Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Friday October 03 2014, @01:42AM   Printer-friendly
from the just-because-the-code-once-worked-does-not-mean-it-was-right dept.

Not sure of the authenticity of the MS dev claim, but this makes sense.

http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2hwlrk/new_windows_version_will_be_called_windows_10/ckwq83x

Reddit user "cranbourne" says:

Microsoft dev here, the internal rumours are that early testing revealed just how many third party products that had code of the form:

if (version.StartsWith("Windows 9")) {
    /* 95 and 98 */
    } else {
}

and that this was the pragmatic solution to avoid that.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Friday October 03 2014, @06:19PM

    by frojack (1554) on Friday October 03 2014, @06:19PM (#101475) Journal

    You are correct. Win 8 has user select-able 16 bit support but only on a 32bit Windows 8 installation (regardless of hardware, which is why 32bit windows installations on 64bit machines are still rather common).

    You can of course run those 16bit apps in a 32bit virtual machine installed on a 64bit platform.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3