68
Why is Windows still bloated (piefed.social)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I’ve often heard that the reason Windows has suffered from bloat and so much has been built on top of ancient underlying technologies, partially to ensure compatibility with old software.

If something like Windows 11 requires specific hardware in order to install it, why does it need to accommodate compatibility for archaic devices/software?

Would it not be preferable for Microsoft to start from scratch with an OS that is considerably more efficient and cut-down for newer devices, similar to something like Apple’s MacOS transition from Intel to Apple Silicon, and just provide security updates for the legacy operating systems that would be in use on un-upgradable hardware?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

Yeah I understand those legacy systems, but I wouldn’t expect those to be upgrading to Windows 11 for example. I guess that’s why I was suggesting a separation of “then” and “now” operating systems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    The legacy systems need to upgrade because they need security patches. It’s not an incompatible system from 1992. Windows broke stuff going to Vista, when real-time controllers like you’d find running a power plant or CNC changed in ways I don’t remember, but fundamentally you could run a 35 year old application on windows 11 with tweaks over the years. These companies are running apps written in the 70s and 80s.

    Microsoft could and perhaps should bifurcate Windows into new and old, or draw a line along Server and Workstation, but I think the bulk of their windows income comes from these enterprises and the “new” windows wouldn’t sell that well - it’s effectively been free for consumers since 8. Windows was the absolute show runner for decades but since the Cloud, it’s shrank quite a lot so there isn’t the money there anymore.

    ARM is an interesting experiment they’ve been working on from a couple angles over the years but never really got the buy in.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    There's no value in switching to ARM, basically.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    ARM is absolutely serving Intel’s head on a platter these days and it’s slowly happening - Server 2025 is availableish in ARM, and the Copilot PCs are ARM. There’s value but MS would rather customers go to PaaS than rebuild eg MSSQL on ARM, I think.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    I wouldn't expect those to be upgrading to 11

    Every desktop/laptop will upgrade to 11 - no business will accept the risk of maintaining an OS that's out of support (with some exceptions). So you don't have a choice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •