But its not really " half-baked" . There has to be billions of different computer configurations if you take into account different hardware and software variations , and Windows works well on most of them. I find that pretty amazing.
True, considering the range of permutations of hardware that Windows runs on, it is quite a feat. But it could be so much better, surely. Or is this another one of those quandaries, as in the everlasting light-bulb(OS) is always a few steps away, because there is only a finite profit in that business course?
I get that what seemed like a great move 5 years ago may not seem so today, so developers change tack, as MS have done, but the overall path might have been plotted better from the outset. There are other considerations to make in relation to how the world is evolving. One being that not all of the worlds population can afford to buy new all of the time, or even constantly update their devices, as a whole unit, or part by part. If more outdated devices are out there then the risk of malware etc spreading is increased obviously. Overall expectations mean that more and more of us can access things digitally; at what cost to individuals, or the planet collectively? Security considerations push distributors into insisting on improved system requirements, how do you afford that if you earn a few dollars a day? This cycle can then lead to more pirated software and OSs, with more vulnerabilities and the poor never managing to keep up. Is there a solution?
support.microsoft.com
