Then there are no point and case is closed, right?
Posted Aug 5, 2009 19:40 UTC (Wed) by khim
In reply to: GNU + Linux = broken development model
Parent article: A tempest in a tty pot
The point of a stable API is precisely that - to continue using
the same source with the newer OS-es which are currently
Sure. And we have many OSes which promised and failed to deliver that:
Windows, Solaris, etc. It just does not work. Drivers from NT don't
work in Windows 2000, drivers from Windows 2000 crash the Windows XP,
drivers from Solaris 8 are unusabel in Solaris 10, etc.
Right now Linux supports more hardware then Windows - sure, the "latest
and greatest" gadgets are supported by "latest and greatest" release of
Windows only, but sheer number is on Linux side.
Stable OS (not stable API, but stable OS - I certainly remember cases
where switch from NT4SP5 to NT4SP6 was impossible because drivers had no
suppoort for this version) makes support for some hardware easier and for
some hardware harder (recall NT4 and USB, for example, then do the same
with Pixel Shaders 4), so I see no huge advantages either way.
What I do see is the wish to reduce number of problems for
manufacturers by increasing number of problem for users and developers -
and I can not agree that it's good idea.
If you want to make life easier then implement stable API where it
naturally exist anyway: on the border between your hardware and my
to post comments)