4 ms·

Still pretty embarrassing when Microsoft maintains backwards compatibility for decades.

by TheCoelacanth 4y ago

K7PJP 4y ago
Not embarrassing, its a deliberate strategy to keep the platform moving forward.
- exodust 4y ago
  Backwards comparability doesn't prevent forward movement. Moving forward is an overused tagline from every meeting ever anyway. If we move along a path does the path behind us crumble into the abyss? I see this as Apple breaking the app. Demanding and nudging users to auto-update the iOS, the consequences being the OS fails to run what it previously could run.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Apple literally removed chunks of the processor that was needed to run 32 bit software to make room for more forward looking features. Backwards compatibility would mean that MacOS should still have support for 32 bit apps? PPC apps? 68K apps? Should they have ported Carbon to 64 bits? Should they have kept support for QuickDraw from the 80s? QuickDraw GX from the 90s?
    - exodust 4y ago
      A smartphone that fails to run a banking app that worked literally "yesterday" is not the same as 32bit deaktop apps no longer working on 64bit systems. Either way, I expect my PC to be capable of running old software including 32 bit apps. My 64bit Windoze machine does that. > removed chunks of the processor Did users petition for the chunks to be removed? It's not like 32/64 bit applications are equivalent to VHS/DVD, where hardware is obviously different. But even then, I own this DVD/VHS combo player: https://www.lg.com/au/dvd-blu-ray-players/lg-RC689D https://www.lg.com/au/dvd-blu-ray-players/lg-RC689D
      - scarface74 4y ago
        No, users appreciate having better photography because the die space that was used to run 32 bit apps can now be used for other features. They appreciate their memory not being used to hold both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of shared libraries. They appreciate their apps not being purged from memory because of memory being taken up by the 32 bit and 64 bit libraries. They appreciate the better battery life because Apple could add features and reduce the size of the chip. Your x86 PC that you appreciate being able to run 32 bit apps, also can’t last 20 hours on one charge, the integrated graphics are much slower and it probably sounds like a 747 under load compared to the fanless MacBook Air. 32/64 bit applications are in fact the equivalent of VHS/DVD combo players. Each instruction set is duplicated and shared libraries are duplicated. If you have some 32 bit applications in memory and some 64 bit applications in memory, you have duplicate libraries in memory.
        exodust 4y ago
        Off track now, 32/64 bit is drifting too far from a banking app that works fine on iOS 15 but not iOS 16. Looks like they fixed the app anyway, as the message on the link has changed and is advising people to update app. I use a desktop machine primarily, no battery issues, no memory issues. Purrs like a kitten under load. I like pushing 3D graphics and having lots of headroom in general. A MacBook Air won't cut it for my purposes. I suppose rejecting backwards compatibility is better for business: Competition from older software is no longer a problem. I still use Photoshop CS6 (2012) because it does what I need. My work laptop has latest Photoshop and while some of the new tools are nice, I don't see 10 years worth of innovation. I see a software company's nagging efforts to enforce cloud dependency, hustle users with sneaky price hikes, and even spam the email addresses of licensee seat holders with "trusted partner" junk.
        scarface74 4y ago
        So Apple had a beta period that gave developers a chance to test for compatibility and either Apple fixed the underlying issue before the OS released or the developer fixed their app. Either way, things worked as expected. Photoshop actually is another example of things working as they should. Adobe has ported Photoshop from 68K, to PPC, to OS X, to x86 32 bit, to x86 64 bit, to ARM. As far as subscriptions, I don’t use Photoshop. But back in the day, one seat of MS Office use to be $600. Now I can get a 5 user license of Office where each user can use Office on any combination of Macs, Windows PCs, iPhones, iPads and the web plus 5TB of cloud storage for $99 a year. The vast majority of people are using laptops. But even desktop ARM Macs are seeing the same benefits from being able to ditch backwards compatibility.
kitsunesoba 4y ago
That backwards compatibility has also infamously been a ball and chain on Windows development. It doesn’t come without tradeoffs.
- TheCoelacanth 4y ago
  Providing backwards compatibility for decades has some serious tradeoffs. Breaking apps that were using the most up-to-date APIs three months ago is simply amateurish. It's clear that Apple has no respect for developers on their platform.
  - kitsunesoba 4y ago
    As mentioned in other comments, it's very unusual for undeprecated APIs in iOS to break badly from one release to the next, at least the time I've developed for the platform. Usually if something is that broken it's because the app in question was using an API that was deprecated years ago despite repeated warnings.
i_am_toaster 4y ago
This is why I don’t like developing on Windows, everything has 10 layers of complexity. To write a script for something that should be a simple task, I need to either reengineer the exact environment settings used in the UI or write an additional script to find the correct executable (with all the overhead of running the executable) to recreate the state needed to run a single command.
Gigachad 4y ago
Because Microsoft focuses on legacy enterprise convenience while Apple focuses on end user convenience.

