Why isn't Leopard backwards compatible???

Discussion in 'macOS' started by chelsel, Oct 29, 2007.

  1. chelsel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    #1
    Even programs written for Windows 95 and XP will work in Windows Vista, 99.9% of the time without any issues (as long as its not a device driver)... what does Apple do to their code that breaks so many applications? Do they not care at all about backwards compatibility?

    I guess this is a boon for some software developers that make money off their apps because they can resell the 'new' version of their programs targeted at the 'new' operating system.
     
  2. D1G1T4L macrumors 68000

    D1G1T4L

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #2
    Most applications do work. We are also going from a 32bit OS to a 64bit OS.

    XP to Vista also experienced and still experiencing growing pains with 3rd party.

    It just happens.
     
  3. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #3
    Apple have clearly made a conscious decision for security reasons to change the plug-in architecture for their apps. Outside of those, Leopard's compatibility rate is MUCH higher than Vista's was at launch...
     
  4. FreeState macrumors 68000

    FreeState

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #4
    I would have to say that this is not the case at all. There are some apps that need updates - the vast majority of them 3rd party updates. The problem lies in developers that do not code their applications according to Apples SGK's in the first place - sure it may work now, but if you do not follow the guidelines from Apple when developing it's likely it will break in the future and be harder to update for the developer. That is not Apples fault - and likewise every update to Windows has had similar issues - and 99% of the time its not the OS Developers fault but the third party developers fault.

    Developers have known about changes for over two years now and have had access to the New OS for over a year. It's these developers you should have a gripe with, they were to lazy or cheep to keep on top of their own products.
     
  5. gloss macrumors 601

    gloss

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Location:
    around/about
    #5
    Windows' comprehensive backwards compatibility is part of the reason the system is so bloated, slow, and self-implosive.
     
  6. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #6
    Were you actually using computers when Windows XP came out? :eek: You've got to be kidding me. When XP came out, it wasn't even clear which hardware would and wouldn't work on it. And there were major pieces of software that wouldn't work with Vista also -- iTunes is a prominent example. It doesn't matter what OS or what platform... this is the way things go. It's a good goal to push the industry to change this, but it's absurd to believe that it doesn't happen on any platform except OS X.
     
  7. aaronw1986 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    #7
    Seriously...same thing with Vista...there were so many issues, and programs that did not work.
     
  8. DanB91 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    #8
    plus classic is a completely different architecture than mac os x. classic needs an emulator and cannot simply run off os x. windows has been based on MS-DOS since its birth so naturally programs from windows 95 should work on it ok. i guess apple realised the emulator was bloated an was no longer needed. srsly, who still uses classic apps?
     
  9. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #9
    Windows ME was the last DOS-based incarnaton of Windows. It's all been NT-based since.
     
  10. vansouza macrumors 68000

    vansouza

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Location:
    West Plains, MO USA Earth
    #10
    What does it matter?

    What does it matter if I can not print to my printer, scan on my scanner and download my Sony video cam to Vista. So what if a program works and I can not have physical output... oh go buy new printers, scanners, and video camera, I think not. With OS X, it really does just work.

    Now list your specifics and perhaps we can help.
     
  11. DanB91 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    #11
    well NT was based off of DOS correct? i maybe pulling hairs here but if thats correct it is still based off DOS
     
  12. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #12
    Nope. NT was a complete ground up rewrite. Brought to you by the same gentleman that was behind RSX (for you PDP-11 fans). NT = New Technology
     
  13. DanB91 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    #13
    o thanx for the info. supposedly the next iteration of windows is not gonna even be based on NT! but some ms architecture. im just waiting to see that crumble have loads of problems :)
     
  14. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #14
    And VMS, for you Vax fans :)
     
  15. Alloye macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Location:
    Rocklin, CA
    #15
    I'm a developer on both Windows and OS X, and I don't agree with your compatibility assessment of Vista. Even some of my company's relatively simple .Net applications were broken out of the gate.

    In any case, I'm sure Apple does care about backwards compatibility to a point. They just don't seem to carry forward as much legacy as MS does. Also, it isn't always changes to the OS that cause applications to break. Developers often bend the rules themselves or even rely on undocumented or undefined behavior of an API. (Present company excluded, of course. ;))
     

Share This Page