http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/26/business/soft.php
QuoteSo what's wrong with Microsoft? There is, after all, no shortage of smart software engineers working at the corporate campus in Redmond, Washington. The problem, it seems, is that Microsoft's past success and its bundling strategy have become weaknesses.
..
A key reason Microsoft holds more than 90 percent of the PC operating- system market is that the company strains to ensure software and hardware that ran on earlier versions of Windows will work on the new one. As a result of this quest for backward compatibility, each new version of Windows carries the baggage of its past.
Not necessarily, what are they talking about in specific? Take the Longhorn Driver model, a lot of XP drivers only work in XP compat mode on Vista and that's a maybe. They only keep backwards support for maybe 1-2 previous versions of it's OS at the most which isn't that bad.
That's barely a problem, if you ask me. Sure, it sucks, but eh?
I agree with iago. I don't see how this is much of a problem. As technology progresses, providing backwards compatibility is a pretty negligible issue.
Go Playstation!
Quote from: Sidoh on March 27, 2006, 12:03:24 AM
I agree with iago. I don't see how this is much of a problem. As technology progresses, providing backwards compatibility is a pretty negligible issue.
I don't think that was what iago was saying. I mean, I could be wrong.
I don't see a problem with this, it WOULD be a problem if they broke compatability with the older applications/drivers and FORCED people to update to even be able to use them..
I was in a hurry when I wrote the first post.
What I was going to go on to say is that the thread's title is right: the biggest weakness in Windows is its ease of use and its friendliness with other Windows systems on the networks. But that same ease of use is what causes all the security problems. In the usability/security balance, they leaned towards usability.
Quote from: MyndFyrex86] link=topic=5343.msg62127#msg62127 date=1143472548]
I don't think that was what iago was saying. I mean, I could be wrong.
I was giving additional evidence supporting his point.