Recent Posts25676
General Software Discussion / Re: Stay Away From Microsoft VISTA
« Last post by mouser on September 06, 2007, 08:07 AM »I think some of the comments about backward compatibility warrant a further comment from me.
There are always very difficult choices to be made when balancing backward compatibility with new features. I think MS makes a reasonable choice to preserve backward compatibility. Yes it does make things messier. Apple is more willing to throw out stuff when they write new APIs, maybe that's just because they have a smaller developer pool which is more willing to be told: your code won't run on the new stuff, rewrite it.
However, the virtual store stuff that microsoft implemented for vista is to my mind, exactly the wrong approach for this kind of thing. In fact i think it's a textbook case of how NOT to handle backward compatibility.
The idea that they are quietly behind the scenes creating mirror copies of files and tricking programs (and users!) into think they are working with one copy of a file (or registry key) when they are really working with another, is so clearly a bad idea that they should have fired they guy who dared to suggest it. Don't even give him the end of the day to clear out his office.
The proper solution would have been simpler, clearer, safer, and better for everyone. When a program is attempting to access files it's not allowed to in one of these privileged directories -- prompt the user, explain the problem, and let them switch the program to run in "compatibility mode" where it IS allowed to access these directories like it could in WinXP, etc. If they want to run it in compatibility mode, fine. If not, don't run it. If you then wanted to let them switch into some insane virtual store more, with a huge warning, you could even do that (though if you ask me i wouldn't provide such an option).
There are always very difficult choices to be made when balancing backward compatibility with new features. I think MS makes a reasonable choice to preserve backward compatibility. Yes it does make things messier. Apple is more willing to throw out stuff when they write new APIs, maybe that's just because they have a smaller developer pool which is more willing to be told: your code won't run on the new stuff, rewrite it.
However, the virtual store stuff that microsoft implemented for vista is to my mind, exactly the wrong approach for this kind of thing. In fact i think it's a textbook case of how NOT to handle backward compatibility.
The idea that they are quietly behind the scenes creating mirror copies of files and tricking programs (and users!) into think they are working with one copy of a file (or registry key) when they are really working with another, is so clearly a bad idea that they should have fired they guy who dared to suggest it. Don't even give him the end of the day to clear out his office.
The proper solution would have been simpler, clearer, safer, and better for everyone. When a program is attempting to access files it's not allowed to in one of these privileged directories -- prompt the user, explain the problem, and let them switch the program to run in "compatibility mode" where it IS allowed to access these directories like it could in WinXP, etc. If they want to run it in compatibility mode, fine. If not, don't run it. If you then wanted to let them switch into some insane virtual store more, with a huge warning, you could even do that (though if you ask me i wouldn't provide such an option).
thanks for that.