From: Philippe Verdy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Dec 05 2010 - 13:21:16 CST
2010/12/5 Peter Constable <email@example.com>:
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
>>> [You may also find that some Windows XP users need to update the
>>> version of Uniscribe (USP10.DLL) in the \Windows\System 32\
>> Microsoft doesn't provide a straightforward "Update Uniscribe" page,
> Indeed: updating usp10.dll in this manner is neither supported nor permitted by the EULA.
>> or automatically push out a newer copy as part of regular updates
> Updates to usp10.dll are sometimes pushed out. Generally that will only be for serious regressions or stability issues, not to add new functionality. And note that Windows XP is no longer serviced.
That's not a good excuse. Adding support for new scripts that are
already working in Seven will not break applications that are all made
to support it and that should be allowed to run and display identical
results in Vista like they do in Seven.
And if strict compatility is really an issue, why doesn't Microsoft
use its "Side-by-Side" versioning system allowing multiple versions to
coexist (like it does with DotNet), or using application compatibility
manifests to enable the newer functionalities (like it does with many
parts of the API, including DirectX versions) ?
In fact Microsoft does push new functionalities with IE, or with
DirectX, or with the MSVC RTL libraries, or with DotNet deployment
kits. I may accept the fact that Microsoft conditions these new
functionalities to a separate "Genuine Windows" licence check, and to
the explicit visit of a special update page and acceptation of the
licence, just like it happens with IE major releases or when they buy
a game that requires a newer DirectX version or DotNet version.
OK, Windows XP is no longer serviced to users, but it is still
serviced to OEM VARs that have maintained a support for it for their
own products deployed.
But Vista is still serviced, and Uniscribe has been enhanced with
Windows Seven to support more scripts and languages... that
immediately started to be much better supported on the Internet with
new contents that would not have found their market only with their
support in Firefox, Opera, Safari or Chrome.
Without these updates to Uniscribe, even IE8 or the next coming IE9
will not be able to render those scripts correctly in Vista like they
do in Windows Seven.
A good question is why doesn't Microsoft provide distribution
licencing to application developers? Isn't there any people or
companies asking for it through their paid support ?
On Linux, adding support for new locales, or scripts, or codepage
conversion tables, can be made by anyone and does not require any
update of the kernel. Due to these restrictions, developers need to
use alternate rendering engines, and Uniscribe is best seen as a
limiting factor for correct internationalization on Windows.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 05 2010 - 13:23:41 CST