[HN Gopher] Windows 95 went the extra mile to ensure compatibili...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Windows 95 went the extra mile to ensure compatibility of SimCity,
       other games
        
       Author : fagnerbrack
       Score  : 211 points
       Date   : 2022-12-26 14:53 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | bradhe wrote:
       | Is it that time of the month again that we republish this story?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | squarefoot wrote:
       | DOS compatibility however wasn't that great. I recall using OS/2
       | (2.1 first, then Warp 3) DOS terminals to build and test Clipper
       | programs. It was much a better experience, also for being able to
       | emulate two networked DOS machines, which had some limitations
       | and stability problems when using Windows 95 terminals.
        
         | TillE wrote:
         | I forget exactly how it worked, but you could just reboot into
         | MS-DOS on your Windows 95 computer. Crucial for running games.
        
           | organsnyder wrote:
           | I just looked it up to refresh my memory. There was a
           | "Restart the computer in MS-DOS mode" option in the shutdown
           | menu.
        
             | justsomehnguy wrote:
             | Just reboot and press F8, or add BOOTGUI=1 to MSDOS.SYS
        
             | rblatz wrote:
             | How would that work? From my recollection the computer
             | booted up in DOS ran through your config.sys and
             | autoexec.bat. The final line typically in the autoexec.bat
             | was win. Which would start up windows 95.
             | 
             | Also when you shutdown windows 95 it would leave you at a
             | DOS prompt. So no restart was actually needed.
        
               | fredoralive wrote:
               | Windows 95 didn't have "win" in the autoexec.bat, it
               | autoloaded it. The behaviour was controlled in msdos.sys,
               | which on 9x had various startup options including BootGUI
               | (DOS was entirely in io.sys).
               | 
               | IIRC "MS DOS mode" could either just exit Windows, or
               | reboot the entire system depending on config (presumably
               | if you wanted custom config.sys / autoexec.bat)? But I
               | might be wrong, it's been years since I used 9x.
        
               | vikingerik wrote:
               | This is correct. msdos.sys was a text file with
               | configuration values, which could be set to either auto-
               | start Windows after running autoexec.bat, or not. In the
               | former case, exiting Windows would stop at the "now safe
               | to turn off your computer" screen. In the latter case,
               | startup would go to a DOS command prompt, and Windows
               | could be started from there, and exiting it would go back
               | to DOS.
               | 
               | Those two cases got conflated by the ability to start
               | Windows from within autoexec.bat, which wasn't the
               | Microsoft default but was a fairly common setup from some
               | OEMs. To the OS, that's the case of starting Windows
               | separately, but to the user, it looks like the auto-
               | starting case.
        
               | accrual wrote:
               | Maybe it just gracefully ends the win.exe process,
               | leaving you in DOS?
        
               | rep_lodsb wrote:
               | Don't know about gracefully (some drivers might not
               | cleanly shut down), but Win95 did indeed exit to DOS. It
               | left the screen in graphics mode with the message "It is
               | now safe to turn off your computer", but you could
               | blindly type some command to reset it to text mode.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | I think you are thinking of Win 3.x, not 9x; 95 was the
               | first consumer Windows for which that description is
               | wrong.
        
               | Narishma wrote:
               | What you describe was before Windows 95.
        
           | dangero wrote:
           | Yes! Right click on the exe file and change the startup
           | options to do a full reboot into DOS. Definitely needed for
           | the games that were hard coded to use the first MB of RAM
        
           | squarefoot wrote:
           | That is true, but my goal was to have two DOS terminals in
           | which I could emulate two DOS networked machines sharing
           | files, both running a client/server software I wrote, to
           | emulate how they would work at a customer of mine shop. While
           | it worked perfectly on OS/2, I encountered some stability
           | problems on Windows 95, which also (if memory serves)
           | required some more steps to allow DOS terminals to share
           | their storage. By using OS/2 I could effectively replicate
           | two machines in a single one and compile both client and
           | server in a single take with 100% confidence that it would
           | work once installed at the customer shop.
        
         | skipkey wrote:
         | During the beta of Windows 95 I was working at a company that
         | had made a DOS extender for Clipper, and we got reports That
         | the apps in 16 bit protected mode did not work. Looking in to
         | it, there was a bug in the 16 bit FAT driver, I think, things
         | are fuzzy from that long ago, which wasn't used by a lot of
         | things. I actually managed to get a bug report in, talked to
         | the guy working on the driver, and had a build Fedexed to me a
         | couple of days later to verify the fix.
         | 
         | Good times.
        
       | hericium wrote:
       | Recent discussion with 17 comments:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33157215
        
       | ecef9-8c0f-4374 wrote:
       | Just an generalization. It seems like wine and steam/proton
       | embodies the early Microsoft philosophy of (backward)
       | compatibility as selling point, while the overall Linux mindset
       | seems to be: "fuck you, you should have provided the source code
       | if you wanted your software to work after the next dist-upgrade"
       | 
       | Just to be clear. I wrote this on my linux mint laptop. I'm
       | thankful for all the hard work people put into Debian, Ubuntu and
       | Free Software in general. This is just an generalization.
        
