> Windows has a _stable userland ABI_. Contrast this with Linux, where glibc is known to break from time to time. Linux also has a stable userland ABI, it is j

> Windows has a _stable userland ABI_. Contrast this with Linux, where glibc is known to break from time to time. Linux also has a stable userland ABI, it is just that unlike Windows said stable ABI does way less. You can make very advanced programs with the stable APIs Windows provide, since they feature not only simple console stuff, I/O, etc but also user interfaces with widgets[0], 3D graphics, audio, video[1], etc. Also glibc is stable if a program relies on public APIs, the breakage comes from programs relying on stuff they weren't meant to use. The biggest annoyance (not only with glibc but most libraries) is that you have to build your program on a system with the oldest libraries you plan on supporting (this is not a requirement on Windows) but with VMs, etc this should not be much of a problem in practice. [0] X11 on Linux is also technically stable since the protocol is compatible even with machines from the early 90s and the libraries have a stable ABI, but by itself it doesn't provide much. [1] Codecs notwithstanding, though Microsoft's own codecs should be fine to rely on