3 ms·

Why would Microsoft do that? It makes zero financial sense to continue with a parser that may need to be rewritten from scratch for a ~30 year old format.

genewitch 3y ago
they can do what they want, and i'll continue on my 2 decade long decision to never give microsoft money, for anything. Same way i'll never give propellerhead another dime, or Plex[0], or any of these other consumer-hostile companies. I don't trust MS to maintain software, even though as far as that goes, they're better than a lot of companies that have been writing software for decades. "time marches on" is silly when we have millions of times the compute, storage, and transit speeds available to us. I also don't see why people see the need to shill for multi-billion dollar companies. What microsoft should have done is trademark a new name for their word processor the second they made the decision to not open word .doc from older versions. That way there's no confusion. [0] having a hard time remembering the name/company of the software i purchased for in-house streaming over a decade ago. Plex is still a hassle to use for in-house streaming compared to the "service" or whatever they're selling. Unfortunately Synology seems to have grown weary of releasing a version of their client for every newfangled device that comes to market, so i'm stuck with plex on my TV; that is, unless i want to use a stick/set-top/computer attached to it.
- nullindividual 3y ago
  > I don't trust MS to maintain software Then you should champion removal of any "old" software they have that is under maintenance-only status. You wouldn't want security vulnerabilities to go unfixed, would you? > What microsoft should have done is trademark a new name for their word processor the second they made the decision to not open word .doc from older versions. That way there's no confusion. That makes zero sense. Word is still Word. It performs the same tasks (and more) as Word 1.0 did. And Word today still reads/writes .doc, just not versions that are that old.

genewitch 3y ago

they can do what they want, and i'll continue on my 2 decade long decision to never give microsoft money, for anything. Same way i'll never give propellerhead another dime, or Plex[0], or any of these other consumer-hostile companies. I don't trust MS to maintain software, even though as far as that goes, they're better than a lot of companies that have been writing software for decades. "time marches on" is silly when we have millions of times the compute, storage, and transit speeds available to us. I also don't see why people see the need to shill for multi-billion dollar companies. What microsoft should have done is trademark a new name for their word processor the second they made the decision to not open word .doc from older versions. That way there's no confusion. [0] having a hard time remembering the name/company of the software i purchased for in-house streaming over a decade ago. Plex is still a hassle to use for in-house streaming compared to the "service" or whatever they're selling. Unfortunately Synology seems to have grown weary of releasing a version of their client for every newfangled device that comes to market, so i'm stuck with plex on my TV; that is, unless i want to use a stick/set-top/computer attached to it.

nullindividual 3y ago
> I don't trust MS to maintain software Then you should champion removal of any "old" software they have that is under maintenance-only status. You wouldn't want security vulnerabilities to go unfixed, would you? > What microsoft should have done is trademark a new name for their word processor the second they made the decision to not open word .doc from older versions. That way there's no confusion. That makes zero sense. Word is still Word. It performs the same tasks (and more) as Word 1.0 did. And Word today still reads/writes .doc, just not versions that are that old.