         | msla wrote:
         | And these days, Windows is more about chasing the shiny than
         | ensuring old applications run.
         | 
         | I've had more luck with old Linux binaries running, myself.
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | I wouldn't say so, for windows you can run the same built
           | package on anything from 7 to 10 without too many issues, on
           | linux trying to install a package that hasn't been released
           | on the current OS version package manager repo feels like
           | blasting your brains out. At least for Debian/Ubuntu. And the
           | only fallback is to compile the entire thing yourself,
           | because fuck me right?
           | 
           | Like sure I understand that having specific packages for each
           | version should make it reliably work, but the trade off and
           | demand for devs to keep up is pretty huge.
        
             | jacoblambda wrote:
             | This was one of the things I found very painless with
             | gentoo surprisingly enough. I could easily slap together an
             | ebuild on my local overlay that matched the dependencies of
             | the deb/rpm even if that meant some old as dirt dep that
             | wouldn't be on my machine normally. Then just `emerge sync
             | -r localoverlay && emerge category/package-name` like
             | normal. Maybe 5-10 minutes at most to do and I'd have a
             | fully managed install that'd continue to work even if I
             | tried to install it 5 years from now.
             | 
             | I've tried similar on debian, ubuntu, and centos but
             | fighting with apt or yum and their (seemingly)
             | comparatively brittle packaging systems got very old very
             | quickly. Not that it can't be done easily on those systems
             | but so far I haven't managed it yet.
             | 
             | Nix I find can also be really nice for this, especially
             | since flake based packages are pretty much self contained.
             | Still a lot less pleasant compared to the portage/ebuild
             | route though.
        
             | Beltalowda wrote:
             | _Usually_ tracking down old versions of libraries works,
             | except when it doesn 't of course. If the source is
             | available, I think "just compile it" is kind of okay to be
             | honest; it's usually not that hard, and if it is, then
             | that's kind of a problem with that software's build system
             | IMHO.
             | 
             | I compiled xv from 1994 the other day on my Linux box; just
             | has to make a tiny patch to fix an include (lots of
             | warning, but it compiles and runs).
             | 
             | That said, there's some room for improvement. For example
             | pkg-config/pkgconf could automatically suggest which
             | packages to install if "pkg-config --libs x11" fails, or
             | some other distro-agnostic way for people to track down
             | dependencies.
             | 
             | If you're shipping a binary program without source (i.e. a
             | game, for example, which tend to be closed source) you
             | should ship the libraries or compile things statically.
             | Some of the older Linux games on gog.com can be a bit
             | tricky to run on modern systems due to this.
        
               | moffkalast wrote:
               | > tracking down old versions of libraries works
               | 
               | See that's the thing, everything on linux is designed to
               | work by sideloading as much as possible, depending on
               | thirty thousand packages that must be all installed to
               | the perfect version by apt or else nothing works. A good
               | system if you need to get a fully featured OS running on
               | 100 MB of disk space, which tbf is linux's niche, but
               | it's absolute horseshit to maintain.
               | 
               | Windows on the other hand tends to have flatpak-style
               | monolithic executables, with the odd .NET framework or
               | cpp resdistrubutable here and there, but it's the rare
               | exception. Things tend to actually work when they bundle
               | their dependencies. Hell, the average Java app ships the
               | JRE along with it because nothing works if the wrong
               | version is installed globally. Linux just takes that
               | problem as a fact of life and tells you to fuck off.
        
               | Beltalowda wrote:
               | In general, I'm a fan of statically linked binaries or
               | shipping the libraries with the application, so I mostly
               | agree with you. But I also can't deny there's advantages
               | to the shared-link approach as well. In short, there's
               | upsides and downsides to both approaches and no perfect
               | solution.
               | 
               | In practice however, I rarely encounter issues, except
               | for closed-source programs that _don 't_ ship their
               | libraries. That, I think, is mostly the fault of the
               | vendor and not the Linux system. Of course, as a user it
               | doesn't really matter whose fault it is if your
               | application doesn't work because you just want the damn
               | thing to work. It does mean the problem (and solution) is
               | mostly an educational one, rather than a technical one.
               | You certainly _can_ ship binary programs that should work
               | for decades to come: the two core components (Linux
               | kernel and GNU libc) take backwards compatibility pretty
               | serious, more or less on equal level with Windows.
               | 
               | You don't even need flatpack. A wrapper script with
               | "LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./binary" gets you a long way (and
               | still provides people the ability to use a system library
               | if they want, so sort-of the best of both worlds).
        
               | tadfisher wrote:
               | That's everything on Unix-likes with shared libraries,
               | yes. You can statically-link or use a system like Nix or
               | Guix that don't enforce a single library version (by
               | ditching the "default library search path" concept), and
               | you get the best of both worlds: space saved for most of
               | your shared library dependencies, and separate versions
               | for those binaries that need them. It's basically Unix
               | with a garbage collector.
        
           | MomoXenosaga wrote:
           | I disagree. Couldn't get Deadly premonition working. Windows
           | recommended XP compatibility mode and it worked!
           | 
           | All the 25 years of code is still in Windows 11 they just
           | hide it with a lick of paint. If you want to play old games
           | Microsoft is still your best bet.
        
