud of solaris - but it wasn't until sun embraced open source that it really took off because we didn't have to buy a compiler that cost hundreds of dollars if not thousands to license. Meanwhile, Windows has TurboC, TurboPascal and tons of stuff - and open source gnu started taking off and linux came around and the world started getting better for everyone- opportunity opened up - we crossed the chasim from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit and 64bit and Windows has maintained a level of compatibility second to none to support all that legacy. They're working hard to compete - Windows "S" mode is windows without the ability to stall win32 - its "Store mode" - it could go a LONG way into making it "suck less" from legacy cruft but by and large the market and developers are refusing to support it - which is odd considering they NEED to support the store model for official chromebooks, android apps or ios marketplaces. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    Horror stories aren't unique to Microsoft So because other companies also did sucky things, Microsoft’s sucky things don’t count. Got it.
    - supernovae 8y ago
      Never said that, it's just apparent you hold a grudge because of actions so long ago that even though they have changed, you won't. You're ignoring a massive amount of history (and current actions) to keep your jaded worldview and that sucks.
  - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
    > Microsoft is also a large, if not the largest, contributor to Linux & Open source. I always hear things like this. What exactly are they contributing though? > Windows has maintained a level of compatibility second to none to support all that legacy As far as I can tell, if you want to run a legacy Windows app, you're more likely to be successful running it in Wine on Linux.
    - supernovae 8y ago
      >I always hear things like this. What exactly are they contributing though? Their employees contribute tons of code to the kernel and they're a premium partner in the Linux foundation paying Linus's salary. They contribute to the kernel, hadoop, mesos, k8s, they contribute to gcc, heck they let you run linux on windows now with Linux subsystem and have official partnerships with redhat, suse, ubuntu. They also open sourced C#, they contribute to jenkins, so much mroe. >As far as I can tell, if you want to run a legacy Windows app, you're more likely to be successful running it in Wine on Linux. no sane person would do that. Just run it in compatibility mode on Windows 10.
      - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
        > Their employees contribute tons of code to the kernel and they're a premium partner in the Linux foundation paying Linus's salary.... Linus wasn't starving before MS became a platinum member of the Linux Foundation. > They contribute to the kernel, hadoop, mesos, k8s, they contribute to gcc, heck they let you run linux on windows now with Linux subsystem... Right, so as far as I can tell most of their contribution are likely to be things to make their linux subsystem work better. Which has very little effect on me. > >As far as I can tell, if you want to run a legacy Windows app, you're more likely to be successful running it in Wine on Linux. > no sane person would do that. Just run it in compatibility mode on Windows 10. Mentioning sanity and running Windows 10 in the same breath?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
fasafsaf3 8y ago
Absolutely not. All the bloat 10 ships that makes it so slow is completely new. Compatibility has almost nothing to do with bloat.
- scarface74 8y ago
  How can compatibility not have to do with bloat? Entire subsystems in Windows are devoted to backwards compatibility. If you follow Raymond Chen’s blog on MSDN, he talks all of the time about all of the hacks in Windows to make it compatible with one specific program. There is still a 32 bit version of Windows in 2018.
  - fasafsaf3 8y ago
    There are a few hacks here and there that, I assume, introduce a bit of overhead, but the real problem with 10 is the absolute disregard the Windows team has for performance. Windows 7 has the same level of compatilibity (or perhaps even more, as I'm sure more software is compatible with it) but it's much lighter.
combatentropy 8y ago
Maintaining backwards compatibility makes improvement harder. But I lay the blame mainly at the feet of culture. It has been a company run by the sales department. Programmers are not in charge. Speed and stability come with leisurely refactoring, an activity impossible to explain to business and marketing majors.

Arnt 8y ago

Are you suggesting that Windows requires about 3700 additional MB of RAM to be backwards compatible with Windows versions that ran on devices with 32MB RAM?

uygihvh 8y ago

Except wine can now run more windows program then any version bof windows. Wine better at windows than windows itself.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago
Can WINE run on Windows eg via WSL?
- fasafsaf3 8y ago
  Wine can probably run on Windows natively.

reaperducer 8y ago

I think this is entirely due to backwards compatibility. That's the current conventional wisdom. But it's more like an excuse. Windows got bloated because Microsoft relied(s) on cheap masses of mediocre programmers, backed by equally mediocre managers. A pattern that Windows application developers copied. Yes, Microsoft has some really talented people. I knew a good number of them from the Bing and Xbox group when I lived in Bellevue. They would talk about amazing things. But then they would always follow those tales with internal Microsoft horror stories.

