Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 424 posts

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#201

Post by FirmwareBurner »

moonchrome wrote: post #170
necovek wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've only used MacOS for a year and only recently (maybe that matters), and I get all the same crappy inconsistent behaviour I do on Linux and did on Windows ~20 years ago when I last used it. Apple has the benefit of controlling both hw and sw and still manage to mess it up. Random crashes, slowdowns for long running sessions, crappy UI (eg those labels not checking their checkboxes in Settings), network weirdness (…

You haven't used Windows in quite a while have you ? Past Windows 7 it's been sliding downhill into bullshit UX, crapware, backend migration to Linux almost exclusively, etc. Random things on top of my head : MacOS doesn't come with candy crush, Instagram, TikTok, Spotify etc. prepopulating your start menu. Phone home telemetry and ads in OS ? Yummy Dealing with Windows dev environment is always a PITA eventually - u…

>Phone home telemetry and ads in OS ?

MacOS also has telemetry.

>For backend stuff it's almost implicit that you're running on Linux in prod and macos is well supported because it's fairly similar.

Then Windows would be better than MacOS in this regard because WSL2 is exactly Linux, not just "fairly similar" to Linux.

>stuff randomly breaking between updates

What stuff broke for you between updates? Our entire DS team develops in windows + WSL2 and nothing broke for them in ~5 years. Maybe they know how to use a computer.

Ultimately just use what you like and what makes you productive, no need to crusade for some big corporation. The OS is just a tool for your job, like a hammer.

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#202

Post by MiddleEndian »

c7DJTLrn wrote: post #31
baal80spam wrote: post #7

And that's why Microsoft will dominate corporate PC market for the foreseeable future.

Not really, the average user doesn't give a shit about backwards compatibility, they care about being able to create slideshows and send emails. Windows will dominate for the foreseeable future because of deals with manufacturers.

>the average user doesn't give a shit about backwards compatibility, they care about being able to create slideshows and send emails.

They may not care about backwards compatibility as an abstract concept, but they would like their computer continue functioning the same way today as it did yesterday.

Although MS is getting somewhat bad at that from a general OS perspective with their updates.

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#203

Post by tom_ »

galleywest200 wrote: post #184
bartread wrote: post #74

All the people on that Twitter thread getting butthurt about it and complaining that Windows' backwards compatibility is a bad thing... WTF koolaid have they been drinking? I don't often sing Microsoft's praises but backwards compatibility is something they get absolutely right: something they've always got right. Everything doesn't have to be changing and breaking all the time and, to me, it's a mark of maturity whe…

I agree. As an example: The Xbox Series X, their newest flagship model, is fully backwards compatible with all of the Xbox physical CD games from all Xbox systems. Just pop the CD in and you are good to go.

Apparently it does not run Outrun 2!

(I only have the JP version, which I assume will never work with my UK Xbox Series X, even if the UK version would actually be compatible. Maybe I need to dig it out of my garage and try it anyway.)

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#204

Post by psychphysic »

rbanffy wrote: post #163
failuser wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counter-example: Soldier of Fortune is broken on modern windows because of a misapplied compatibility hack. Rename the binary and it works with no problems. This is an awful way to implement backwards compatibility. Opaque and ad-hoc. They have been using similar toolset to break competitors applications. The choice of what old version of windows to run the program on is typically to try them one by one. Linux is no…

> Linux is no better with no stable ABI. I’m confused. Linus has repeatedly stated that the ABI should be stable, “we don't break user space”. There are exceptions, but any proposal that makes a breaking change to the kernel’s external symbols is very hard to push through. I don’t remember anything breaking because of a new kernel version except device drivers, which are part of the kernel anyway and should be compil…

Drivers being kernel specific is really annoying

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#205

Post by charonn0 »

snickerbockers wrote: post #116

That's cute and all, but it's fucking gzip. It doesn't have complex dependencies. Pretty sure Linux could run a 30 year old gzip binary too. I've never needed to do that with gzip but I have definitely run binaries of a similar vintage without issue. Windows backwards-compatibility fails miserably on non-trivial programs, you're generally pretty lucky if you can get something from the XP-era or older to work out of t…

> you're generally pretty lucky if you can get something from the XP-era or older to work out of the box.

That's actually pretty good. XP was released over 20 years ago.

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#206

Post by jdjehxhdb »

lamontcg wrote: post #149
knallfrosch wrote: post #20

See also https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/06/13/how-microsoft-lost... one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Win…

From where I'm sitting this looks like an excellent argument for breaking backwards compatibility. All those bullshit hacks are a maintenance and debugging burden for someone and a tax on the whole rest of the operating system -- and I'd argue that it really shows.

And that’s why you stand where you are and Microsoft stand where it does.

You’re thinking like an engineer. Microsoft is a business. Backwards compatible is its major core competency.

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#207

Post by dijit »

lamontcg wrote: post #149
knallfrosch wrote: post #20

See also https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/06/13/how-microsoft-lost... one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Win…

From where I'm sitting this looks like an excellent argument for breaking backwards compatibility. All those bullshit hacks are a maintenance and debugging burden for someone and a tax on the whole rest of the operating system -- and I'd argue that it really shows.

FWIW Safari and Chrome are also doing this with their “quirks” files: https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/main/Source/WebCore/pa... (I can’t find the chrome one)

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#208

Post by AshamedCaptain »

znpy wrote: post #152
msla wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works in Linux the same way it works on Windows: If you don't have the dynamic libraries and configuration you need, it won't work. Why this is a mark against Linux and not Windows is beyond me.

Eh, kinda. On linux you can only assume kernel abi compatibility whereas pn windoes you can assume the basic runtime (win32 or whatever) to be present and available.

In the timeframes this post is talking about, you can practically do the same in any operating system. What "basic runtime" could such an aged Linux binary use, other than glibc and Xlib/motif, which are precisely the ones which have been actually trying to preserve ABI? These 30 year old binaries have a higher change of working than week old ones...

This is similar to the fact that Office 95 will work on recent Windows, but Office 2k won't.

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#209

Post by jiggawatts »

e40 wrote: post #76
jmkni wrote: post #63

What I find so frustrating is that Windows, under the hood, is so solid. It's just the UI with Bing/Ads/telemetrics/etc integration is so crap, like they've ruined a solid OS with crappy surface level stuff.

Really? Filesystem performance on Windows is absolutely horrible compared to Linux. It blows me away how, even using SSDs, the performance of git over large repos is at least 10x slower than a Linux box with the same CPU. It is the bane of my existence. It's not just git. rsync of a large directory takes >10x as long. This is with Server 2016 (and 2012 r2). My 2012 r2 machine had spinning disks and when I tested on 2…

This is mostly caused by the anti-malware scanning. Exclude your sources folder from real-time scanning.

Re: Windows 11 will happily execute a binary compiled 30 years ago

#210

Post by User23 »

lamontcg wrote: post #149
knallfrosch wrote: post #20

See also https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/06/13/how-microsoft-lost... one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Win…

From where I'm sitting this looks like an excellent argument for breaking backwards compatibility. All those bullshit hacks are a maintenance and debugging burden for someone and a tax on the whole rest of the operating system -- and I'd argue that it really shows.

The other position is that Microsoft’s customers paid them billions of dollars and maintenance and debugging “burden” is just part of the business.
Post reply on HN