             | msla wrote:
             | > Couldn't get Deadly premonition working. Windows
             | recommended XP compatibility mode and it worked!
             | 
             | This just tells me Windows is on a level with Linux + Wine,
             | with the compatibility mode.
             | 
             | > All the 25 years of code is still in Windows 11 they just
             | hide it with a lick of paint.
             | 
             | That's not true. Windows had a big, discontinuous shift
             | when they abandoned the DOS-centric Windows codebase in the
             | move to XP.
        
               | ThunderSizzle wrote:
               | Which is why you need a Dos Box to play DOS games.
        
               | tadfisher wrote:
               | That wasn't true for Windows XP, which shipped with the
               | NT Virtual DOS Machine (ntvdm.dll). Unfortunately, this
               | was dropped in 64-bit Windows and finally axed in Windows
               | 10.
        
               | MomoXenosaga wrote:
               | You're welcome to try getting Deadly premonition working
               | in Linux!
        
               | mrintegrity wrote:
               | I was about to gloat, as it's so cheap to buy, I thought
               | it was a good opportunity to test Steam proton by
               | selecting "enforce compatibility" which so far has worked
               | for everything I threw at it (CIV V, hitman absolution,
               | bunch of other obscure windows only titles).
               | 
               | Initially happy as the install and intro ran fine, but
               | pressing enter to skip the video exits the game
               | immediately.
               | 
               | Maybe that's further than you would expect, wine / proton
               | is incredibly good nowadays, but still your point stands.
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | > Windows had a big, discontinuous shift when they
               | abandoned the DOS-centric Windows codebase in the move to
               | XP.
               | 
               | You mean the move to the NT platform, which made the
               | consumer windows desktop OS finally stable.
               | 
               | Compatibility features, while not perfect, were
               | implemented to help try and get Win9x and DOS workloads
               | to function normally. Some DOS apps ran fine on XP in
               | compatibility mode, although I couldn't say what %.
        
             | jorvi wrote:
             | As the joke goes, Win32 is the Linux ABI.
             | 
             | There are a lot of baffling decisions by Microsoft's
             | Windows division, but their extreme dedication towards
             | backward compatibility is nothing short of Herculean.
             | 
             | Sometimes I wish they'd split up Windows in an ultra-slow
             | 'Enterprise' ring and a move-fast (think about the speed of
             | macOS changes) 'consumer' ring, where they could drop much
             | of the legacy cruft in trade for speedy/forced
             | improvements. Think macOS going fully 64 bit, making the
             | system image immutable, etc.
             | 
             | Hell, imagine if they'd allowed the Xbox One, X and S to
             | run Windows 11 in S mode. Instant cheap performant computer
             | for the layperson! And with it running S mode, they'd make
             | their money through the Microsoft Store.
        
         | nektro wrote:
         | this is very much distro specific experiences. others and Linux
         | upstream care very much
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | mike_hock wrote:
         | _Linux_ takes backward compatibility very seriously. The FOSS
         | ecosystem as a whole has the whole spectrum, so the bad apples
         | break it for everyone.
         | 
         | The result isn't even "fuck you, recompile." The result is,
         | "fuck you, you better be constantly fixing the shit that we
         | broke with our breaking changes."
         | 
         | This is part of the value that distros bring to the table.
         | Providing a snapshot of versions that actually interoperate
         | well.
        
           | lmm wrote:
           | > Linux takes backward compatibility very seriously. The FOSS
           | ecosystem as a whole has the whole spectrum, so the bad
           | apples break it for everyone.
           | 
           | > The result isn't even "fuck you, recompile." The result is,
           | "fuck you, you better be constantly fixing the shit that we
           | broke with our breaking changes."
           | 
           | Linux's approach to _drivers_ is the most  "fuck you, you
           | better be constantly fixing the shit that we broke with our
           | breaking changes" of any OS. It does take userland
           | compatibility seriously though.
        
         | Xenoamorphous wrote:
         | I thought that at least the kernel philosophy was the exact
         | opposite? The "never break userland" motto?
        
           | 5436436347 wrote:
           | That philosophy extends to the kernel only - there are
           | multiple other dependencies for running programs that may not
           | have a stable API/ABI, or the same compatibility approach.
           | Shared libraries like glibc may be updated, graphical
           | interfaces may differ, search paths may not be uniform, etc.
           | and these can all break a program.
        
         | Throw4949 wrote:
         | If you want stable binary compatibility, use distro that
         | focuses on that (Suse, Redhat). Not some joke build around
         | opensource idea and communism!
        
         | zozbot234 wrote:
         | > the overall Linux mindset seems to be: "fuck you, you should
         | have provided the source code if you wanted your software to
         | work after the next dist-upgrade"
         | 
         | These days you just need a container. Or use Nix/Guix, which
         | makes it easy to preserve required dependencies for an older
         | app even when upgrading other parts of the system.
        
           | krater23 wrote:
           | And a lot of space on the harddrive to house the last 20
           | versions of your operating system...
        
         | tomatotomato37 wrote:
         | That mindset only really applies to the weird enthusiast OS's
         | like arch & gentoo, where the need to recompile half your stuff
         | after an upgrade is almost the point. Everything else from my
         | experience has been pretty good at maintaining compatibility
        
           | AussieWog93 wrote:
           | What about that classic meme of Linus (Tech Tips, not
           | Torvalds) running the equivalent of `apt update` on Pop OS
           | and breaking the entire Desktop Environment?
           | 
           | I'd be lying if I said I'd never done something similar when
           | trying to switch from the open-source Nvidia drivers (glitchy
           | at 4k60, at the time) to the officially provided ones.
        
             | j5155 wrote:
             | To be clear, Linus got an error trying to install an app
             | via the GUI, ran the equivalent terminal command, and
             | directly overrode the warning telling him what would happen
             | before his desktop environment broke. It wasn't quite as
             | simple as just apt upgrade.
        
               | AussieWog93 wrote:
               | The point is that it gave him a text warning that
               | basically said "press y to destroy your whole Desktop
               | Environment" buried in a wall of text that you'd normally
               | ignore. This is beyond terrible UX and would never happen
               | outside of Linux/FOSS.
        
               | csande17 wrote:
               | In a proprietary operating system, you just wouldn't have
               | been allowed to uninstall the desktop environment at all.
               | Unfortunately, you are also forbidden from uninstalling
               | Facebook if they have a deal with your device's
               | manufacturer.
        
               | eastAligned wrote:
               | There is a huge space between cli everything and pre-
               | infested walled garden. I have always felt that there
               | should be more visual differences in the standard newby
               | frendly tools for linix. Many problems would be avoided
               | with a basic graphic interface.
        
           | lmm wrote:
           | In my experience that's backwards; Arch and Gentoo are far
           | better at telling you exactly what you need to stay backwards
           | compatible and letting you do it than the fancy commercial
           | distros are. (E.g. compare the difficulty of running the
           | original Linux release of Quake 3 on those distros).
        
       | lastdong wrote:
       | I recall buying a magazine that focused on the Win95 launch. The
       | highlight was the ability to play Prince of Persia in the
       | included DOS. Backwards compatibility was effectively a major
       | selling point.
        
       | moomin wrote:
       | Maybe for once someone should tell the story of how Windows 3.1
       | went the extra mile to ensure incompatibility to the extent of
       | getting an antitrust settlement enforced.
        
         | CSMastermind wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code
         | 
         | ^ For those unfamiliar with what this poster is talking about.
         | 
         | tl;dr:
         | 
         | In a _beta_ release of windows 3.1 Microsoft included code to
         | detect if the user was running authenticate DOS or a third-
         | party clone and errored out if it wasn't the real thing. The
         | code was disabled on for the actual release of 3.1 that went
         | out to customers.
         | 
         | Internal memos about the code came to light during the
         | government's antitrust prosecution of Microsoft. When this
         | happened the new owner of the clone DOS system sued Microsoft
         | and they settled to make the case go away and get the anti-
         | trust headlines out of the news.
        
           | acdha wrote:
           | Clone isn't quite the right term since Digital Research made
           | the original CPM which Seattle Computing used as the basis
           | for their 86-DOS which they sold to Microsoft:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS
        
       | Randor wrote:
       | I don't know why SimCity and just a few titles are getting media
       | attention on this. There perhaps a dozen more games and quite a
       | few applications that were being patched at runtime.
       | 
       | At Microsoft this eventually became a feature: Application
       | Compatibility Database
       | 
       | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/devnotes/app...
        
         | ninth_ant wrote:
         | Likely because SimCity was a memorable game that can be
         | associated strongly with that era in our nostalgia. But also,
         | not something "serious" such as tools designed for work or
         | productivity.
         | 
         | Having MS design Win95 with specific hacks for SimCity means
         | that MS thought that SimCity was special and important, which
         | reminds people in that era that they also thought SimCity was
         | special and important -- and it's mildly or moderately
         | interesting enough for these people to find "behind the scenes"
         | work which validates their nostalgic memories.
        
           | asveikau wrote:
           | SimCity was also quite huge and novel in the 90s. I think
           | it's easy to underestimate that now.
        
           | flomo wrote:
           | SimCity games had long shelf-lives and were on the sales
           | charts for years. It could be it wasn't individually special
           | and it was just "make sure the top 20 windows games work".
        
             | skylanh wrote:
             | I see you aren't familiar with Raymond Chen.
             | 
             | https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/author/oldnewthi
             | n...
             | 
             | Microsoft had a program internally within it's development
             | teams for Windows 95 that you could get _any_ software for
             | free. You just had to agree that you 'd ensure it was
             | compatible with Windows 95 and take ownership of its quirks
             | to get it to run on Windows 95.
        
               | mike_hock wrote:
               | "Just."
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | supertrope wrote:
       | Website compatibility issues get blamed on the browser. GPU
       | drivers include game specific workarounds.
        
         | Kwpolska wrote:
         | Everything worked fine back on Windows 3.1. Then you upgraded
         | to Windows 95 and now your favourite game crashes. Why would
         | you not blame Microsoft for this?
        
           | afterburner wrote:
           | You would. Not OP but I believe they're highlighting an
           | analogous situation in our present time.
        