supernovae 8y ago
This isn't true at all. The ENTIRE industry had to re-invent itself MANY times - and MANY companies failed and have long since shutdown. Microsoft on the other hand has survived - and not only maintained backwards compatibility but embraced new technologies - and is doing so at a breakneck pace today. Microsoft research is a top notch research company. Microsoft is also a large, if not the largest, contributor to Linux & Open source. Horror stories aren't unique to Microsoft... The industry of the 80s/90s and early 2000s was something i'd never want to go back to - but its also something i suffered through and that suffering didn't matter what OS you ran. If you chose Irix it sucked paying 600 bucks for MEDIA to update your OS, if you ran HPUX it sucked having to buy a support contract to update your OS, if you ran Solaris, you were proud of solaris - but it wasn't until sun embraced open source that it really took off because we didn't have to buy a compiler that cost hundreds of dollars if not thousands to license. Meanwhile, Windows has TurboC, TurboPascal and tons of stuff - and open source gnu started taking off and linux came around and the world started getting better for everyone- opportunity opened up - we crossed the chasim from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit and 64bit and Windows has maintained a level of compatibility second to none to support all that legacy. They're working hard to compete - Windows "S" mode is windows without the ability to stall win32 - its "Store mode" - it could go a LONG way into making it "suck less" from legacy cruft but by and large the market and developers are refusing to support it - which is odd considering they NEED to support the store model for official chromebooks, android apps or ios marketplaces. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Horror stories aren't unique to Microsoft So because other companies also did sucky things, Microsoft’s sucky things don’t count. Got it.
  - supernovae 8y ago
    Never said that, it's just apparent you hold a grudge because of actions so long ago that even though they have changed, you won't. You're ignoring a massive amount of history (and current actions) to keep your jaded worldview and that sucks.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
  > Microsoft is also a large, if not the largest, contributor to Linux & Open source. I always hear things like this. What exactly are they contributing though? > Windows has maintained a level of compatibility second to none to support all that legacy As far as I can tell, if you want to run a legacy Windows app, you're more likely to be successful running it in Wine on Linux.
  - supernovae 8y ago
    >I always hear things like this. What exactly are they contributing though? Their employees contribute tons of code to the kernel and they're a premium partner in the Linux foundation paying Linus's salary. They contribute to the kernel, hadoop, mesos, k8s, they contribute to gcc, heck they let you run linux on windows now with Linux subsystem and have official partnerships with redhat, suse, ubuntu. They also open sourced C#, they contribute to jenkins, so much mroe. >As far as I can tell, if you want to run a legacy Windows app, you're more likely to be successful running it in Wine on Linux. no sane person would do that. Just run it in compatibility mode on Windows 10.
    - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
      > Their employees contribute tons of code to the kernel and they're a premium partner in the Linux foundation paying Linus's salary.... Linus wasn't starving before MS became a platinum member of the Linux Foundation. > They contribute to the kernel, hadoop, mesos, k8s, they contribute to gcc, heck they let you run linux on windows now with Linux subsystem... Right, so as far as I can tell most of their contribution are likely to be things to make their linux subsystem work better. Which has very little effect on me. > >As far as I can tell, if you want to run a legacy Windows app, you're more likely to be successful running it in Wine on Linux. > no sane person would do that. Just run it in compatibility mode on Windows 10. Mentioning sanity and running Windows 10 in the same breath?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

fasafsaf3 8y ago

Absolutely not. All the bloat 10 ships that makes it so slow is completely new. Compatibility has almost nothing to do with bloat.

scarface74 8y ago
How can compatibility not have to do with bloat? Entire subsystems in Windows are devoted to backwards compatibility. If you follow Raymond Chen’s blog on MSDN, he talks all of the time about all of the hacks in Windows to make it compatible with one specific program. There is still a 32 bit version of Windows in 2018.
- fasafsaf3 8y ago
  There are a few hacks here and there that, I assume, introduce a bit of overhead, but the real problem with 10 is the absolute disregard the Windows team has for performance. Windows 7 has the same level of compatilibity (or perhaps even more, as I'm sure more software is compatible with it) but it's much lighter.

combatentropy 8y ago

Maintaining backwards compatibility makes improvement harder. But I lay the blame mainly at the feet of culture. It has been a company run by the sales department. Programmers are not in charge. Speed and stability come with leisurely refactoring, an activity impossible to explain to business and marketing majors.