Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th Sep 2007 21:01 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 270060
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Compatibility you say?
by antwarrior on Mon 10th Sep 2007 23:51
in reply to "RE: Compatibility you say?"
i dunno why the compatibility/ back-compatibility thing keeps popping up... applications in linux and windows are handled differently, most applications people use in linux are not binary only and are "free", the sources are available and they get the latest build with a distro upgrade anyway. The commercial apps usually work for a few distro release cycles anyway ( Nero, Realplay,flash ...etc )i dont see what the issue is... if you talk about binary only drivers then thats a different thing... can't we find anything else to whine about ? :->
RE[2]: Compatibility you say?
by Flatland_Spider on Tue 11th Sep 2007 20:22
in reply to "RE: Compatibility you say?"






Member since:
2005-07-01
The article specifically mentions applications compatability and hardware compatability.
With regards to the latter, I'd be surprised to hear of a Linux _distro release_ breaking hardware that previously worked, as it seems anathema the whole "enormous kernel does everything" ethos. That said, I expect there are examples and they just haven't affected me, which is why I don't remember them. But remeber, just because the kernel devs break it, it doesn't count if it got patched back together by the distros.
I'd be very interested to hear of a third-party Linux app which has had it's compatability broken. Mainly because there are so few (relatively) third-party Linux apps.