         | yunohn wrote:
         | GPUs and games have a vested commercial interest in ensuring
         | they work.
         | 
         | On the other hand, both the website and browser are mostly
         | provided for free. Paid websites often do put the extra effort
         | in to make it work everywhere, eg IE/Safari compat.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Someone's paying for you to use the browser, even if it's not
           | you - it's not like Mozilla is hoping everyone will stop
           | using Firefox. So browsers do have compatibility checks for
           | websites sometimes.
        
           | Slaminerag wrote:
           | There are an awful lot of expensive apps with web front ends
           | that only worked with IE6 for years.
        
       | ecef9-8c0f-4374 wrote:
       | I own the games Myst 1993 for Windows 95 and I own the point and
       | click adventure Ankh 2005 on Linux ported by RuneSoft. Only one
       | of the 2 games I am able to run on modern hardware on a modern
       | Linux without going the extra mile of compiling stuff.
       | 
       | It's a shame but older Windows software runs better under wine
       | then old Linux software does under Linux. Maybe we need a line?!
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | Jorengarenar wrote:
       | Absolutely off-topic, but I need to get it out of myself:
       | 
       | I just noticed Joel Spolsky's surname means "from Poland" ("z
       | Polski")
        
         | jvanderbot wrote:
         | I think the workers on Ellis Island often made up last names
         | when speaking to hurried immigrant families. My last name is
         | pretty close to "Von Der Hook" by pronunciation, which is awful
         | close to "from the hook" (Hoek, a part of Netherlands). My
         | friend is quite close to "From the Sluis", which is another
         | part of Netherlands.
         | 
         | Add to that the various spellings "Vander X, Van Der X,
         | VanderX". I'm sure the conversation went
         | 
         | "Surname?"
         | 
         | "Vas?"
         | 
         | "Where you from?"
         | 
         | "Von Der Hook"
         | 
         |  _scribbles something on intake card_.  "Next!"
        
           | bitwize wrote:
           | My sister's ex-husband's family tacked a "-ski" onto their
           | surname while immigrating to avoid sounding too German. They
           | immigrated during one of the World Wars (I believe it was the
           | second) when anti-German sentiment was high.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | asveikau wrote:
           | Not doubting your story, but wanted to add that many European
           | Jewish communities especially wound up with surnames that
           | reference geography. That would have happened centuries
           | before the US existed, representing migrations that happened
           | in Europe.
           | 
           | Don't have a lot of details on this history (which i heard
           | orally) but a Google search for "Jewish surnames geography"
           | seems to back me up.
        
             | Animats wrote:
             | China still struggles with that. A traditional question is
             | "what is your village?", to get name uniqueness in a system
             | which has too few family names.
             | 
             | France at one time went to the other extreme - names had to
             | be approved by a central registry at birth. Until 1993,
             | there was an official list of allowed first names. Today,
             | there are still some prohibited names. "Nutella" just made
             | the list.
        
               | tomcam wrote:
               | > "Nutella" just made the list
               | 
               | My wife is French. We're expecting our third child and
               | the other two, Banana and Oatmeal, were devastated.
        
               | shagie wrote:
               | In #dadjokes on one of the slack channels I'm in...
               | 
               | > On the way home I'd pick up Pizza and Coke. She wasn't
               | happy with me.
               | 
               | > Fur fgvyy unfa'g sbetvira zr sbe anzvat gur xvqf.
               | 
               | https://rot13.com
        
             | jvanderbot wrote:
             | Yeah this very much might be how surnames actually
             | happened. I wouldn't know. Or, a little of column A and
             | column B.
        
           | cookie_monsta wrote:
           | I'm surprised there aren't more people around with the
           | surname Vas
        
           | bazoom42 wrote:
           | > I think the workers on Ellis Island often made up last
           | names when speaking to hurried immigrant families
           | 
           | This is a myth.
        
             | MomoXenosaga wrote:
             | I have an incomprehensible last name and it often gets
             | butchered by busy people.
             | 
             | It would not surprise me at all if some overworked
             | government employee doesn't really care what noises the
             | foreigner is trying to make. This was in a time when lots
             | of people couldn't read or write.
        
             | kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
             | C'mon, you can't just drop that in with no corroborating
             | data.
             | 
             | I could, with similar authority, state that it being a myth
             | is a myth.
        
               | roywiggins wrote:
               | "Someone wanting to book passage to America, Canada,
               | Australia, South America, etc., would have had no
               | difficulty locating an agent. Agents quoted ticket prices
               | to the would-be traveler, accepted payment, and then
               | recorded each traveler's name and other identifying
               | information (the specific information collected varied
               | over the years). The information taken down by the agents
               | was sent to the home office, where it was transferred by
               | shipping company clerks onto large blank sheets provided
               | by the US government. Those sheets became the passenger
               | lists which later were used by American port officials."
               | 
               | https://journals.ala.org/index.php/dttp/article/view/6655
               | /89...
        
           | Beltalowda wrote:
           | No doubt this kind of thing happened, but people also just
           | changed their names over time because it's easier. One of my
           | grandfather's brother migrated to Canada in the 50s, and he
           | now goes by "Vanderloo" or "Vanderlo" (not entirely sure how
           | he spells it) instead of "Van der Loo".
           | 
           | Same people Dutch people named Martijn or Maarten, who will
           | often use Martin abroad. Johan Cruijff is typically known as
           | Cruyff abroad, etc.
        
