An example of that is:
Allowing an application to run in unprotected
mode!
Granted: it's mostly games that "demand" that. And that's a feature
that's been around since very early DOS.
But MS is also fairly well known
for breaking compatibility even between two immediate versions. MS Access is an
example that has experienced that in a number of places a few times.
I
wonder if anyone has done any stats that one could point to and say something
like:
80% of the time backwards compatibility is covered, 20% of the time it
is not, in 100% of the cases, backwards compatibility of some type
fails.
That would be a rather good amount of research and testing involved,
which probably breaches MS' EULA unless you get their permission to disclose the
data. And I certainly wouldn't rely on any stats generated from survey's.
Human memory being what it is, most people will fall into one of the two
following groups:
Dislike of MS backwards compatibility (BC) and therefore
fails to mention where the BC actually works.
or
Like of MS and
therefore fails to mention where the BC actually fails.
In short - memory
recall will mostly be tainted by which side of that particular fence one falls
on. Disclaimer: I fall on the dislike side.
So with that taint in
mind:
My humble opinion based on experience I remember: When you're
talking specifically of MS Word, going back two versions to properly and fully
read in the document is iffy at best and three versions is pretty much expected
to fail in at least a few ways.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
