Shreddoc wrote on 2022-03-18, 21:21:

The massive 'entropy' (read: number of possible states) present in broad-scale modern software is staggering. Just compare the numbers of lines of code in a large 1995 program compared with a large 2020 one. (then, for extra laughs, add "permanent network connection to the entire world" into that complexity). It became humanly impossible to release such things in even a near-perfect state, quite some time ago.

Any decently developed piece of software should still be capable of telling you where it stopped working, if nothing else because it would aid the people developing it as well as the people using it. If it just stops working, informs you that something went wrong, but no further then it does no one any good. Being so rushed to develop something that you can't even code in some basic error reporting then I think we're beyond "I couldn't find the time to troubleshoot this," and into the realm of either "I wasn't ALLOWED to troubleshoot this," or (more likely) "I didn't bother to troubleshoot this because it didn't fit in the workflow."

javispedro1 wrote on 2022-03-19, 16:11:

RandomStranger wrote on 2022-03-19, 16:04:

Compatibility layers will always have an overhead.

That's just not true at all, mostly because "compatibility layer" is a very loosely defined thing. Technically I could even argue than any Win32 application runs under a "compatibility layer" even in Windows.
You should not think that it's adding extra abstraction layers or the like, despite the name. It could be just a different implementation of the same API, and might actually go through less layers than the original.

I think compatibility layers always have overhead as it is extra effort for redirecting inputs/outputs. It might happen that it runs faster on a non-native system in the end due to other things specific to the target system but the compatibility overhead will always be there.
I agree its confusing, though. The comparison should not be between windows x wine, but between wine x native linux port.

SolidSonicTH wrote on 2022-03-19, 16:26:

Shreddoc wrote on 2022-03-18, 21:21:

The massive 'entropy' (read: number of possible states) present in broad-scale modern software is staggering. Just compare the numbers of lines of code in a large 1995 program compared with a large 2020 one. (then, for extra laughs, add "permanent network connection to the entire world" into that complexity). It became humanly impossible to release such things in even a near-perfect state, quite some time ago.

Any decently developed piece of software should still be capable of telling you where it stopped working, if nothing else because it would aid the people developing it as well as the people using it. If it just stops working, informs you that something went wrong, but no further then it does no one any good. Being so rushed to develop something that you can't even code in some basic error reporting then I think we're beyond "I couldn't find the time to troubleshoot this," and into the realm of either "I wasn't ALLOWED to troubleshoot this," or (more likely) "I didn't bother to troubleshoot this because it didn't fit in the workflow."

Problem is, if you compile in debug mode instead of release mode, you get an extremely massive performance hit... sometimes 50% or more.

badmojo wrote on 2022-03-19, 01:02:

ptr1ck wrote on 2022-03-18, 22:52:

I may be in the minority but I actually like 11

Nar I'm confident that people who rage about windows are well and truly in the minority - it's just an OS and based on my experience, and the almost zero "support requests" I get from family members these days, it's managing to do its job and stay out of the way.

I've always found W10 to be quick to boot and super stable so when W11 comes knocking I'll let it in.

The biggest thing MS did was get the driver side of things to work correctly, Windows 10/11 will do their best to nuke bad drivers and rollback without he user even being aware 90% of the time, even if its the right driver modern windows can for the most part deal with any issues on its own even repairing driver issues in the background during boot.

Windows had come a long way in that regard, if I wasn't a Windows Insider I doubt I would have to ever restart much outside of critical updates.

Compatibility layers will always have an overhead.

I disagree for the most part. Compatibility layers, as what I experienced is just a small tweak to the default experience. Windows doesn't usually emulate old programs in software, it just changes what is needes according to the situation.

TrashPanda wrote on 2022-03-19, 21:34:

badmojo wrote on 2022-03-19, 01:02:

ptr1ck wrote on 2022-03-18, 22:52:

I may be in the minority but I actually like 11

Nar I'm confident that people who rage about windows are well and truly in the minority - it's just an OS and based on my experience, and the almost zero "support requests" I get from family members these days, it's managing to do its job and stay out of the way.

I've always found W10 to be quick to boot and super stable so when W11 comes knocking I'll let it in.

The biggest thing MS did was get the driver side of things to work correctly, Windows 10/11 will do their best to nuke bad drivers and rollback without he user even being aware 90% of the time, even if its the right driver modern windows can for the most part deal with any issues on its own even repairing driver issues in the background during boot.

Windows had come a long way in that regard, if I wasn't a Windows Insider I doubt I would have to ever restart much outside of critical updates.

That's definitely I can agree on, only if M$ did update their driver lists in time (it doesn't provide GR drivers in time IIRC)

BEEN_Nath_58 wrote on 2022-03-19, 21:38:

Compatibility layers will always have an overhead.

I disagree for the most part. Compatibility layers, as what I experienced is just a small tweak to the default experience. Windows doesn't usually emulate old programs in software, it just changes what is needes according to the situation.