           | jeroenhd wrote:
           | I don't know anything about refugees immigrating into the US
           | so I can't refute your story in any way, but one thing worthy
           | of note is that Dutch names often include geographical areas
           | with "van de/van der/van" (meaning "of, from") as an
           | insertion ("tussenvoegsel") between first and last name .
           | "van der Sluis" would be a perfectly normal Dutch name. I
           | also wouldn't think twice about "van der Hoek" if I heard
           | someone introduce themselves by that name.
           | 
           | Many people had to pick surnames when the French occupied the
           | Netherlands, often leading to geographical names, references
           | to occupations, or sometimes even jokes ("Naaktgeboren" being
           | relatively common, meaning "born naked"). The forefathers of
           | someone named "van der Sluis" could have lived near a
           | sluice/lock, lived near a place called Sluis, or perhaps
           | operated sluices/locks as part of their job in the barging
           | industry.
           | 
           | English speaking countries where last names consisting of
           | multiple words were incredibly rare often concatenate(d) such
           | names into one or fewer words. To many English speakers the
           | only name with multiple words would imply nobility (if they
           | even considered the concept at all) and I wouldn't expect
           | nobility to arrive amidst refugees either. To this day some
           | American websites refuse to take the space in my last name.
           | 
           | As an added bonus, Dutch names specifically can have
           | "tussenvoegsels" that are part of the name but need to be
           | treated specially to be used correctly (i.e. when sorting a
           | list of names). Depending on if the name belongs to a Belgian
           | or a Dutchman the capitalisation rules also differ (the
           | Flemish capitalising the "Van", the Dutch using lowercase
           | letters). Of course other languages and cultures also have
           | their own naming schemes with grammar rules (take
           | German/Austrian "von" or Danish "af/de/von" for example);
           | it's hardly a unique concept, but the details differ between
           | countries.
           | 
           | It's no wonder those poor American immigration workers
           | couldn't make heads or tails out of the names these people
           | brought into their country. As a Dutchman, the end result is
           | often quite interesting to witness when Americans or
           | Canadians with Dutch names appear on TV, most names
           | containing their own special deviation from "normal" Dutch
           | names.
        
         | asveikau wrote:
         | I wonder if Yiddish speaking ancestors pronounced that S as SH
         | because P follows it, which would not be in keeping with its
         | Slavic root.
        
           | asveikau wrote:
           | Now that Mr. Spolsky himself cleared up the etymology, I wish
           | i could delete this.
           | 
           | But he cited something with the letter sh, indicating the sh
           | sound. So I think I was onto something.
        
         | rr808 wrote:
         | https://forward.com/culture/13721/how-did-jews-choose-their-...
         | describes reasons how and why Jewish people chose names in
         | Europe when Joseph II enforced them.
         | https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2017/importa...
        
         | spolsky wrote:
         | A common assumption, but it is actually from Shpola, a city in
         | the Ukraine.
        
           | Jorengarenar wrote:
           | Really? I assumed it's the same genesis as the word "spruce"
           | ("z Prus")
        
             | switch007 wrote:
             | In case you missed it, that is Spolsky himself replying to
             | you
        
               | Jorengarenar wrote:
               | Indeed I did miss that, but fortunately my reply wouldn't
               | have changed.
               | 
               | Now I kinda hope for further details. Is the surname from
               | adjective "Shpolians'kii"?
        
           | fsckboy wrote:
           | seems reasonable to hypothesize that the Ukranian town might
           | have named "from Poland"
        
       | bernardv wrote:
       | Very cool. I was an MS Windows Tech Support during the Win31/1 to
       | Win95 transition. Looking back, it went pretty smoothly. Most of
       | our calls were HW driver related or usability related if I
       | remember well.
        
         | mysterydip wrote:
         | That must have been a wild time, between brand new interfaces
         | and a changing hardware landscape. Did you have many BSOD
         | calls, or was that what you meant with HW driver related?
        
           | nikanj wrote:
           | About as wild as any given day in Node.js land
        
           | bernardv wrote:
           | Plenty of BSOD calls for sure. Also some very memorable calls
           | from a bunch of Linux guys who would think-up of a monster
           | Windows machine loaded with all sorts of crazy hardware
           | peripherals and call support to mess with us.
        
             | derefr wrote:
             | Are you sure it was truly just to mess with you? If I were
             | a Linux kernel maintainer back then, and there was some
             | hardware I wanted to fix support for but didn't personally
             | have the money to buy, I think "trick Microsoft into
             | divulging how their own driver for it works" would be what
             | I'd see as a "clever hack"!
        
               | bernardv wrote:
               | Perhaps. But I think some of them were actually more
               | senior techs calling in and messing with the new guy.
        
         | flandish wrote:
         | Same here, though not for MS, just ISPs and resellers. Most
         | often, iirc, it was drivers on floppies and "how do I do ..."
        
