|
With the vast improvements made in the VM arena, is this argument even going to be valid anymore?
I guess I would say, as long as my Virtual Machine application could run on the new OS, I wouldn't care about compatibility ...
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is that Microsoft considers running an OS inside a VM as a second machine and wants you to buy additional licences.
John
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with John and I add a question: Does ordinary user know anything about VM?
Rezak
|
|
|
|
|
yes Rezak,I know many ordinary user know nothing about the vm!But I think the problem of the backwards compatiblity is developer's problem !
|
|
|
|
|
I would like to know how much of the size of my OS installation is due to legacy (hw+sw) support.
I believe is not affordable in the long term to support models and models of diffrent printers, video cards, protocols and so on (it remembers me the problem of increasing virus definitions).
New OSes should point to future...
64bit, 4+ Gigs of RAM, Broadband, new generation devices, etc.
For the legacy software they should provide Virtual Machine based support.
Wake up! The Singularity is coming.
|
|
|
|
|
planned obsolescence is not good. I want to use my purchases as long as possible.
WarePhreak
Programmers are tools to convert caffiene to code.
|
|
|
|
|
Ware@Work wrote: Programmers are tools to convert caffiene to code
I like that, that's so true!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Fowler wrote: Ware@Work wrote:
Programmers are tools to convert caffiene to code
I like that, that's so true!!!
[Laugh]
I only drink camomile tea 
------------------------------
spoon? what spoon?
modified 22-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I understand back compatibility is both burden and difficult to maintain ,but what the peoples who have shell out millions of dollars for hardware cost, and if new version OS/Software is not compatible with it, then in my idea it of no use, in the end we working for $$$$
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
Never mind - my own stupidity is the source of every "problem" - Mixture
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and You/codeProject$$>
|
|
|
|
|
planned obsolescence is not good. I want to use my purchases as long as possible.
WarePhreak
Thats a moot point, just because a new OS comes out, doesn't mean you have to install it on your antique hardware. And just because you have a 2008 computer doesn't mean you should be able to run windows 95 on it either, that's why we have virtual machine technology (amongst other things)
I say stop keeping age old crap code in the OS just because someone might be using it. if they are using it now they're obviously using it on hardware that supports it (or already properly virtualized) so there is no need whatsoever to worry about it for more than maybe one generation of OS versions.
Keeping all that old code means you need heavier hardware everytime, we can never get a clean, lean OS with all the legacy support, nor proper security etc.
My vote goes to: Backwards compatibility is utterly unimportant.
Kris
/^([b]{2}|[^b]{2})$/
|
|
|
|
|
but if I can't use my current printer / scanner / etc... that is still working fine with a new machine because the newer OS doesn't have drivers, I don't see that as helping me. I need a new machine not all my peripherals and accessories too...
I voted important because I understand that security is more important.
My problem isn't so much with the new OS but with them killing off support for an older OS that is still a viable option just because they have a newer one.
WarePhreak
Programmers are tools to convert caffiene to code.
|
|
|
|
|
My problem isn't so much with the new OS but with them killing off support for an older OS that is still a viable option just because they have a newer one.
WarePhreak
Can't do much but agree to that.
but if I can't use my current printer / scanner / etc... that is still working fine with a new machine because the newer OS doesn't have drivers, I don't see that as helping me. I need a new machine not all my peripherals and accessories too...
Hovever, I feel you can't hold an OS vendor responsible for a thirdparty hardware vendor's lack of drivers. I don't really see this as an issue myself, i just refrain from buying weird hardware.
Kris
/^([b]{2}|[^b]{2})$/
|
|
|
|
|
than get ready for shelling out more money!
"Opinions are neither right nor wrong. I cannot change your opinion. I can, however, change what influences your opinion." - David Crow
Never mind - my own stupidity is the source of every "problem" - Mixture
cheers,
Alok Gupta
VC Forum Q&A :- I/ IV
Support CRY- Child Relief and You
|
|
|
|
|
"Compat" huh?
Start a company, write an OS, and then obsolete your user's software and hardware assets every few years. See how long you stay in business.
Wait... I'm sure since your company will probably attract 1% of the population of computer users, and your products will be underpowered and overpriced, liberals and democrats will love you.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think backwards compatibility is critical. It is however important to not take stuff away at the last second.
Vista: Release Candidate 0 had the following functionality that they took away in Release to Manufacturers (RTM)
Shared Memory
Globally Named Pipes
This was a critical issue for my current employer. They developed their software and were ready for Vista, till the release came out. Then it just quit working. So all the R&D for Vista was wasted. There was a huge rush to fix it and it required a significant re-write. This hurt many software manufacturers.
Hogan
|
|
|
|
|
Can I freeze first column in a Scrolling datagrid
first column should be frozen.
modified on Tuesday, June 3, 2008 1:39 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weren't able to understand the English sentence that came up when posting a message in this forum?
Please DO NOT POST PROGRAMMING QUESTIONS HERE. If you have a programming question please post it in the programming forums at forums
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Is this some kinda sick joke?
|
|
|
|
|
smyers wrote: sick joke
eternal hilarity, rather.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players.
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts... --William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
|
... if it is a media player, really, who cares - plenty of them to pick from.
But I wouldn't jeopardize Starcraft, Quake or even Heretic (yes, the DOS one).
Nuclear launch detected
|
|
|
|
|
The OS should be upgraded ONLY when it outgrows the hardware. Like on the Macs between version 6 and 7 (or was it 7 & 8) when they changed Processors at the same time they changed the OS. There new OS had an emulator to simulate the old processor. The programs written for the old OS ran slower on the slowest of the new hardware then the fastest of the old hardware, but it did run with no problems. And by the time I got enough money to get an upgrade, almost all programs had been upgraded to be optimized to the new hardware.
So I say we stick with XP until there are CPUs fast enough to emulate the x86 processors. Then we can run XP in a window for those old programs. Until everything gets optimized to the new CPU. This "new OS just because we haven't had a new one in a while" nonsense is just that, nonsense. I'm gonna wait for Windows 7 (If they actually do everything they say they are gonna do with it, but that is a rant for another time).
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting point. But you see the situation only from "software-execution-speed"-perspective.
You don't mention that the software (OS) does not only get slower but also more user friendly (hopefully  . That's the main reason to upgrade an OS imo. I would probably still switch if the new OS is 30% slower but I am 40% more productive with it. Even without new hardware.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting point. But you see the situation only from "software-execution-speed"-perspective.
You don't mention that the software (OS) does not only get slower but also more user friendly (hopefully . That's the main reason to upgrade an OS imo. I would probably still switch if the new OS is 30% slower but I am 40% more productive with it. Even without new hardware.
Pretty much exactly why I do prefer Vista over XP. It's not that important that it's faster, or even fast at all. But it is important that it feels faster because it doesnt force me to wait through window repaints etc. it makes me feel like I am not waiting nearly as much, thus I am less annoyed. ergo: I am more productive.
So the speed at wich software executes is much less important than the speed at which software allows me to use it.
Kris
/^([b]{2}|[^b]{2})$/
|
|
|
|
|
How about CListCtrl's compatibility across the diversified platforms?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
