Subject: Re: Legacy apps in Windows/OS X was Re: Old MS-DOS & Win Software
From: Scott Stevens <chenmel at earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2005 21:05:45 -0500
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:27:31 +0000
Adrian Graham <witchy at binarydinosaurs.co.uk> wrote:
On 7/12/05 23:53, "Zane H. Healy"
<healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
Worst case, I setup something like my 8500/180
running an old
enough version of the OS so that I can also run "Warlords 2".
BTW, I do own PC versions of both games, from before I got a
Mac, however, they're limited to 640x480, while the Mac
versions go up to something like 1152x870. Both games are
also well on topic, but still two of my favorite games of all
time.
My only take on this that springs to mind is why should you
expect a computer company to continue supporting older hardware
and software beyond a certain timeframe unless they explicitly
say their current product is 100% compatible with their 10/15/20
year old product? It's almost like expecting a car manufacturer
to still support manual wind-down windows and non-central
locking because you happen to like manual windows and door locks
you can activate individually.
It's not a matter of 'meeting the requirement' or else for the
manufacturer. It's a matter of satisfying a customer and holding
onto market share. I happen to prefer manual windows and
non-central locking, and won't buy a car with electronic locks.
That is my choice and car makers who want to sell a car to me will
offer it.
Much the same is true with Microsoft. They want to hold onto
their legacy customers, in fact leveraging that legacy is a big
part of how they've held onto and controlled the market. There
come points at which it's probably to Microsoft's advantage to
abandon legacy features, and that's when they do it. But they and
a lot of the rest of us know that's really one of the only things
they have going for themselves.
Therin lies the truth of the matter. It's why the VAX11/780 happend,
DGs machine Eclipse, and many others. The investment of software
and the desire for "customer retention" are often drivers of
technology choices. Its basic to even chipsets be they 8080 to 8088
then on to 80286 and Motorola did the same with 6800, 6809 and 68K.
Granted in many cases at the chip level they are not binary compatable
the idea being everyone gets to keep what they learned and has an
upgrade path. I don't think for one second that was missed in
business 101.
However, legacy can be an albatross, ones neck may be on the line
if the choice is wrong.
Allison