You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
What's ironic is that a lot of actual software products stopped doing the ".0" thing at some point
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Now I'm just thinking about how USB 3.0 was retroactively renamed "USB 3.1 Gen 1" when they wanted to consolidate the standards documents.
Well, my company's putting out a .0 version this week.
Of course, it's been a very long time coming and involves platform migration and significant improvements at pretty much every level, so it kind of warrants it.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
I figured someone would say that.
You know what I find odd? Window 8 was 6.2, but Windows 8.1, despite basically just being a service pack for 8, bumped the number to 6.3.
Of course, 10 is 10.0 because someone finally realized there was no need to play this game anymore...
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
They claim it was for compatibility reasons, but I don't know if we can definitively rule out anti-Cirno prejudice.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
All those programs that checked for "Windows 9" to determine if they were on Win9x or not tho.
Raymond Chen once told the story of programs having compatibility problems with early development releases of Windows 95. Why? Because this was how they checked the Windows version (paraphrased in shitty pseudocode):
IF major_version < 3 OR minor_version < 1 THEN PRINT "This program requires Windows 3.1 or later."
...so when they tried to set the version number to 4.0, all these programs that had this especially dumb version check assumed they were running on an older verison of Windows.
There's been a similar problem rcently with Windows 7/8/10 and 64-bit drivers; some older stuff just isn't supported in 64-bit mode. 32-bit drivers won't work in 64-bit mode, but neither will 16-bit code (some really old 3.1/95 programs) or things that need direct I/O access (same; those didn't work even on 2000 or XP).
Comments