Comment Re:Never heard that one about DOS -- Agreed (Score 1) 425
>> It was presented as a representation of Microsoft's commitment to compatibility, but, IMHO, it's a shitty way to write an operating system...
You're right, it's a shitty way to write an OS. Unfortunately, if MS "breaks" some program because the ISV used undocumented APIs or reserved fields who do you think gets blamed? If that program has enough users (like anything Adobe makes) then MS has to make a check to restore the broken behavior for the bad app.
There's a story on some MS blog about a software vendor who forced MS to debug their software which broke on a Windows upgrade. Turned out they used a reserved field which the new version of Windows started using. And the vendor was like "You (MS) can't use that field! It's reserved!"
You're right, it's a shitty way to write an OS. Unfortunately, if MS "breaks" some program because the ISV used undocumented APIs or reserved fields who do you think gets blamed? If that program has enough users (like anything Adobe makes) then MS has to make a check to restore the broken behavior for the bad app.
There's a story on some MS blog about a software vendor who forced MS to debug their software which broke on a Windows upgrade. Turned out they used a reserved field which the new version of Windows started using. And the vendor was like "You (MS) can't use that field! It's reserved!"
