3 ms·

Personally, I like the Microsoft approach of having backwards compatibility forever in Windows, until the end of time. They could have made 32 bit support slow

Personally, I like the Microsoft approach of having backwards compatibility forever in Windows, until the end of time. They could have made 32 bit support slower, and gone through a virtualization layer.

scarface74 6y ago
And the Microsoft approach has it own set of tradeoffs. - Security. The more code you have the larger the attack surface of vulnerabilities. One of the earliest side spread attacks on IIS was caused by IIS not checking the validity of one of the myriad of ways that you could represent a string in Windows. It didn’t take any great hacker skills to take advantage of the vulnerability. All you had to do was encode a DOS command in the url bar of a web browser to run commands on the Windows server. - code bloat. There is a reason that Microsoft wasn’t able to port Windows to low memory/relatively slow mobile devices as easily as Apple was. - battery life. Have you compared the battery life of the typical Windows laptop to Macs running on the same hardware? - it doesn’t force adoption of newer technology. If Adobe could have gotten away with it. They probably still would have 68K code running on the latest version of their products.