[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MiNT] 1.15.10 (fwd)
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, Konrad M. Kokoszkiewicz wrote:
> 1.02, and TOS 2.06, and MiNT and anything. So the user thinks:
> 1. These systems do not differ, there are no major updates, if a program
> can work equally on anything (not realizing that a lot is done by
> kludgy libraries, which emulate everything they can).
> 2. So why I have to upgrade? My TOS 1.02 is good enough.
And actually, the user would be right. If an application runs equally well
on a 520ST with TOS 1.0 and MiNT 1.12 as it would with a Milan running
MiNT 1.15, it would mean that there is no reason for using the Milan or
the newer kernel.
The fact that both in Linux (and fortunately also in MiNT), a lot of apps
require latest kernels and latest other stuff, is a healthy indication of
the fact that there is *useful* development going on. This goes for any
platform and has nothing really to do with the Atari system.
The only "challenge" left is to make programs as backwards compatible as
plausible; i.e. programs that do not need latest features, shouldn't be
programmed to require them. But only to Windoze programmers this is a
challenge; both in Linux and in MiNT, latest versions of simple stuff like
vi or Pine can run on systems like 520STs or 386s (and with ELKS probably
on even older systems). But surely Hadeses, Milans, and Centurbo'ed
Falcons have a reason to live too.
But there is nothing wrong with requiring latest versions of software
components like kernels or libs. They aren't developed for nothing. :)