• daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I despise Microsoft but it’s not something bad.

    One of the greatest advantages of windows over Linux is great retro compatibility.

    One practical example. Lots of people with old Nvidia cards cannot use linux simply because propietary drivers do not run on modern linux kernels, because at some point in the past 5 years the linux kernel decided to change some API making the old libraries unusable. So at that point there’s only two options, or the software gets patched (which won’t happen with legacy software), or distro maintainers keep maintaining the old kernel manually applying security parches to it without changing the API, which happens but only for some time. With windows the system API is the same since ancient times, so you can easily run ancient software on it, as is it the case for old Nvidia drivers.

    It’s just a constructive criticism to Linux, I wish it would be more stable with the system APIs to ensure old software could keep running without patches.

    • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      One of the greatest advantages of windows over Linux is great retro compatibility.

      It’s completely insane that none of my native Linux games work anymore, while under Proton all windows apps work just fine

      • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I’ve been saying for a bit now that Linux games should be distributed via flatpak or similar to mitigate this problem.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    You know the good part on 30 years old code? It usually is low on bugs, because most have been found by now, and it does not yet contain AI slop, or worse, AI enabled features.

  • Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 day ago

    Good code is good code no matter what age it was written in.

    Why change something because it is old when it works?

  • Mwa@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    20 hours ago

    i mean most/all Windows versions are built on top of the predecessor,so makes sense.

  • MolochAlter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 day ago

    Hell, it might be the last reliable piece they have left, I’m fine with them not vibe coding that out of the codebase.

    • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Define “mainstream” and “modern”.

      If we define mainstream as “GUI based, user oriented”, that gives us windows, macOS, iOS, Android, and Linux.

      In any of those cases I’d bet you’ll find some kernel code from at least 30 years ago. I’m not saying you’d find entire untouched libraries, but I would put good money on untouched functions.

      • Prior_Industry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Those would fit my definition. And yes I would expect they all have some very old code still included.

        I know it’s fashionable to dunk on Windows but running old code seems pretty universal OS wise.

        • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          If it aint broken. But also when coding you don’t start reinventing everything yourself. Well… I did hear about some researchers at my old uni, they would start a project out with developing a task specific language. But there’s a reason they were working as postdocs at a university and not in the private sector.

          Anyway, only a statistically insignificant amount of programmers don’t reuse code.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I have less of a problem with this than the “constant update” model all software companies seem to subscribe to these days. We don’t need new features, we need bug fixes.

    • glitch1985@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      Isstill can’t figure out why discord has a new update every other day. I’ve never seen software this needy before.

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Well it’s just s different approach in how you deliver updates. Update as you go or save up updates and publish once a month like ms

    • Oisteink@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s the forced online login that wercks it. I now suggest linux.

      We’d use a lot more windows if it wasnt so locked up in marketing

  • truthfultemporarily@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Seems like good code then? Old code is stable and bug free and we should keep using the boring stuff as long as possible.

    • howrar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      It seems more likely to me that any bugs present in that code just became features that old software relied upon over time, so they can’t change anything without breaking backward compatibility.

      So I guess, in a sense, it’s bug-free.

  • Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Most mobile devices use ARM processors, a tech developed by Acorn in the early 1980s.

    Old doesnt mean bad. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it

    • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it

      Sure, If there are no better alternatives and competition.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      2 days ago

      Had a friend in college who was redoing nuclear decay calculations written in Fortran so they’d work as C++/C# libraries. The calculations had been a historical standby for decades, and people were coming up with increasingly elaborate daisy-chains of dependencies to get them to work properly in modern environments.

      There’s definitely a point at which the physical hardware and modern network/interfaces need you to catch up your code with the current technology. But there’s also this terror around trying to touch code that’s got an archaic datestamp on it, particularly if you’re working in a language or dealing with a particularly baroque procedure where the guy who wrote it retired 20 years ago.

      Old doesnt mean bad.

      Unreviewed Code is bad code unless proven otherwise. Maybe that latest iteration really is time tested and bulletproof. Or maybe Microsoft Execs simply won’t allocate time/money to the kind of routine review and maintenance a codebase needs from time to time.

        • papalonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          “I converted my studio into a 3 story mansion and the foundation sunk into the ground. The foundation is still solid, it’s just the 3 story mansion that’s the problem.”

          A foundation that can no longer support what it needs to support is not a good foundation and should be replaced

          • NoForwadSlashS@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            A better analogy would be that the mansion fell down but the foundation is still standing. Because the foundation is the solid part.

  • Doom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh boy, wait until you hear about an ancient little sweetheart named COBOL.