3 ms·
Is not about closed or open source. It’s about MS past priorities. Apple is also closed source, but the need to transition from PowerPC to Intel, forced them to
by diegof79 5y ago
Is not about closed or open source. It’s about MS past priorities.
Apple is also closed source, but the need to transition from PowerPC to Intel, forced them to have multi-platform app packages (universal binaries). Nothing prevents MS to do the same. The legacy of Wintel apps reflects the MS priorities in the past. They have UWP, but in the usual MS way: ambiguous messages to the devs adopting the platform.
- yisonPylkita 5y ago> Nothing prevents MS to do the same There is a big difference between Apple's transitions between architectures and failed attempts by Microsoft - Apple is also a sole creator of its hardware, not only software. After they announced transition no more PowerPC would be sold few years later. Microsoft can only dream of banning hardware producers from making x86 laptops/desktops
- GeekyBear 5y ago> the need to transition from PowerPC to Intel, forced them to have multi-platform app packages (universal binaries) Classic MacOS had them before that, during the transition from 68k to PPC. NextStep called them Multi-Architecture Binaries since Next ran on 68k, x86, and a couple of RISC CPU flavors.