4 ms·
It has been optional because you have to pay for it. POSIX compliance has a cost associated with it. Not that I think POSIX compliance has any value anymore, mi
by ksk 12y ago
It has been optional because you have to pay for it. POSIX compliance has a cost associated with it. Not that I think POSIX compliance has any value anymore, mind you. I was replying to someone for whom POSIX compliance was a make or break feature.
Anyway, I sense an argument drift from "Windows" to "Modern Windows". Nice. I guess earlier versions of Windows stopped being Windows once version 8.1 was released.
- derefr 12y ago> I guess earlier versions of Windows stopped being Windows once version 8.1 was released. Well, yeah. We're (presumably) talking about software architecture choices here. Are you telling me you'd purposefully build a new system on top of an old version of Windows, and specifically on old features that have since been deprecated+removed? If not, then it doesn't matter what old Windows does; "Windows is not POSIX-compliant" is the fact that you are making a choice based upon when you design a system right now.
- ksk 12y agoPOSIX compliance (which probably only serves as a checkbox for some arcane procurement guideline) is only relevant in niche markets. You are trying to apply a general software design thought process which unfortunately doesn't work there. People still ship WinCE and '95 software. Software targeting old UNIX systems is still being written today. BTW, I can purchase a copy of windows 8 today (which is going to be supported by Microsoft till 2023) that is POSIX compliant. So the argument is moot anyway.