5 ms·

Error design depends on context. For most of the systems I work on, fail fast on request for anything out of spec is the correct design. B2B/Microservices/API

by mey 3y ago

Error design depends on context. For most of the systems I work on, fail fast on request for anything out of spec is the correct design. B2B/Microservices/API focused systems. Windows however has focused on bending over backwards to provide compatibility (including memory patching popular software that was broken, like Simcity https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/windows-95-went-the-extra-mile-to-ensure-compatibility-of-simcity-other-games/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/10/windows-95-went-the-... ). In the context of a user desktop where a user has no control of correcting the system code, the final experience is more important that correctness in many cases. It doesn't matter who is "in the wrong". Microsoft learned that it doesn't matter why the BSOD occurred, just that bad software/hardware was giving them the bad reputation. So yeah, fail fast/halt catch fire on any invalid input/condition is my personal preferred design, but I can see the value in this approach in this environmental context. The important thing here is that context and not applying either dogmatically. Don't take Mr Chen's approach in reactor or HFT designs for example. Fantastic approach for game engines.

PaulHoule 3y ago
It's hard to overstate how hard Microsoft has worked to maintain backwards compatibility. Recently I had to read an old Access file and where I work we still keep Office '97 around for this purpose and it is quite amazing that it installs and works just fine on Win 11, Clippy works just fine, in fact all the other lame-ass things Office '97 does to take over your desktop all still work even if they don't quite visually match the current desktop. The thing is that Microsoft has a framework built into Windows where they can specify different system behaviors such as that Simcity case where the game didn't work with a new memory allocator so they put in a flag so an application that needs it can get the old memory allocator. They have a very systematic approach to the half-baked and haphazard process of patching the OS so you don't have to patch applications.
- elevatedastalt 3y ago
  It's hard to overstate*
  - PaulHoule 3y ago
    Fixed
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  It’s close to common sense, end users don’t care which monkey(s) threw in the wrench if they encounter an error, just that some entity did. The only caveats I can think of are that it must prominently display that it’s running in a “compatibility mode” and that any encrypted subsystems can’t revert to a lower standard of encryption, which may render the application unusable anyways depending on how tightly integrated it is.
- delta_p_delta_x 3y ago
  > It's hard to overstate how hard Microsoft has worked to maintain backwards compatibility. Here's a pretty detailed list: - It is possible to target Windows XP SP3 (released 2008, EOL 2014, 10 years ago) from Windows 11 and Visual Studio 2022[1] using C++23. Windows 2000 can be targeted with a little more setup[2]. Windows 2000 is 24 years old this year. - It is possible to run a binary written for and compiled in Windows NT 3.1 x86 on a modern 2024 Intel/AMD PC running Windows 11 with absolutely no modifications to said binary whatsoever. Windows NT 3.1 is 31 years old this year. - It is possible to write one binary and target multiple versions of Windows by simply choosing a Platform Toolset, which is paired with a Visual C/C++ Redistributable. - Windows has a run-as mode to run programs in what is essentially a super-thin VM; like you mentioned, emulating different iterations' behaviour for a given program. All four of these are nearly impossible on Linux. The fourth is essentially Docker, which is needed even to target an older glibc (i.e. the equivalent of the first situation). Windows has gone to extreme lengths to not only maintain API compatibility, but ABI compatibility as well. The fact that unmodified binaries from 20, 25, 30 years ago can run without a hitch is a testament to how important backwards/forwards compatibility still is on Windows. Side tangent: all the criticisms levelled at Windows here and in many hacker fora are limited to its userspace—things like its shell and user-space programs, and trivial complaints like 'Candy Crush', or 'start bar', or 'extra right click', or even 'PowerShell aliased curl to Get-Content, grr'. The userspace changes so often because it can; it is a superficial part of Windows. To the haters: Try actually programming with NT OS primitives and even the (undocumented) NT syscalls. It is as enjoyable as UNIX system programming, and I daresay more productive. [1]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-sg/cpp/build/configuring-programs-for-windows-xp?view=msvc-170 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-sg/cpp/build/configuring-prog... [2]: https://building.enlyze.com/posts/modern-visual-studio-meets-ancient-windows/ https://building.enlyze.com/posts/modern-visual-studio-meets...
  - wvenable 3y ago
    The most stable API/ABI for the Linux desktop is provided by Wine.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
- reddalo 3y ago
  > all the other lame-ass things Office '97 does to take over your desktop all still work I'm curious about this. What do you mean? I remember using Office '97 on a Windows '98 machine, but I don't remember Office trying to take over all my desktop.
creshal 3y ago
> Microsoft learned that it doesn't matter why the BSOD occurred, just that bad software/hardware was giving them the bad reputation. But the primary resolution to that problem was to force hardware vendors to write higher quality drivers (or for MS to write good enough default drivers that HW vendors wouldn't need their own), not to hide the BSOD. Technical details were only removed from them 2 decades after MS started fixing drivers.
- mey 3y ago
  Certifications have done a lot, but Windows now supports things like automatically restarting the graphics driver after it crashes instead of bringing down the system. I don't have inside information but from the outside, the HAL on Windows has evolved from freezing on a misbehaving USB device to just prompting you when you have exceeded the max number of USB devices supported. Anyone who remembers trying to dock a laptop back in the Windows 98 days remembers it being a dice roll if you would freeze the laptop or not.

