Old icons from windows 3.11 and 95 still on Windows 7!

[arrrgh]

This is the only legacy icon I really hope they replace.. looks so out of place in Vista and makes my eyes bleed instantly :(

[lunarworks]

If you decided to pull the plug on EVERYBODY WHO DID NOT COMPLY TO SUPER AWESOME WINDOWS VERSION 1337 STANDARDS and magickally every developer joined in and updated their software, you'd hit this same problem in Version 1338. :)

What? I just think that anything prior to Windows 95 should be ejected from the codebase and handled by a VM. (Ideally, anything non-NT should be handled by a VM.)

[lunarworks]

Also, consider this: Windows XP, when it was released over 7 years ago, finally did away with MS-DOS support. If I remember correctly, the world of IT did not, in fact, implode from this, despite businesses still using legacy MS-DOS apps at the time. (I know. I was there.)

Windows XP went on to become the most successful release of Windows yet.

[magik]

This is the only legacy icon I really hope they replace.. looks so out of place in Vista and makes my eyes bleed instantly :(

There's a Visine for that.

[arrrgh]

There's a Visine for that.

I tried them once, tasted gross and the next thing I knew was waking up from a couple month coma.

[Rigby]

Win3.1 is 16bit, and as far as I know the 64bit edition of Vista/7 doesn't even support anything 16bit anymore... Or am I wrong?

That's true, however Windows NT 3.1, 3.5, and 3.51 were all 32-bit versions of Windows that used the old Program Manager as their shell also.

[Compuspital]

About the only thing, Those are resources in the SHELL.DLL SHELL32.DLL RUN32.DLL CONTROL.CPL EXPLORER.EXE and cannot be easily removed, they would have to rewrite the dll's above to get rid of them or even replace them. I have tried to remove them with reshack but it just won't happen Windows will notice wrong filesizes and crash. lol

:D

[hdood]

It's not that we have to worry about. It's the developers who still rely on archaic, deprecated, and undocumented APIs and methods in their new software.

They'll keep programming that garbage until Microsoft takes their crutches out of the OS.

You could go and remove it, but the only thing you accomplish is annoying countless customers who can no longer use their software. Given that the competition has reached a high level of maturity at this point, there is no guarantee that they will go Microsoft when they have to replace everything.

Not everything these developers do is intentional either, programming for Windows is extremely complicated and much of the documentation very confusing.

What? I just think that anything prior to Windows 95 should be ejected from the codebase and handled by a VM. (Ideally, anything non-NT should be handled by a VM.)

Technically all actual 16-bit programs already run virtualized, and removing it doesn't really accomplish that much. 64-bit versions of Windows already do. Infact, the next version of Server 2008 will take it one step further and be 64-bit only with only optional support for 32-bit programs.

Also, there is no clear distinction between what is NT and what is 9x, as they were developed side by side and new things from either added to the other. There's even 32-bit functions with the old 16-bit syntax that were originally introduced so that 16-bit Windows programs could more easily be recompiled with fewer changes. These are more distinct, but still in use today, even incorrectly by modern software.

The only thing truly NT is the native NT API, which is the basic kernel API itself which all higher level APIs eventually end up calling, and that isn't really relevant here. In reality, all you can do is start completely from scratch with brand new APIs, and having all current software run virtualized. That's no small job, and a risky move.

Also, consider this: Windows XP, when it was released over 7 years ago, finally did away with MS-DOS support.

No. XP, Vista and 7 all retain the DOS emulator, and many businesses rely on it to run old and new software side-by-side.

[Skulltrail]

You can change the icons yourself, if that will make you feel any better.

[Pikey]

I assume the end product will have better icons for the action centre, network and sound things down by the clock??

[+Elі Subscriber²]

This is the only legacy icon I really hope they replace.. looks so out of place in Vista and makes my eyes bleed instantly :(

Agree with that one, I hate it, and here's two more I think need replacement before 7 ships:

[Calum Veteran]

This is the only legacy icon I really hope they replace.. looks so out of place in Vista and makes my eyes bleed instantly :(

I completely agree! That icon is terrible and from the Windows 95 era! It has nothing to do with the icons in the Windows folder. Many users will actually see this icon!

Agree with that one, I hate it, and here's two more I think need replacement before 7 ships:

Agreed! In the first screenshot I don't even see why the icon needs to even be there in the first place? So I think it's silly they put such an old one there because they couldn't find a replacement or that they just haven't taken it out yet. There's no need for the icon...