John Locke <johnlocke98513@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This is the one (of many things) that really gets me. Vista SHOULD run
> ALL applications that were running under XP and Windows 2000,
> but it doesn't. That's just plain stupid. I don't care what their
> logic is for this. They need to make all the apps run. Period.
>
> What in blazes is Microsoft thinking ?? If they just did one thing
> right, they might have saved this product from the glue factory.
I have really ancient software still running on servers at few
clients, despite upgrading them to the latest versions of Linux.
And I'm not talking about old code running after a recompile...
I'm talking about old closed source binaries... even binaries
for proprietary versions of Unix, still running on newer versions
of Linux. It means installing a few legacy support libraries,
but thats just a checkbox and click in Synaptic or the like.
Thats the nice thing about Linux, it does not break compatibility
unnecessarily. There is no market pressure to force obsolescence
of existing apps. Users choose when to upgrade, not the vendor.
Thad
|
|
