snixyz123@lemmy.ml to Memes@lemmy.ml · 1 year agoWindows compatibility is insane!lemmy.mlimagemessage-square110fedilinkarrow-up1115arrow-down125
arrow-up190arrow-down1imageWindows compatibility is insane!lemmy.mlsnixyz123@lemmy.ml to Memes@lemmy.ml · 1 year agomessage-square110fedilink
minus-squareJohanno@lemmy.fmhy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up5arrow-down1·1 year agoThen compile it from the sources
minus-squaredustojnikhummer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0arrow-down8·1 year agoYes because that is more user friendly than running an executable through a built in compatibility layer… suure
minus-squareReakDuck@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up8·1 year agoWho tf wants usability when shit just has a solution no matter what. Additionally its an old program that a normal person wouldn’t even try. On windows shit just doesn’t work and the solutions are most of the time not even existing.
minus-squareriskable@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoIf you’re trying to get ancient software to work I think “user friendliness” is the least of your concerns. Especially compared to the alternative (Windows) where the answer is just, “No: That’s not going to work no matter what you do.”
Then compile it from the sources
Yes because that is more user friendly than running an executable through a built in compatibility layer… suure
Who tf wants usability when shit just has a solution no matter what. Additionally its an old program that a normal person wouldn’t even try.
On windows shit just doesn’t work and the solutions are most of the time not even existing.
If you’re trying to get ancient software to work I think “user friendliness” is the least of your concerns. Especially compared to the alternative (Windows) where the answer is just, “No: That’s not going to work no matter what you do.”