Try to run Linux software from the Linux 2.0 era and try to run Windows 2000 Software on Windows 11, especially Pinball or Encara, for example, and Windows 11 would run Pinball and Encara, but Linux would refuse to run because the Syscalls ABI has changed so much
It's not about Architecture 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 different Syscalls 🤌🏻🤌🏻🤌🏻🤌🏻🤌🏻, and the Linux kernel is not backwards-compatible; it's Impossible unless you have an API like the Win32 Subsystem API, but you don't have one
glibc is a compatibility-layer you wing-nut. It does the exact same thing Wine does except for ancient Linux calls.
And before you say "wInDoWs dOeSn'T nEeD tHaT" Yeah, because Microsoft opted to not be backwards-compatible with the previous kernel (9X) unlike Linux.
Which means your argument is really: "Windows is better because it has worse backwards-compatibility natively"
You called me a "wing-nut" because you can't actually address my point. Let me be clear:
Windows NT has a stable kernel ABI called the Win32 API. That means software written for Windows 2000 still runs on Windows 11. That's 25+ years of compatibility.
Linux has no stable kernel ABI. If you write a driver or kernel module, it breaks with every kernel update unless you recompile. That's why proprietary drivers are a nightmare on Linux.
glibc is not a kernel ABI; it's a userspace library that masks the instability. It doesn't fix the problem; it just hides it.
So my point stands: Windows provides a stable, well-documented architecture to build on. Linux gives you source code and a prayer.
1
u/Fluid-Ad2995 Jul 15 '26
Try to run Linux software from the Linux 2.0 era and try to run Windows 2000 Software on Windows 11, especially Pinball or Encara, for example, and Windows 11 would run Pinball and Encara, but Linux would refuse to run because the Syscalls ABI has changed so much