4 ms·

It's a good move for Microsoft but kind of a sad statement on the computer industry in general. Let me preface this by saying I make the purchasing decisions f

It's a good move for Microsoft but kind of a sad statement on the computer industry in general. Let me preface this by saying I make the purchasing decisions for my agency so I'm as guilty as anyone. But the reality is we're all kind of lazy. Developers don't want to rewrite their programs, IT admins don't want to learn Linux and all in all people just want to tow the line. But with x64 processors becoming mainstream and Microsoft pressuring hardware makers not to offer XP drivers we as an industry all have to upgrade to something. That will essentially be the basis for Windows 7's sales and that's why this feature is both a good idea and a depressing statement on us all.

potatolicious 18y ago
IMHO the problem is not that developers don't want to rewrite their programs, it's that they don't want to maintain them, and don't want to learn. There's no problem with letting old software stop running at some point, provided said period is long enough. The problem with Windows and its back-compat is that it supports more than legacy apps - many developers release brand new applications that still rely on long-deprecated API and technologies. This complicates back-compatibility, since removing API will now kill new apps instead of just the decade-old ones it's meant to target. Developers need to get a lot less lazy - if the API says "deprecated", do NOT use it. Do not use undocumented calls... If people started programming instead of layering on hacks, this wouldn't be a large problem.
- yters 18y ago
  simple solution: microsoft releases as scan utility that counts the number of unique deprecated calls. The higher the count, the more costly the software maintenance, and the less preferable it is. so, all companies can independently evaluate a piece of software and developers can't hide their shoddiness.
  - potatolicious 18y ago
    Companies often do - I've worked for shops that knew a rewrite was a good idea, and that hacking layers of old API onto their product was a bad idea in the long run. But management isn't always focused on the long run.
briansmith 18y ago
Do you have a citation for "Microsoft pressuring hardware makers not to offer XP drivers?" I'm sure they are pressuring them into offering Vista/7 drivers but I'd be surprised if they were telling them to stop offering XP drivers. People want maximum benefit for minimal investment. My friend just bought a 2005 Corolla instead of a 2009 Corolla. The 2009 model is much better, but it isn't 225% better to match its cost. It is the same thing with XP and Vista. There really are a lot of important benefits to upgrading to Vista from XP and from IE6 to IE8. But, people aren't convinced that it is worth the cost of upgrading. Especially now that Windows 7 is around the corner, nobody wants to roll out a new Vista deployment that is already obsolete. Instead, the companies that avoided upgrading are going to save a lot of money upgrading directly to IE8/Win7. And, they are probably not going to upgrade from IE8/Win7 for another 5-10 years. By the way, the #1 reason for having this virtualized XP feature is to run IE6 inside of Windows 7. Some companies that didn't upgrade their internal web apps to with with IE7/IE8 are going to save a lot of money because of that.

potatolicious 18y ago

IMHO the problem is not that developers don't want to rewrite their programs, it's that they don't want to maintain them, and don't want to learn. There's no problem with letting old software stop running at some point, provided said period is long enough. The problem with Windows and its back-compat is that it supports more than legacy apps - many developers release brand new applications that still rely on long-deprecated API and technologies. This complicates back-compatibility, since removing API will now kill new apps instead of just the decade-old ones it's meant to target. Developers need to get a lot less lazy - if the API says "deprecated", do NOT use it. Do not use undocumented calls... If people started programming instead of layering on hacks, this wouldn't be a large problem.

yters 18y ago
simple solution: microsoft releases as scan utility that counts the number of unique deprecated calls. The higher the count, the more costly the software maintenance, and the less preferable it is. so, all companies can independently evaluate a piece of software and developers can't hide their shoddiness.
- potatolicious 18y ago
  Companies often do - I've worked for shops that knew a rewrite was a good idea, and that hacking layers of old API onto their product was a bad idea in the long run. But management isn't always focused on the long run.

briansmith 18y ago

Do you have a citation for "Microsoft pressuring hardware makers not to offer XP drivers?" I'm sure they are pressuring them into offering Vista/7 drivers but I'd be surprised if they were telling them to stop offering XP drivers. People want maximum benefit for minimal investment. My friend just bought a 2005 Corolla instead of a 2009 Corolla. The 2009 model is much better, but it isn't 225% better to match its cost. It is the same thing with XP and Vista. There really are a lot of important benefits to upgrading to Vista from XP and from IE6 to IE8. But, people aren't convinced that it is worth the cost of upgrading. Especially now that Windows 7 is around the corner, nobody wants to roll out a new Vista deployment that is already obsolete. Instead, the companies that avoided upgrading are going to save a lot of money upgrading directly to IE8/Win7. And, they are probably not going to upgrade from IE8/Win7 for another 5-10 years. By the way, the #1 reason for having this virtualized XP feature is to run IE6 inside of Windows 7. Some companies that didn't upgrade their internal web apps to with with IE7/IE8 are going to save a lot of money because of that.