         | bcrescimanno wrote:
         | I'll share my own story of the Windows 3.1 -> 95 migration and
         | MS Tech support. At the time, I was using my grandfather's old
         | PC that had originally been a 486sx 33mhz processor with 4mb of
         | RAM and a 200mb HDD. We upgraded the machine using an Intel
         | "Overdrive" processor to a 486dx/2 66mhz processor with 8mb of
         | RAM and added a Soundblaster 16 sound card and triple-speed CD
         | ROM drive. I received a copy of Windows 95 for Christmas 1995
         | and proceeded to install it on the system. It worked pretty
         | well and, a few months later, I decided I wanted to add the "MS
         | Plus!" pack.
         | 
         | I was 14 years old and knew very little about PCs at the time;
         | though, I was learning. What I definitely didn't know at the
         | time was that the HDD in the machine that I was told was nearly
         | 500MB was actually a 200mb drive that had been compressed with
         | an older version of DriveSpace. The addition of Plus! upgraded
         | the compression to DriveSpace 3 which corrupted something on
         | the drive that caused the system to hardlock as soon as the
         | Windows 95 UI appeared no matter what I did.
         | 
         | After spending 4-5 hours on the phone with a very patient tech
         | support specialist at MS, he eventually concluded that I would
         | need to format the drive as nothing we did in those hours
         | worked at all. Definitely a major learning experience for me
         | doing my first full system format and OS reinstall.
         | 
         | By the end of 1996, I'd be doing my first Linux installation on
         | a slightly newer PC that I saved money from a summer job to
         | buy. If it hadn't been for DriveSpace 3 and an MS tech support
         | specialist who educated the hell out of me for a few hours, who
         | knows when (or even if) I would have gone down the rabbit hole
         | that led to my career.
        
           | cydonian_monk wrote:
           | It's difficult to explain to people today just how good
           | Microsoft tech support was in the early-mid 1990s. We had a
           | similarly complex issue with DOS 6.something that I don't
           | remember the full details of, and I think I learned more
           | about operating systems in the couple hours we were on the
           | phone with MS than I did in the semester-long operating
           | systems class I took in college. Some days after the call we
           | got a stack of floppies in the mail from Microsoft with a
           | small bug fix that helped with whatever the situation was we
           | had encountered. Just night and day compared to most modern
           | interactions with tech companies.
        
           | bernardv wrote:
           | The most rewarding calls were those helping either very young
           | or very old customers who just needed help getting started. I
           | recall a grandfather calling in with his grandson, trying to
           | figure out the new Windows machine he had just bought him.
           | Being patient and understanding was all it took to make a
           | difference.
        
           | krimpenrik wrote:
           | That is pretty wild, imagine that support in the current
           | climate
        
             | leonidasv wrote:
             | This lead me to wonder if retail Windows licenses are
             | expensive because they used to include a phone support and
             | then, when people learned how to Google for problems,
             | Microsoft dropped the phone support but kept the price
             | because "customers are used to this price tag"?
             | 
             | I recently bought a Windows 11 machine that came with
             | Windows 11 Home, I felt the need for some Pro features and
             | went to check the price for an upgrade and my jaw dropped.
             | Years of "free upgrade to Windows 10/11" lead me believe
             | those licences were less pricey nowadays.
        
               | bornfreddy wrote:
               | $199.99 if I'm not mistaken.
        
             | mananaysiempre wrote:
             | At the same time, it's probably worth remembering the
             | contemporary Microsoft rule of thumb that "each product-
             | support call costs a sale"[1], that is to say, handling a
             | single product-support call to that standard costs as much
             | as was earned by selling the product in the first place
             | (and the products weren't exactly cheap--not that they've
             | become cheap now).
             | 
             | [1] "Old New Thing" (the print one), https://books.google.c
             | om/books?id=wYrCitbs5PQC&lpg=PA1&pg=PT...
        
             | dzdt wrote:
             | Exactly. We are moving to a tine where having a person
             | individually and attentively help you with anything is a
             | high order luxury item.
             | 
             | A major change is on the horizon though. We are close to
             | where a large language model could play the role of the
             | support side of that call. But if it an AI on the support
             | side, would anyone bother to learn on the customer side?
        
       | overgard wrote:
       | As amazing as this was, I do think subscription software and
       | near-universal internet access has changed the equation now.
       | Apple breaks backwards compatibility and old software all the
       | time, and there's essentially no consequence.
        
       | nraynaud wrote:
       | I am always torn about the agressivity of MS on the marketplace
       | at the time and their displayed technical insecurity visible in
       | trying to ensure compatibility with existing apps (vs telling
       | external developers to fix things).
        
       | bmalicoat wrote:
       | When I worked at Xbox I was amazed to see the 360 game boot code
       | had multiple title ID checks in it. For some titles it would
       | report things differently, for others it would sleep a bit. When
       | new features like cloud saves were introduced, those code paths
       | for checking storage devices had per title ID branches too. It
       | seems like whether you design your APIs perfectly or poorly,
       | someone will use them in a way just outside of your intention.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | Interesting how SimCity relied on use-after-free working and that
       | was the issue.
       | 
       | Obviously the correct solution was to rewrite SimCity for Windows
       | 3.x in Rust, thus avoiding this very common bug. /s
        
         | jerrysievert wrote:
         | I've been updating some MUDs to work on "modern" OS's, and have
         | run into so many use-after-free issues that it's almost become
         | a hobby fixing them.
        