Its a complicated issue, if you have access to the MS Power Tools it has a compatibility tool in there that opens up all the options for compatibility windows has ..there are hundreds and the simple interface most people use for compatibility hides all of these but Windows itself uses them, its a true nightmare to program for this and the fact it works as well as it does it pretty amazing.

TrashPanda wrote on 2022-03-19, 22:30:

BEEN_Nath_58 wrote on 2022-03-19, 21:38:

Compatibility layers will always have an overhead.

I disagree for the most part. Compatibility layers, as what I experienced is just a small tweak to the default experience. Windows doesn't usually emulate old programs in software, it just changes what is needes according to the situation.

Its a complicated issue, if you have access to the MS Power Tools it has a compatibility tool in there that opens up all the options for compatibility windows has ..there are hundreds and the simple interface most people use for compatibility hides all of these but Windows itself uses them, its a true nightmare to program for this and the fact it works as well as it does it pretty amazing.

I never heard of PowerTools but I have used MS Application Compatibility Toolkit alone and through the Windows SDK. There were also certain cases I asked other developers to implement certain fixes (shims) in their program. For the most part, Microsoft have done a good job, and without it, programs would have been a mess. Even today, if I try to make a program requiring Windows 95 compatibility mode (manually set), I have to go through the 75 compatibility fixes and figure out which one fixes it.

I'd swap the question round to why did you rush to install Windows 11?
I never recommend anyone installing any windows version, (or anything new really) till it's been out in the wild for at least 12 months.
Even if Microsoft themselves have updated everything for the new shinny OS, other software companies can take a lot longer to update their own programs/drivers/whatever.

I've no problem with people that want to upgrade sooner, just be aware if you want to be at the forefront of change your going to have to suffer some some growing pains as the world adapts to "new way" of life

I'm not upgrading my 10 machines to 11 until 2024 or so, right before Windows 10 gets axed. Too many things are experimental and we don't have a clear idea of what 11 will be like as it matures.

chinny22 wrote on 2022-03-21, 10:20:

I'd swap the question round to why did you rush to install Windows 11? I never recommend anyone installing any windows version, […]
Show full quote

I'd swap the question round to why did you rush to install Windows 11?
I never recommend anyone installing any windows version, (or anything new really) till it's been out in the wild for at least 12 months.
Even if Microsoft themselves have updated everything for the new shinny OS, other software companies can take a lot longer to update their own programs/drivers/whatever.

I've no problem with people that want to upgrade sooner, just be aware if you want to be at the forefront of change your going to have to suffer some some growing pains as the world adapts to "new way" of life

Well if we are being upfront here .. Windows 11 is Windows 10 . .its been out in the wild since 2015, Win 11 was simply a new name for a major Service Pack for Windows 10, the reason for the name change was to differentiate it from Windows 10 since the new security features were a pretty big update but under the hood its still Windows 10 and handles everything is the same manner.

If you had been talking about the shift from WinXp to Vista or from Win7 to Win8 then yeah you would have a point about drivers as both sets of releases radically changed how drivers are used and managed by the OS, but Windows 10 to 11 has no such radical changes and they both use the same driver model and management and can use drivers built for each other.

The main issues I see with people and Win 11 is the new security bullshit tends to get in the way and screw shit up, the new UI also has a few quirks but they were quickly fixed and you can turn off the security shit.

I find it amusing that people believe Windows 11 to be something new .. its really not, I've been using it since early beta and yup its just windows 10 with a new lick of paint nothing radically changed. (Its like how Windows 7 is really just a nicer version of Vista)

chinny22 wrote on 2022-03-21, 10:20:

I'd swap the question round to why did you rush to install Windows 11? I never recommend anyone installing any windows version, […]
Show full quote

I'd swap the question round to why did you rush to install Windows 11?
I never recommend anyone installing any windows version, (or anything new really) till it's been out in the wild for at least 12 months.
Even if Microsoft themselves have updated everything for the new shinny OS, other software companies can take a lot longer to update their own programs/drivers/whatever.

I've no problem with people that want to upgrade sooner, just be aware if you want to be at the forefront of change your going to have to suffer some some growing pains as the world adapts to "new way" of life

It's just Windows 10 + new features. They didn't change some so radically to break, but they did in the end.

Q:"Why did they rush X"
A: $

It is likely because of pressure to make something "new" just to be on the news again. (and possibly because of those sweet 🤑
Most people agree that since Windows 7 things went downhill, I don't want to blame anyone, they are a corporation after all but they feel so so detached when it comes to their consumers, it's just sad to see

Yep, same shit/different year. Look back through recent history, and there are similar technical complaints about every Windows release this century.

The complaints may be technically valid, but that has little-to-no bearing upon the commercial strategy and success of Microsoft. OEMs, businesses, enterprise, retailers, and Mom-n-Pops are still locked into the permanent Windows grind.