Still pretty embarrassing when Microsoft maintains backwards compatibility for decades.

K7PJP 4y ago

Not embarrassing, its a deliberate strategy to keep the platform moving forward.

exodust 4y ago
Backwards comparability doesn't prevent forward movement. Moving forward is an overused tagline from every meeting ever anyway. If we move along a path does the path behind us crumble into the abyss? I see this as Apple breaking the app. Demanding and nudging users to auto-update the iOS, the consequences being the OS fails to run what it previously could run.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Apple literally removed chunks of the processor that was needed to run 32 bit software to make room for more forward looking features. Backwards compatibility would mean that MacOS should still have support for 32 bit apps? PPC apps? 68K apps? Should they have ported Carbon to 64 bits? Should they have kept support for QuickDraw from the 80s? QuickDraw GX from the 90s?
  - exodust 4y ago
    A smartphone that fails to run a banking app that worked literally "yesterday" is not the same as 32bit deaktop apps no longer working on 64bit systems. Either way, I expect my PC to be capable of running old software including 32 bit apps. My 64bit Windoze machine does that. > removed chunks of the processor Did users petition for the chunks to be removed? It's not like 32/64 bit applications are equivalent to VHS/DVD, where hardware is obviously different. But even then, I own this DVD/VHS combo player: https://www.lg.com/au/dvd-blu-ray-players/lg-RC689D https://www.lg.com/au/dvd-blu-ray-players/lg-RC689D
    - scarface74 4y ago
      No, users appreciate having better photography because the die space that was used to run 32 bit apps can now be used for other features. They appreciate their memory not being used to hold both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of shared libraries. They appreciate their apps not being purged from memory because of memory being taken up by the 32 bit and 64 bit libraries. They appreciate the better battery life because Apple could add features and reduce the size of the chip. Your x86 PC that you appreciate being able to run 32 bit apps, also can’t last 20 hours on one charge, the integrated graphics are much slower and it probably sounds like a 747 under load compared to the fanless MacBook Air. 32/64 bit applications are in fact the equivalent of VHS/DVD combo players. Each instruction set is duplicated and shared libraries are duplicated. If you have some 32 bit applications in memory and some 64 bit applications in memory, you have duplicate libraries in memory.
      - exodust 4y ago
        Off track now, 32/64 bit is drifting too far from a banking app that works fine on iOS 15 but not iOS 16. Looks like they fixed the app anyway, as the message on the link has changed and is advising people to update app. I use a desktop machine primarily, no battery issues, no memory issues. Purrs like a kitten under load. I like pushing 3D graphics and having lots of headroom in general. A MacBook Air won't cut it for my purposes. I suppose rejecting backwards compatibility is better for business: Competition from older software is no longer a problem. I still use Photoshop CS6 (2012) because it does what I need. My work laptop has latest Photoshop and while some of the new tools are nice, I don't see 10 years worth of innovation. I see a software company's nagging efforts to enforce cloud dependency, hustle users with sneaky price hikes, and even spam the email addresses of licensee seat holders with "trusted partner" junk.
        scarface74 4y ago
        So Apple had a beta period that gave developers a chance to test for compatibility and either Apple fixed the underlying issue before the OS released or the developer fixed their app. Either way, things worked as expected. Photoshop actually is another example of things working as they should. Adobe has ported Photoshop from 68K, to PPC, to OS X, to x86 32 bit, to x86 64 bit, to ARM. As far as subscriptions, I don’t use Photoshop. But back in the day, one seat of MS Office use to be $600. Now I can get a 5 user license of Office where each user can use Office on any combination of Macs, Windows PCs, iPhones, iPads and the web plus 5TB of cloud storage for $99 a year. The vast majority of people are using laptops. But even desktop ARM Macs are seeing the same benefits from being able to ditch backwards compatibility.

kitsunesoba 4y ago

That backwards compatibility has also infamously been a ball and chain on Windows development. It doesn’t come without tradeoffs.

TheCoelacanth 4y ago
Providing backwards compatibility for decades has some serious tradeoffs. Breaking apps that were using the most up-to-date APIs three months ago is simply amateurish. It's clear that Apple has no respect for developers on their platform.
- kitsunesoba 4y ago
  As mentioned in other comments, it's very unusual for undeprecated APIs in iOS to break badly from one release to the next, at least the time I've developed for the platform. Usually if something is that broken it's because the app in question was using an API that was deprecated years ago despite repeated warnings.

i_am_toaster 4y ago

This is why I don’t like developing on Windows, everything has 10 layers of complexity. To write a script for something that should be a simple task, I need to either reengineer the exact environment settings used in the UI or write an additional script to find the correct executable (with all the overhead of running the executable) to recreate the state needed to run a single command.

Gigachad 4y ago

Because Microsoft focuses on legacy enterprise convenience while Apple focuses on end user convenience.