Improving features, the Microsoft way
-
@cartman82 said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
@zmaster said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
If they can get rid of some shit I'm all for it. The action center contains 16 buttons and I use 3 of them.
I don't remember ever clicking any of those buttons
The one I'm usually clicking is Airplane mode.
-
@dcon said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
Airplane mode
A good example of one that's utterly pointless on a desktop
-
@jaloopa said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
desktop
??? (oh wait, I have one of those at home now...)
-
@timebandit Fair point, except in this case Linux has shitty quality and a stupidly low marketshare.
-
@blakeyrat said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
@timebandit Fair point, except in this case Linux has shitty quality and a stupidly low marketshare.
I Googled "percentage of the internet running Linux" and the first result was this article:
-
@ben_lubar Not bad for a shitty quality OS
-
@timebandit said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
@raceprouk said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
half the size of Windows is compatibility shims so accounting software from 1993 still functions correctly.
Just kill that shit already.
After 25 years, if you can't update your accounting software, just buy an accounting ledger and a calculator
OTOH, I've seen some programs from the 9x days that won't run in Win7 or later.
Would that be 16-bit stuff that won't run on x64, or actual 32-bit stuff that does something desperately stupid and consequently won't run on WoW64?
-
@steve_the_cynic Nowadays, more likely the latter.
-
@raceprouk said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
@steve_the_cynic Nowadays, more likely the latter.
I'd guess one of the classics is a thunk to allow 32-bit code to call 16-bit DLLs. 9x supported that, but the NT codebase never, to my knowledge, allowed it. (The reverse was supported, and even necessary, obviously, in NT, as part of the WoW32 engine that allowed Win16 code to run on NT. It (32-bit calling 16-bit) might have been added to 32-bit builds of XP and later, but wouldn't be allowed on 64-bit builds.)
EDIT: found it. Flat thunks. Vile, but actually allow bidirectional calling between 32-bit and 16-bit code.
-
@steve_the_cynic Am I the only one who’s reminded by all those numbers in your post about the old 32-/16-/8-/4-/2-/1-bit-joke about Microsoft?
-
@steve_the_cynic said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
I'd guess one of the classics is a thunk to allow 32-bit code to call 16-bit DLLs.
Fucking christ. Trigger that shit! (I wrote a thunk for Win32S to access the 16bit COM api - because there was no 32bit variant.)
edit: That's COM as in communications (modems).
-
-
@dcon said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
@jaloopa said in Improving features, the Microsoft way:
desktop
??? (oh wait, I have one of those at home now...)
Or the vast majority of laptops.
(They don't care if the wi-fi is turned on. Hell, most planes have wi-fi.)