> >Compatibility issues hobble innovation. > > Yes, indeed. I'm a software engineer and backwards compatibility > is a major pain as the software gets older and there are more versions to > support. It hobbles innovation for sure, and will eventually cripple it.
Well we certainly have proof of that, just look at the size of XP! IMO there is no real reason for being crippled by the need to support the old software or to hobble creativity or innovation.
And size has to do with what I wrote, exactly?
If you were really innovative you would find a way to eliminate the issues of compatibility with old software by changing the way you interface your applications to the O/S. Just because Microsoft keeps increasing the number of O/S interface options doesn't mean you have to use them all.
Hilarious. By definition innovation means change. You might have had an awfully innovative, say, serialization engine 10 years ago. Today it's not going to be innovative. That means you have to stick to your old "innovative" engine and maintain compatability with it.
I don't know which fairy tale world you live in, but there's a reason why those APIs are put there. And if you are to be competetive you often have to use these things whether you want it or not because if you don't support these new things, your competetor will.
The core UNIX O/S remains a pretty small package even after 34+ years of development and lacks the API weaknesses that Windows has. Because of this UNIX also lacks the virtually unlimited number security issues that Windows has and as such enjoys very high in-core execution efficiency and a very low level of security risks.
This is funny. I've used UNIX for a long time, but UNIX is more or less stale. Virtually nothing has happened to UNIX for a very long time. Linux you say? I've used that too since Red Hat 3.x or earlier, and it's still UNIX. My co-worker used to work on the VMS team. Yeah, the VMS API hasn't changed much but nothing happens there either. Oooh, everyone, switch to VMS.
That's not to say the Windows API is all that great. It isn't. Hopefully it will be a lot better with WinFX.
UNIX security is somewhat of a myth, it's just the problems that are discovered there tends to avoid the popular media attention. And of course there are a lot less UNIX systems than Windows systems so there's obviously less gain for virus, adware, and spyware writers to target it.
Now, the average UNIX system is configured more securly than the average Windows is and the average UNIX user knows a hell of a lot more about computers than the average Windows user so these two things greatly impact the overall secureness of the two so to speak.
-- - Marius
* **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