And for the most part, it does them fine. It's not as though the entire Windows world switching to Ubuntu or MacOS would suddenly make the world a vastly-different place.

Rubixzy wrote on 2022-03-21, 20:54:

It is likely because of pressure to make something "new" just to be on the news again. (and possibly because of those sweet 🤑
Most people agree that since Windows 7 things went downhill, I don't want to blame anyone, they are a corporation after all but they feel so so detached when it comes to their consumers, it's just sad to see

Their market share allows them to be as clueless as they want. I think it'd be healthier if MS would lose ~20-30% of its market share and as I see they are working on it. The real sad part is, their consumers don't take the hint.

Rubixzy wrote on 2022-03-21, 20:54:

It is likely because of pressure to make something "new" just to be on the news again. (and possibly because of those sweet 🤑
Most people agree that since Windows 7 things went downhill, I don't want to blame anyone, they are a corporation after all but they feel so so detached when it comes to their consumers, it's just sad to see

You need to remember they are not there to service their consumers, only their shareholders and stakeholders matter to them. So that detachment you feel has always been there since they went on the market, it has gotten worse the more they feel the pressure of having to produce all the profit year over year and cramming adds and user data tracking into windows is part of that profit stream.

Its not going to get better.

Personally I think Windows 10 is a fine OS, sure you have to do a little work to kill the "Adds" and User data tracking but once you do its a perfectly serviceable OS, Win7 was great for its time but its a god damn prettied up Windows Vista.

Shreddoc wrote on 2022-03-21, 20:57:

Yep, same shit/different year. Look back through recent history, and there are similar technical complaints about every Windows release this century.

The complaints may be technically valid, but that has little-to-no bearing upon the commercial strategy and success of Microsoft. OEMs, businesses, enterprise, retailers, and Mom-n-Pops are still locked into the permanent Windows grind.

And for the most part, it does them fine. It's not as though the entire Windows world switching to Ubuntu or MacOS would suddenly make the world a vastly-different place.

It would likely have a detrimental impact on Linux as a whole, if everyone switched then distros would be forced into the very same user data profit stream MS is trapped in, The fact Linux is still a niche user OS means it can avoid that stupid shit and get profit from more legitimate sources than its users and their data.

The benefit is it would force Linux to catch up fast to fill that Windows hole, especially gaming wise.

In many ways Linux is pretty gaming-capable already. Technically-speaking, I'll happily play BOTW @ 4k right now in either Windows or Linux, and the only difference is that I'll probably get a few more FPS in Linux. But it's the old (commercial) chicken-and-egg situation. Commercial game companies focus where the market share is... which then reinforces that market share - rinse and repeat.

It's not just MS trapped in that user data profit stream. It's the entire FAANG sector, and more. Linux as largely non-profit is currently somewhat insulated from such commercial gluttony, but a (theoretical) mainstream influx would obviously involve massive and unprecedented changes. Because one cannot simply open the dykes and let the sea in, without everything getting salty as a result. 😉

gaffa2002 wrote on 2022-03-19, 02:53:

Why do we have to run to remain on the same place? Because tech companies must keep selling the same functionality over and over […]
Show full quote

Jasin Natael wrote on 2022-03-18, 15:48:

I don't think that it is fair to blame capitalism. It is the modern world of connectivity and the perils that come with having so much information readily available because of that.
Operating systems can't remain static because NOTHING is static at this point. How often does code have to be patched to be secure? How often does your browser update, graphics drivers? Game updates? Workstation updates to office productivity software?

It isn't just Windows/MacOS/Linux whatever the case and pick your flavor. It is the entire ecosystem. The world today isn't the same as it was 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago. We have to run as fast as we can to stay in the same place.

Why do we have to run to remain on the same place? Because tech companies must keep selling the same functionality over and over to make lots and lots of money.
Why do companies release rushed software to fix it later? Because properly maintaining software costs money, and they need to expend as little as possible to make more money, or expend this effort adding fluff to it instead, to make it more attractive as a product.
And finally, why do companies need to make lots and lots of money? Because they are going to be swallowed by their competitors if they don't.

So basically for every actual improvement in software/hardware, we are forced to have a "business case" to go with it. Keep in mind I never said that software as a service is a bad thing, my complain is aimed toward the clear priority of making software profitable above anything else , including quality and actual positive impact on people's lives (which is the exact definition of capitalism).
Maybe this competition for profit was good until some point (i.e. when quality meant more profit), but right now it's starting to hurt progress on every area.

Not to be argumentative, but that isn't the definition of capitalism. Per the Oxford dictionary it is: cap·i·tal·ism

noun
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
"an era of free-market capitalism"

Make of that what you will. I'm not saying capitalism is inherently good or evil, or that progress simply for the sake of profit is a good thing. I'm just saying that blaming free market values for all of the woes of software is perhaps painting with too broad of a brush. So to speak.