Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- From: "MikeU" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:41:44 -0500
"Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ut44kSAEGHA.1120@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> You have to understand the fact that Ilfak Guilfanov does not really have
> to worry about breaking any applications, and he did say to use it at your
> own risk.
>
> Microsoft, on the other hand, has to test a patch against thousands of
> applications to make sure that the patch doesn't break a competitors
> product. If they don't, the competitor will be in court looking for money!
>
Don't forget to toss in the many development platforms used to create
countless custom apps.
It looks like this problem is not technically a bug, but the result of a
design from long ago. If the fix requires changing expected behavior, much
greater care needs to be taken to avoid breaking existing functionality.
It's tough to say what a fix might impact, but imagine if a quick fix from
MS "broke" a large number of the printer drivers in use. To avoid that kind
of thing, MS may need to get a long list of partners to test a fix before it
can be released.
.
- References:
- Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- From: Stephen Howe
- Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- From: Richard Urban
- Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- Prev by Date: Re: Guilfanov's WMF patch update (v 1.4)
- Next by Date: Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- Next by thread: Re: Why no patch for the .wmf problem?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
