4 ms·

Many generations of code and UX standards, all still supported. This just reveals Microsoft’s prioritization of UX consistency. Whatever the priority is, it’s

Many generations of code and UX standards, all still supported. This just reveals Microsoft’s prioritization of UX consistency. Whatever the priority is, it’s not enough to overcome the perceived cost of creating consistency. It also shows why Windows can be a strength: still runs almost everything anyone ever made for it.

spicybright 5y ago
The fact I can open most exe files from 1993 today on my window 10 laptop and have it work nearly perfect is an incredible feat. MacOS couldn't be more opposite in this regard. Linux I also dislike for this reason. It's expect you compile your own programs, but more often than not it'll fail if the project is abandoned for 5 years (purely anecdotal).
- datenarsch 5y ago
  While I agree this is great, it is not really related to and no excuse for the inconsistent mess that Windows' UI has been ever since the Windows 8 Metro disaster. Win32 UI (think Windows 2000) was perfectly line.
- petepete 5y ago
  If I want to run an old program I'd rather do it in a VM and have a nice, lean, consistent, sensible OS.
  - oblio 5y ago
    You're a technical person. Grandpa would go: "VM? What's that???".
    - eyelidlessness 5y ago
      The answer to this is simpler than it seems: instead of dedicating your compatibility efforts toward a monolithic OS that runs everything, dedicate them toward make the VM/shim layer so transparent “Grandpa” doesn’t have to know it’s an implementation detail. In contrast with the earlier comment about how poorly Apple fares on backcompat: they have twice (thrice, actually, counting 68k->PPC) successfully made breaking platform changes where old software kept working with no required intervention by users or even knowledge it was happening. Not everyone has been happy with Apple’s deprecation strategy, but there’s no technical reason MS couldn’t use their subsystem prowess to gradually move old technologies out of the core OS into sandboxed environments. The reason they don’t is partly cultural—the compatibility at all costs trope is real—but I think it’s mostly a combination of lack of motivation and a recognition that the ecosystem produces a lot of abandonware that would quickly show seams.
      - petepete 5y ago
        This is what I had in mind. Something along the lines of VMware Unity. Shipping an OS where some bits of UI date back to Windows 3.1 is never going to lead to a seamless experience.
  - theranger 5y ago
    Tell that to a bookeeper who runs aincent software the company has licensed decade ago or to the factory worker who must use a CAD software for a particular CNC machine to prepare the work files.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - petepete 5y ago
      So yeah, legit but niche use case. Thankfully I don't need to worry about it so don't give it a second thought.
      - jcelerier 5y ago
        windows's long tail is niche use cases
ceronman 5y ago
I understand that Microsoft cares a lot about backwards compatibility. I think this is great and they should keep doing it. Now, I completely understand if some third-party program developed twenty years ago looks inconsistently. I even understand if some recent third party tool also looks inconsistently. But here we're talking about the software that is shipped with Windows and it's created by Microsoft directly. These are examples from Edge, Explorer, Settings, etc. This is more than having a low priority for consistency, this is Microsoft not even considering the possibility of consistency. I have not tried Windows 11. But I'm baffled to find that in Windows 10, Microsoft still ships parts of its own UI that are not high-dpi ready. They seem to have zero problem showing dialogs with scaled pixelated text.
- marcthe12 5y ago
  Some of these stuff expose plugin apis or hooks which make this complicated. Control panel is a good example of this. The only alternative is to effective create a new and make that default unless configured otherwise.
hulitu 5y ago
A lot of old windows games do not run anymore on win 7 let alone 10.

spicybright 5y ago

The fact I can open most exe files from 1993 today on my window 10 laptop and have it work nearly perfect is an incredible feat. MacOS couldn't be more opposite in this regard. Linux I also dislike for this reason. It's expect you compile your own programs, but more often than not it'll fail if the project is abandoned for 5 years (purely anecdotal).

datenarsch 5y ago
While I agree this is great, it is not really related to and no excuse for the inconsistent mess that Windows' UI has been ever since the Windows 8 Metro disaster. Win32 UI (think Windows 2000) was perfectly line.
petepete 5y ago
If I want to run an old program I'd rather do it in a VM and have a nice, lean, consistent, sensible OS.
- oblio 5y ago
  You're a technical person. Grandpa would go: "VM? What's that???".
  - eyelidlessness 5y ago
    The answer to this is simpler than it seems: instead of dedicating your compatibility efforts toward a monolithic OS that runs everything, dedicate them toward make the VM/shim layer so transparent “Grandpa” doesn’t have to know it’s an implementation detail. In contrast with the earlier comment about how poorly Apple fares on backcompat: they have twice (thrice, actually, counting 68k->PPC) successfully made breaking platform changes where old software kept working with no required intervention by users or even knowledge it was happening. Not everyone has been happy with Apple’s deprecation strategy, but there’s no technical reason MS couldn’t use their subsystem prowess to gradually move old technologies out of the core OS into sandboxed environments. The reason they don’t is partly cultural—the compatibility at all costs trope is real—but I think it’s mostly a combination of lack of motivation and a recognition that the ecosystem produces a lot of abandonware that would quickly show seams.
    - petepete 5y ago
      This is what I had in mind. Something along the lines of VMware Unity. Shipping an OS where some bits of UI date back to Windows 3.1 is never going to lead to a seamless experience.
- theranger 5y ago
  Tell that to a bookeeper who runs aincent software the company has licensed decade ago or to the factory worker who must use a CAD software for a particular CNC machine to prepare the work files.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - petepete 5y ago
    So yeah, legit but niche use case. Thankfully I don't need to worry about it so don't give it a second thought.
    - jcelerier 5y ago
      windows's long tail is niche use cases

ceronman 5y ago

I understand that Microsoft cares a lot about backwards compatibility. I think this is great and they should keep doing it. Now, I completely understand if some third-party program developed twenty years ago looks inconsistently. I even understand if some recent third party tool also looks inconsistently. But here we're talking about the software that is shipped with Windows and it's created by Microsoft directly. These are examples from Edge, Explorer, Settings, etc. This is more than having a low priority for consistency, this is Microsoft not even considering the possibility of consistency. I have not tried Windows 11. But I'm baffled to find that in Windows 10, Microsoft still ships parts of its own UI that are not high-dpi ready. They seem to have zero problem showing dialogs with scaled pixelated text.

marcthe12 5y ago
Some of these stuff expose plugin apis or hooks which make this complicated. Control panel is a good example of this. The only alternative is to effective create a new and make that default unless configured otherwise.

hulitu 5y ago

A lot of old windows games do not run anymore on win 7 let alone 10.