> That is plain wrong. I don't know who started with that line of reasoning, but it is very wrong.
Looks at old Linux binaries not running because of glibc incompatibility or dependency version mismatch.
There is a mountainful of valid complaints for Microsoft, but SXS is one of those "its the least worst but realistic solution" to dependency hell. Someone saying that they are running old Linux libraries (without recompiling or patching) are either lucky to not use dependencies (usually terminal-based programs) or plainly lying.
Did you ever wonder why some programs work and some don't ? Luck does not have much to do with it. I have some games that were made many versions of glibc ago, and they still work. Why is that ? (that is a rhetorical question)
> Did you ever wonder why some programs work and some don't ?
Not really. (Also older games can also stop running on Windows. It's not really Microsoft's problem except in the XP to Vista transition where several APIs were emulated but in general games (on any platform including consoles) tend to poke everything and use APIs they shouldn't touch at all.)
Looks at old Linux binaries not running because of glibc incompatibility or dependency version mismatch.
There is a mountainful of valid complaints for Microsoft, but SXS is one of those "its the least worst but realistic solution" to dependency hell. Someone saying that they are running old Linux libraries (without recompiling or patching) are either lucky to not use dependencies (usually terminal-based programs) or plainly lying.