by mey 3y ago

PaulHoule 3y ago

It's hard to overstate how hard Microsoft has worked to maintain backwards compatibility. Recently I had to read an old Access file and where I work we still keep Office '97 around for this purpose and it is quite amazing that it installs and works just fine on Win 11, Clippy works just fine, in fact all the other lame-ass things Office '97 does to take over your desktop all still work even if they don't quite visually match the current desktop. The thing is that Microsoft has a framework built into Windows where they can specify different system behaviors such as that Simcity case where the game didn't work with a new memory allocator so they put in a flag so an application that needs it can get the old memory allocator. They have a very systematic approach to the half-baked and haphazard process of patching the OS so you don't have to patch applications.

elevatedastalt 3y ago
It's hard to overstate*
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  Fixed
MichaelZuo 3y ago
It’s close to common sense, end users don’t care which monkey(s) threw in the wrench if they encounter an error, just that some entity did. The only caveats I can think of are that it must prominently display that it’s running in a “compatibility mode” and that any encrypted subsystems can’t revert to a lower standard of encryption, which may render the application unusable anyways depending on how tightly integrated it is.
delta_p_delta_x 3y ago
> It's hard to overstate how hard Microsoft has worked to maintain backwards compatibility. Here's a pretty detailed list: - It is possible to target Windows XP SP3 (released 2008, EOL 2014, 10 years ago) from Windows 11 and Visual Studio 2022[1] using C++23. Windows 2000 can be targeted with a little more setup[2]. Windows 2000 is 24 years old this year. - It is possible to run a binary written for and compiled in Windows NT 3.1 x86 on a modern 2024 Intel/AMD PC running Windows 11 with absolutely no modifications to said binary whatsoever. Windows NT 3.1 is 31 years old this year. - It is possible to write one binary and target multiple versions of Windows by simply choosing a Platform Toolset, which is paired with a Visual C/C++ Redistributable. - Windows has a run-as mode to run programs in what is essentially a super-thin VM; like you mentioned, emulating different iterations' behaviour for a given program. All four of these are nearly impossible on Linux. The fourth is essentially Docker, which is needed even to target an older glibc (i.e. the equivalent of the first situation). Windows has gone to extreme lengths to not only maintain API compatibility, but ABI compatibility as well. The fact that unmodified binaries from 20, 25, 30 years ago can run without a hitch is a testament to how important backwards/forwards compatibility still is on Windows. Side tangent: all the criticisms levelled at Windows here and in many hacker fora are limited to its userspace—things like its shell and user-space programs, and trivial complaints like 'Candy Crush', or 'start bar', or 'extra right click', or even 'PowerShell aliased curl to Get-Content, grr'. The userspace changes so often because it can; it is a superficial part of Windows. To the haters: Try actually programming with NT OS primitives and even the (undocumented) NT syscalls. It is as enjoyable as UNIX system programming, and I daresay more productive. [1]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-sg/cpp/build/configuring-programs-for-windows-xp?view=msvc-170 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-sg/cpp/build/configuring-prog... [2]: https://building.enlyze.com/posts/modern-visual-studio-meets-ancient-windows/ https://building.enlyze.com/posts/modern-visual-studio-meets...
- wvenable 3y ago
  The most stable API/ABI for the Linux desktop is provided by Wine.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
reddalo 3y ago
> all the other lame-ass things Office '97 does to take over your desktop all still work I'm curious about this. What do you mean? I remember using Office '97 on a Windows '98 machine, but I don't remember Office trying to take over all my desktop.

creshal 3y ago

> Microsoft learned that it doesn't matter why the BSOD occurred, just that bad software/hardware was giving them the bad reputation. But the primary resolution to that problem was to force hardware vendors to write higher quality drivers (or for MS to write good enough default drivers that HW vendors wouldn't need their own), not to hide the BSOD. Technical details were only removed from them 2 decades after MS started fixing drivers.

mey 3y ago
Certifications have done a lot, but Windows now supports things like automatically restarting the graphics driver after it crashes instead of bringing down the system. I don't have inside information but from the outside, the HAL on Windows has evolved from freezing on a misbehaving USB device to just prompting you when you have exceeded the max number of USB devices supported. Anyone who remembers trying to dock a laptop back in the Windows 98 days remembers it being a dice roll if you would freeze the laptop or not.