Longhorn question

[minkster]

When windows longhorn comes out ...would it be able to run n64 emulators that were originally written for xp? thanks!-minkster

[Quvack]

It really shouldnt have many problems running them, I've played with the latest leak of it for a little and had no problems, but thats uber alpha version, who knows what will happen but it really shouldnt have many issues if they keep compatibility up, which I'm fairly sure they would :P

[PsyMan]

I'll answer to your question with a question:
When Windows 2010 (The name may change to Windows XT or whatever) comes out shall it be able to run 1964? :P
Let's wait for the final release and we'll see...

[minkster]

lol thanks psyman i realized i sounded like a real noob meh probably still am!

[ScottJC]

You can always keep a copy of windows XP on a partition of your hard drive for compatibility purposes. (should longhorn or any os that follows require it)

[MasterPhW]

ANd probably all emulation freaks must have a copy of winXP on their partition, because of the palladium thing... because all emulators could stop working... :(
But we never know...

[smcd]

From my understanding, Microsoft is trying to break backwards compatibility in Longhorn (however, doing this will surely cause chaos and piss off numerous amounts of people, so in the end they'll probably provide some sort of compatibility). If not, 1)don't upgrade (I've played with the alpha releases, it's just a modified XP edition at the moment) or 2) keep another OS along side it and dual boot.

[DarthDazDC]

setmcdoogle, i dont see how u can write ur 1st reason as its a very, very early alpha build that isnt to be released until sometime in 2006, when the beta is released (which should be mid next year) then we'll see if there will be backwards compatibility for programs or not.

[Stalkid64]

I remember I talked about a leaked alpha once...
*psst!*hey, Microsoft...*cough*

[smcd]

I remember I talked about a leaked alpha once...
*psst!*hey, Microsoft...*cough*

I got my alphas legally TYVM. I subscribed (it ended June 2004) to MSDN Universal, and you can also occasionally pick them up from MSDN conferences. None of this "psst hey, Microsoft" is going to scare me. :P

Darth> I am basing my reasoning on items which I have read regarding the future of MS and longhorn, as well as what I've heard from speakers from Microsoft regarding these things as well.
Personally, I feel they'll have some sort of compatibility layer, otherwise they'll lose a large consumer base (unless they somehow manipulate those consumers to buy VirtualPC Super longhorn edition special or whatever it will be called).

[minkster]

thats pretty stupid if they dont have backwards compatibitlity...lets hope they do cuz if i was a programmer that would surely piss me off.

[smcd]

Hmm, seems they are keeping backwards compatibility :paperbag:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/Support/lhdevfaq/default.aspx



Will my existing Win32 and .NET apps continue to run under Longhorn without modification?

The goal is that apps written against the documented Win32 APIs and the .NET Framework will absolutely run well without any modifications under Longhorn when it ships.

Chris Sells, MSDN, October 2003


Other sites suggest it still might not allow older programs to "absolutely run well":
http://msdn.microsoft.com/chats/vstudio/vstudio_082603.asp


Q: If I deploy an app with .Net Framework V 1.1 is it warranted that my app will continue running in future Framework Versions no matter .Net what version comes?
A: Future version of the .NET Framework will have the same backwards compatibility requirements as the Win32 API, which is to say the Framework will remain compatible, and most apps will upgrade from one version to the next seamlessly.

Just like Win32, however, there will be compatibility bugs, and no matter how much testing we do, it's impossible add features and perf improvements to an API while *absolutely guaranteeing* no one will ever hit a compatibility issue.


Look at how many applications are broken or acting in a different manner from the SP2 release for XP, and also there were (are) compatibility issues between .NET 1.0 and 1.1 even.

While it probably won't be perfect, it appears they are going to at least attempt it. (Which is different that what I read/heard back around 2002, should have researched before posting eh?)

[minkster]

phew :)