After working with linux drivers for far too long, I’ve developed some strong opinions on the so-called “APIs” they implement.
Linux: Of course you can use these syscalls designed in the 70s. Windows: Compatibility with what? No, you must use these newly-designed functions that exist only on windows. It’s for your own protection.
Tell me again how proprietary software gives a shit about compatibility.
“Backwards compatibility” is a totally different thing from “cross compatibility”. Of course proprietary software is going to be less cross-compatible.
With the risk of breaking the internet, I see no reason to fight someone who is wrong.
yeah because windows is a shining example of a great api
Some super old version of GIMP will run on both XP and Win11.
I had to modify and recompile my laptop’s Broadcom WLAN driver for it to run on the latest kernel.
Fight me 🤪
Just buy a shiny undocumented ARM macbook and stop making low effort bait posts on a Linux memes lemmy community.
This is a nothing post.
I would much rather pay for closed source code that also has bad api and lazy backwards compatibility!
If you don’t bother to provide any argument, I won’t bother to argue.
Any concrete examples on that? I feel like FOSS is what pushes people towards making modular software with APIs in the first place while proprietary software is usually monolithic, probably because all the devs are colleagues and can just talk to each other.
My 14+ year old laser printer “just works” on the latest linux kernel. It has been several years since MacOS supported installing the last driver binary created for it.
Sorry isn’t Linus the one that always says “never break user code”? Or are you complaining about how you actually use those APIs?
Plus I’ve seen many, many shitty closed source APIs. You are conflating correlation and causation.
