Vista vs OSX - Compatibility
I've been thinking about the Windows Vista versus OSX debate, and one thing occurred to me last night.
In the very early previews of Vista at PDC 2003, Microsoft demonstrated VisiCalc (one of the first applications ever to run on a PC) running on their new OS. VisiCalc is 20 years old - a spreadsheet application written for DOS.
Here's Tim Sneath talking about backwards-compatibility in Vista.
Do you think Apple's LisaCalc (a spreadsheet program written for Apple's OS around the same time as VisiCalc) runs on OSX?
Heck - do OS9 applications even run on OSX?
Food for thought.
Comments
# Kevin
29/03/2006 12:11 AM
I'm a C# developer and windows user so I'm not trying to slam Microsoft here, but I think backwards compatibility is not always such a good thing. Read this article on the NY Times about the trouble Microsoft has had with maintaining backwards compatibility. I would be willing to sacrifice some compatibility for a rock solid OS like OSX.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/technology/27soft.html?_r=1&ei=5094&en=482f269e6e35b1c3&hp=&ex=1143435600&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
# mabster
29/03/2006 6:01 AM
I can't say I totally disagree. The main thrust of my post was to give a reason why MS are lagging behind Apple in providing a new OS with features we've come to expect. I reckon backwards compatibility is slowing them down.
They're doing some interesting work with their internal Singularity OS ... who knows? Maybe one day they'll break free of the Windows legacy. Watch out then.
# Poo
29/03/2006 10:38 AM
Up until they moved to intel they did support OS 9 apps via a thing they call "Classic". You get ask you during install weather you want it so you don't have the overhead if you don't need it.
I do agree with your point Matt, backwards compatability is slowing them down, mostly because their OS was never designed to do what it's trying to do, they keep tacking these things on without cutting out the dead wood.
One example of this that slapped me in the face this week is "screen savers", these are still copied into your C:\Windows\System32 directory, along with the wallpapers... oh and all your system DLLs. Surely they could have found somewhere better for them by now.... security++!
# mabster
29/03/2006 10:49 AM
Heck - Raymond Chen just made a post about how there's a notepad.exe in both the C:\Windows folder and the c:\Windows\System32 folder, because old programs might look in either place for it (hard-coded).
It's backwards-compatibility gone mad!