this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
569 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

74073 readers
2730 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 17 hours ago (7 children)

I've heard this comment about OpenXML (the xml format of the office documents) before, and i'm a bit on the fence about it.

It's of course indeed ridiculously complex, but so is office. Microsoft both adds a shit ton of functionality to their documents, and keeps an impressive amount of backwards compatibility.

In the past i heard complaints about part of the OpenXML spec that also allows older binary data in there for backwards compatibility reasons, which of course means for OSS implementations that they don't just have to implement this spec, but also the older spec that came before to be truly compatible with everything a modern office version can open.

But on the other hand, if i look at it from the side of Microsoft, they opened up their format, they've got a gazillion functionalities, should they remove functionality to appease the open source developers? If so which? Should they stop being backwards compatible with documents of decades ago to appease the open source developers? If so how long should they support? Are you going to tell their customers?

Office is an immense program with an immense amount of legacy features, backwards compatibility, ....

It's incredibly complex by nature. And might they have made the format more complex to dissuade competition? Could be. However, in this instance Occam's razor pushes me more to "write a huge program over a timespan of many decades, with thousands upon thousands of programmers working on it, and you'll indeed most likely end up with something very complex...."

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 12 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

The one thing you have to give Microsoft is backwards compatibility. They make hot garbage, but God damn if you can't run that garbage from 10 years ago.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 6 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

Although 10 years ago isn't that long in computer terms any more. Those are machines that can still run Windows 10 without issue. It's an older computer, but still perfectly usable these days.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

I haven't done the experiment, I'm curious to know if you can take a random binary compiled for Linux 10 years ago run on the latest version of popular distros. See in which ones it runs.

load more comments (5 replies)