On 6/7/2011 1:15, Invisible wrote:
> ...which completely explains how Vista and 7 managed to be more secure while
> not breaking everything in sight.

In what way are they more secure?  Remember everyone bitching that they had 
to buy all new hardware like new scanners and printers and stuff for Vista? 
Why do you think that happened?

> Oh, wait. No it doesn't.

How many Win3 programs broke when you tried to run them under Win2000?

(Answer: Lots and lots.)

> It also doesn't explain why Windows couldn't have done this 10 years ago.

See above. By now, nobody really complains when a Win3 or Win98 program breaks.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message