I'm just tired. On the last post about having Linux at our work, many people that seems to be an IT worker said there have been several issues with Linux that was not easy to manipulate or control like they do with Windows, but I think they just are lazy to find out ways to provide this support. Because Google forces all their workers to use Linux, and they have pretty much control on their OS as any other Windows system.
Linux is a valid system that can be used for work, just as many other companies do.
So my point is, the excuse of "Linux is not ready for workplaces" could be just a lack of knowledge of the IT team and/or a lack of intention to provide to developers the right tools to work.
Red Hat. Probably Canonical too.
I know it for a fact since I worked for a bank that chose Red Hat and since I also know someone working for Red Hat.
Red Hat isn't really known for making it easy to keep your new or old software working. Just the opposite.
Unlikely. Don't forget that most software designed for Windows 95 still run on Windows 11 just fine.
I can't even get installers designed for Windows 7/8.1 to run. It's just a software to use the scan feature of a printer. No errors, no logs. Cups works perfectly with it.
And that’s why Windows is dropping support for 3rd party print drivers; they’re shitty and unnecessary
It's not even drivers really, printing works fine. The printer itself works fine without the software. It just needs an extra program to scan.
Now, a generic driver which adds support for scanning without third party software, so drivers which can interface directly with Windows' scanning service, would probably solve that problem. But considering that the Software for the printer stopped at 7/8.1, it's a pretty old printer even if they stopped support immediately after releasing it (which they didn't). So I doubt M$ will be able to provide as much support for nearly as many printers as Linux got over the years by the community.
Windows 95 software also runs on Linux, with Wine. And it works for me.
AHaha what a fucking lie.
Celestia (the planetarium) from early 2000s also runs on modern Linux just fine
maybe for a very, very broad definition of "just fine"
oh geez. I've done Windows desktop support for many years, and that is so VERY not true. Even if you discount the fact that win95 software would be written for 32-bit architectures, they don't account for UAC or file permissions, often fail to let you move installation files to better locations, and universally have shitty automated installers. Often they depend on hardware, eg dongles that no longer exist or CDROMs that have long since gone to hell.
Usually we'll airgap a machine and run Windows XP 32-bit, which is generally the highest you can reliably get a win95 program working with. Sometimes a VM will work. Sometimes you can mount an ISO and fake a CDROM. It's a challenge.
Linux is so much easier. You have more options for getting old stuff to work, even if you have to do a lightweight VM with an old OS, you can sandbox it better.
In term of software compatibility, on Linux, you have the option of making chroots. Since the kernel devs makes a lot of effort to preserve compatibility, old software can still work fine. If I remember correctly, some kernel devs tested a while ago some really really old versions of bash, gcc, etc, and they still work fine with modern kernels.