4 ms·

Windows has always been two creatures that behave in very different ways. The server line is where you see stability and compatibility reign supreme. On the de

Windows has always been two creatures that behave in very different ways. The server line is where you see stability and compatibility reign supreme. On the desktop/workstation line though, let's take a trip down memory lane and remember all these upgrades together: Windows 3.11 -> 95 -> 98 -> Me -> XP -> Vista -> 7 -> 8 -> 10. I am having a really hard time seeing how one can infer from that timeline that Microsoft's desktop OS line follows a philosophy of "catering to the user, keeping things consistent, and being backwards compatible." Windows 98 didn't cause much hassle, but, at least from my experience, that was really it. Windows 7 had its share of hassles, too. Particularly, as I recall, in the backwards compatibility department. We just remember it fondly because it was sandwiched in between Windows Vista and Windows 8.

ezconnect 6y ago
Hardware support was always an issue on every version of windows but on the software side the only time I had software compatibility issue was whenI moved to Windows 2000. Windows vista for me was just a bad PR management by Microsoft.
- vezycash 6y ago
  I place the blame mainly on penny pinching OEMs who sold windows XP hardware and slapped vista capable logo on it.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
3.11 to 95 was a big shift in terms of how the interface worked, but after that it was pretty damned consistent until 8 tried to turn everything into a tablet. The introduction of WDDM along with the new sound and networking driver architectures caused some headache in Vista, but were ultimately significant improvements over the way things had been. 10, on the other hand, made automatic updates mandatory, and pushed itself on everybody through dark patterns. It puts ads in the start menu and on the lock screen. It started, but didn't finish, implementing new interfaces nobody asked for while deprecating the old ones they still hand't entirely replicated. Today, they're doing their damnedest to hide the fact that you don't need a Microsoft account to set up your computer.
- ROARosen 6y ago
  We should - though - definitely appreciate the fact that they still "let" you setup a workstation without signing in to a Microsoft account (unlike iOS, the new Oculus device etc.)
  - djxfade 6y ago
    You can setup iOS devices without an Apple ID if that is what you are trying to imply.
    - danhor 6y ago
      You can, but apart from calling & web browsing, it's not that useful, in contrast to a windows machine (i guess you probably can't use the windows store)
      - jsmith45 6y ago
        The Windows Store (now called the Microsoft Store, apparently to match the name o their physical stores), does allow one yo download free programs without using a Microsoft Account. I'm guessing you might need one for paid programs, but I've literally never tried, since this is a PC, not a phone/tablet.
      - xodice 6y ago
        iOS is still useful without an iCloud account. Everything still works. Calendar, Calculator, Contacts, Safari, Music, etc, on and on all work just fine. You can add any number of third party services with the email app. All you loose not logging into iCloud is sync'ing of said data to other devices. It's a local only device at that point. Pretty sure the same stands for Android.
        brnt 6y ago
        What do you mean with third party services? Apps? You can download (free) apps w/o an Apple ID?
thomasz 6y ago
Windows is light years ahead in this department compared to any alternative. It's a hard problem.
coldtea 6y ago
>I am having a really hard time seeing how one can infer from that timeline that Microsoft's desktop OS line follows a philosophy of "catering to the user, keeping things consistent, and being backwards compatible." In the simple sense that you can run ancient Win 95 applications in any of these later versions (if not 3.11 and DOS too).
- sandworm101 6y ago
  >> you can run ancient Win 95 applications in any of these later versions In theory, according to MS. In reality we all have seen old applications die when windows updates. Security-related applications are notorious for this. What once worked perfectly well with Win8 now goes into total panic mode when it sees Win10 doing its thing in unexpected ways.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    >In reality we all have seen old applications die when windows updates. Security-related applications are notorious for this. I wouldn't expect "security related" applications to work (e.g. some antivirus), as they use bizarro / too low level APIs. But you can still run 15+ year old games, office apps, and whatever...
Njikl 6y ago
I'm not sure how you're having a hard time. Yes, Microsoft releases new OS versions. I'm not sure what you think that has to do with backwards compatibility. Have you not heard any of the stories about all the hacks Microsoft has had to implement over the past decades to ensure that third-party applications function correctly? A program made for Win95 will generally work seamlessly on W10. Worst-case scenario, you'll need to change compatibility settings or configure exceptions in things like exploit protection. The same can't be said for Linux, where the only thing you can count on is the kernel's ABI.
dublin 6y ago
Your chain breaks between Me and XP, because you omitted Win2K. And that's a huge change - It was the point at which they switched to the NT kernel from the previous DOS-based ones. While MS hasn't always done a great job on all of the OS functionality surrounding the kernel (though it's quite good now), the internals of the NT kernel are and always have always been excellent, and IMO, are considerably superior to Linux' kernel internals. One reason for this, interestingly, is that NT had less of a past to deal with - it was a clean-sheet design by one of the most experienced OS kernel designers on the planet (David Cutler, from DEC) - Linux was still trying to be "Unix-like" and maintain (more or less) POSIX compatibility (though to be fair, POSIX didn't show up until about the time Linux grew out of its hobbyist toy phase...)

