4 ms·
That changed because they have a major refactor starting from Windows 7. They have it up to the spec and not so much more ad-hoc behavior this time. To me it s
by stevefan1999 5y ago
That changed because they have a major refactor starting from Windows 7. They have it up to the spec and not so much more ad-hoc behavior this time.
To me it seems like cutting the compatibility arm is worth the price of having to keep a shitty, inconsistent behavior.
Apple has nailed it so well (don't make it backward compatible) for the last decade afterall, since Apple realized one the internet is so much better and source code management (and repository, backup, disaster recovery) became more accessible so that the cost of port became much lower.
- unicornfinder 5y agoTo be fair though I think there's a happy medium. For a while I really loved Apple's approach of just not giving a damn about backwards compatibility but I have to say using Windows did make me realise just how wonderful it is not worrying about whether the software I want to use will work.
- saagarjha 5y agoApple ships hundreds of workarounds for specific apps.
- stormbeta 5y agoYeah - as a user, I specifically _don't_ like Apple's approach of breaking things all the time.
- Pxtl 5y agoLet's not even start about Android's approach to backwards compatibility. There's a very long list of stuff I loved that no longer runs.
- yellowapple 5y agoIIRC that refactor came with Vista (and 7 just polished it up).
- jcelerier 5y ago> Apple has nailed it so well It's a constant issue around me. I know people still keeping 10.6 Macs and sweating profusely at the idea that one day they'll stop working, as the tools they use haven't been ported upwards (because most often the developer of the proprietary app is dead) and will stop too ; imagine an artist whose favorite signature brand of crayons closes door.
- quickthrower2 5y agoIsn’t emulation of older mac oses a thing?
- jcelerier 5y agofor macOS 9 and older, yes, but not as far as I know for the first OS X releases - and running in a VM generally would not cut it (besides being extremely hard to do)
- account42 5y ago> To me it seems like cutting the compatibility arm is worth the price of having to keep a shitty, inconsistent behavior. The ideal solution would be to have a compatibility shim (like Wine) to provide the old behavior while being able to make the native behavior more consistent.