A few days ago I had this idea, why AP Classics is not being implemented as another language in NAT. .. <
This means that many people will help migrate to the new platform ...
I mean that Ironyub, IronPathon, etc. ...
It seemed to me that I like a great idea ... But, come, I'm not a genius, there must be some reason why they did that Not ...
I'm curious about it ...
Because Microsoft has left the compatibility behind its API. I think that they felt that using the maintenance cost for new development was a better investment.
Sometimes I agree, sometimes I disagree with their new perspective ...
Now you do not think that while presenting your thoughts on Microsoft Here are some references:
The first major win was making Visual Basic .NET not backward compatible with VB 6.0 This was really the first time in random when you upgraded a Microsoft product, then your old data (i.e., which is the code you sent to VB6 It was the first time that Microsoft's upgrade did not respect the work that the user used to use the previous version of a product.
...
With this major victory under its belt, the acquisition of the MSDN magazine camp was a fine thing to change things suddenly. IIS 6.0 came out with a separate threading model that broke some older applications. I came to know that with Windows Server 2003 our customers were having trouble running foggbags. So .NET 1.1 was not fully compatible with 1.0. And now the cat was out of the bag, the OS team came into the spirit and decided instead of adding the features to the Windows API instead, they were going to completely change it.
Comments
Post a Comment