           | 1f60c wrote:
           | MUD?
        
             | nemacol wrote:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUD
        
           | myko wrote:
           | I now maintain the MUD I played as a child and have been
           | playing whack a mole with bugs like this for years. I'm a
           | very poor C coder so still run into issues pretty often!
           | Interestingly the game is much more stable on my MBP that I
           | use for development than it is on the production Ubuntu 18
           | server I run it on. Not too bad for a Diku.
           | 
           | Do you hang out in the Mud Coder's Guild Slack at all? You
           | might find it interesting: https://mudcoders.com/join-the-
           | mud-coders-guild-6770301ddcbd...
        
       | PreInternet01 wrote:
       | Backwards-compatibility between new Windows OS releases and
       | previously available apps has always been great. Recently, things
       | have regressed a _little bit_ , but even on Windows 11, you can
       | still run anything available for Windows 8 (released over a
       | decade ago) just fine by simply ticking a checkbox.
       | 
       | And for apps where the out-of-the-box mitigations don't work, the
       | inscrutably-named _Assessment and Deployment Kit_
       | (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/get-start...)
       | will most likely help you out. Sure, some truly ancient apps
       | (mostly DOS and OG-WinAPI) really won't work anymore, but those
       | are better relegated to a VM anyway, if only for security
       | reasons.
       | 
       | If you want to understand why Windows still occupies a _lot_ of
       | IT mindset even in Y2K22, understanding the traditional Microsoft
       | approach to backwards compatibility (as much demonstrated
       | deficiencies as it has...) is a necessary first step.
        
         | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
         | You can even run stuff from Windows 98-2000 if you're lucky.
        
           | Joeri wrote:
           | Ecco Pro was last built in 1997 and still has an active user
           | community on windows 10.
        
         | bobsmooth wrote:
         | I installed a webcam driver for Windows Vista on Windows 10 the
         | other day. As you said, all I had to do was check a box in the
         | compatibility options.
        
           | LaLaLand122 wrote:
           | There was still a need for webcam drivers when Vista was
           | released?
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_video_device_class
        
         | 29athrowaway wrote:
         | There are videos on YouTube upgrading from Windows 1.0 all the
         | way to the most recent versions.
        
           | PreInternet01 wrote:
           | Yes, I'm sure such exercises work fine for any real-life OS:
           | if you take, say, Ubuntu 1.0, then run all the intermediate
           | upgrade steps, you'll eventually end up with an up-to-date
           | system as well.
           | 
           | The real question, though, is: after a successful OS upgrade,
           | how many of your installed apps still work without issues?
           | 
           | On Linux, this varies: popular source-available apps tend to
           | do fine, whereas less-common and proprietary (not to mention
           | expensive!) apps fail after even minor updates, with no other
           | resolution than 'ask your app supplier to do better', which
           | is not always an option due to said supplier being too
           | burned-out, bankrupt, or both.
           | 
           | On MacOS, apps generally seem to have a 2-5 year lifetime,
           | after which they break for various (often minor) reasons.
           | Resolution is as per above, and often unavailable due to
           | suppliers disappearing or giving up because of to the
           | relatively small size of the MacOS market. iOS has similar
           | issues.
           | 
           | On Windows, you can generally continue to use even the most
           | obsolete apps for 10-20 years, and often even longer. Of
           | course, traumatic generational changes (obsoleting DOS or
           | 16-bit WinAPI apps) still take their toll, but compared to
           | other operating systems, this happens a lot less often, and
           | migration tooling is often available.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Arrath wrote:
         | > Windows 8 (released over a decade ago)
         | 
         | Surely you lie.
        
           | PreInternet01 wrote:
           | Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_8, "Windows 8 is a
           | major release of the Windows NT operating system developed by
           | Microsoft. It was released to manufacturing on August 1,
           | 2012"
           | 
           | Per https://www.google.com/search?q=decade+in+years, a decade
           | is 10 years, making the above date since December 26, 2022,
           | over a decade ago?
           | 
           | But possibly, per Bill Clinton, that all depends on "what the
           | meaning of the word 'is' is"? Or I'm missing some implied
           | sarcasm? Usually Occam's Razor would help out, but I just got
           | downvoted _twice_ for enumerating some historical facts on a
           | separate thread, so who knows...
        
             | Arrath wrote:
             | Naw simply a joke.
             | 
             | My mental model of Windows 8 is "that toc (terrible half of
             | the cycle) windows release to 7's tic, that I had to remove
             | from my Aunt's new laptop and found that UEFI made
             | downgrading to Win7 a right ballache and I swear I did this
             | 3 years ago not 10" How time flies.
        
         | JohnTHaller wrote:
         | Some software I code works on Windows XP through 11 without
         | issue. Some of the tools I work on still work on Windows 2000
         | though I don't still test for it.
        
       | ubermonkey wrote:
       | At last, a story of something Microsoft did in the 1990s that we
       | can all support!
       | 
       | (I mean, unless you prize productivity.... goddamn did SimCity
       | eat whole DAYS for me back then.)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-26 23:00 UTC)