ezconnect 6y ago

Hardware support was always an issue on every version of windows but on the software side the only time I had software compatibility issue was whenI moved to Windows 2000. Windows vista for me was just a bad PR management by Microsoft.

vezycash 6y ago
I place the blame mainly on penny pinching OEMs who sold windows XP hardware and slapped vista capable logo on it.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

3.11 to 95 was a big shift in terms of how the interface worked, but after that it was pretty damned consistent until 8 tried to turn everything into a tablet. The introduction of WDDM along with the new sound and networking driver architectures caused some headache in Vista, but were ultimately significant improvements over the way things had been. 10, on the other hand, made automatic updates mandatory, and pushed itself on everybody through dark patterns. It puts ads in the start menu and on the lock screen. It started, but didn't finish, implementing new interfaces nobody asked for while deprecating the old ones they still hand't entirely replicated. Today, they're doing their damnedest to hide the fact that you don't need a Microsoft account to set up your computer.

ROARosen 6y ago
We should - though - definitely appreciate the fact that they still "let" you setup a workstation without signing in to a Microsoft account (unlike iOS, the new Oculus device etc.)
- djxfade 6y ago
  You can setup iOS devices without an Apple ID if that is what you are trying to imply.
  - danhor 6y ago
    You can, but apart from calling & web browsing, it's not that useful, in contrast to a windows machine (i guess you probably can't use the windows store)
    - jsmith45 6y ago
      The Windows Store (now called the Microsoft Store, apparently to match the name o their physical stores), does allow one yo download free programs without using a Microsoft Account. I'm guessing you might need one for paid programs, but I've literally never tried, since this is a PC, not a phone/tablet.
    - xodice 6y ago
      iOS is still useful without an iCloud account. Everything still works. Calendar, Calculator, Contacts, Safari, Music, etc, on and on all work just fine. You can add any number of third party services with the email app. All you loose not logging into iCloud is sync'ing of said data to other devices. It's a local only device at that point. Pretty sure the same stands for Android.
      - brnt 6y ago
        What do you mean with third party services? Apps? You can download (free) apps w/o an Apple ID?

thomasz 6y ago

Windows is light years ahead in this department compared to any alternative. It's a hard problem.

coldtea 6y ago

>I am having a really hard time seeing how one can infer from that timeline that Microsoft's desktop OS line follows a philosophy of "catering to the user, keeping things consistent, and being backwards compatible." In the simple sense that you can run ancient Win 95 applications in any of these later versions (if not 3.11 and DOS too).

sandworm101 6y ago
>> you can run ancient Win 95 applications in any of these later versions In theory, according to MS. In reality we all have seen old applications die when windows updates. Security-related applications are notorious for this. What once worked perfectly well with Win8 now goes into total panic mode when it sees Win10 doing its thing in unexpected ways.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >In reality we all have seen old applications die when windows updates. Security-related applications are notorious for this. I wouldn't expect "security related" applications to work (e.g. some antivirus), as they use bizarro / too low level APIs. But you can still run 15+ year old games, office apps, and whatever...

Njikl 6y ago

I'm not sure how you're having a hard time. Yes, Microsoft releases new OS versions. I'm not sure what you think that has to do with backwards compatibility. Have you not heard any of the stories about all the hacks Microsoft has had to implement over the past decades to ensure that third-party applications function correctly? A program made for Win95 will generally work seamlessly on W10. Worst-case scenario, you'll need to change compatibility settings or configure exceptions in things like exploit protection. The same can't be said for Linux, where the only thing you can count on is the kernel's ABI.

dublin 6y ago

Your chain breaks between Me and XP, because you omitted Win2K. And that's a huge change - It was the point at which they switched to the NT kernel from the previous DOS-based ones. While MS hasn't always done a great job on all of the OS functionality surrounding the kernel (though it's quite good now), the internals of the NT kernel are and always have always been excellent, and IMO, are considerably superior to Linux' kernel internals. One reason for this, interestingly, is that NT had less of a past to deal with - it was a clean-sheet design by one of the most experienced OS kernel designers on the planet (David Cutler, from DEC) - Linux was still trying to be "Unix-like" and maintain (more or less) POSIX compatibility (though to be fair, POSIX didn't show up until about the time Linux grew out of its hobbyist toy phase...)