Since then, it has become widely accepted that this is what MS is doing, but the above quote from Mr. You know, when I was first arguing about what was wrong with Windows 10 years ago, I remember being told I was crazy for thinking MS was going to move away from Win32 by one particularly enthusiastic MS booster (not here… it was another site). If that’s a problem, then surely the move to UWP is even worse A more robust Windows installer with better journaling would fix that, though it would still require the existing legacy installer for older programs. The thing about how UWP apps won’t have the problem with an inherently fragile Windows installer or the difficulties it has in fully removing programs, often leaving bits of code and registry entries behind, could well be true, but that’s not a problem with Win32 as a concept. There’s nothing in particular wrong with Win32 (or its 64-bit sibling) other than its singular suitability for the platform for which it was designed, but it doesn’t lend itself to a Windows Store or mobile devices (which is a feature, not a bug, to some of us). Less Win32 just means more UWP, more “app,” more mobile user interfaces on a platform that’s nearly wholly desktop-oriented (laptops with touchpads count as desktops it’s the discrete pointing device or lack thereof that defines the UI type). I’m not interested in a non-win32 Windows even if it did have the tinkering room Win32 has. The new ways things are done make it very difficult to achieve the same customizations.” “Each new version of Windows moves further away from the classic Win32 programming model, which allowed room for a lot of tinkering. That’s what makes part of the farewell announcement from (former) Classic Shell dev Ivo Beltchev so ominous: I’m with you on the bit about not wanting anything to do with UWP apps.
0 kommentar(er)
