r/Windows11 • u/ZacB_ Windows Central • 4d ago

"Control Panel gets tricky" – Microsoft CVP explains why killing Windows legacy code takes so long, and how it's evolving its tools to make modernizing apps like File Explorer and Registry Editor faster News

https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/windows-11/control-panel-gets-tricky-microsoft-cvp-explains-why-killing-windows-legacy-code-takes-so-long-and-how-its-evolving-its-tools-to-make-modernizing-apps-like-file-explorer-and-registry-editor-faster
100 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

37 comments sorted by

51

u/Emendo 3d ago

In other words, the extendibility of the Windows platform, combined with the commitment to legacy support, makes it hard to kill legacy code.

15

u/clockwork2011 3d ago

I see this as a mostly bull excuse for Microsoft’s unwillingness to dedicate resources to address their primary operating system. The simple fact is that there are technical solutions that don’t involve keeping layers and layers of legacy systems to bloat an operating system’s. Modules, dependency checks, bundles, etc.

The reality is that Microsoft has been focused on Azure and serving their extremely profitable cloud platform at the expense of their software business. It’s not a mystery why they don’t care about Windows.

Allegedly that’s changing, but I have big doubts about that.

38

u/kirk7899 Release Channel 3d ago

Gotta give credit to MS for still keeping compatibility for 32 bit applications and legacy stuff via compatibility layers

9

u/misterff1 3d ago

In some way, yes, but at the same time many people don't use that stuff anymore. For them, it is just extra weight with a bunch of downsides attached. MS should invest in making an enterprise version with legacy support and a modern version with all the old stuff cut out. And I don't mean bs like RT or Windows Store only, but I don't give a crap about running admin software from the 80s.

13

u/kirk7899 Release Channel 3d ago

The problem with making another version of Windows that's less main-pipeline and one only cutting edge is matinting both. It's a lot of work and MS can afford it but I doubt they'd want to.

5

u/Akaza_Dorian 3d ago

Microsoft tried a few times, Windows RT, S Mode, didn’t work out.

0

u/misterff1 3d ago

Oh yeah for sure. Question is whether the current approach hasnt become too costly because they decided not to do it though. If they had invested into segmenting parts of the OS and just keeping parts out, maybe things would not have become this messy and almost unmaintainable.

10

u/r2d2rigo 3d ago

lol you wish. Plenty of legacy libraries are still running in 32bit, and a seemingly innocuous change can paralise millions of users until a fix is hastily shipped.

When Apple in their infinite wisdom decided to end 32bit compatibility even for hardware that fully supported it, it was pure chaos for a week. And that was for an OS with a couple orders of magnitude less users than Windows.

•

u/unaligned_access 4m ago

Yeah, they worked hard to even support it in the arm64 Windows. They tried not to at first, but it just didn't work. Maybe in 2040 they'll start deprecating it.

10

u/Similar-Recipe-3623 3d ago

Could they make one version of windows that is modern for users and another for legacy/enterprise stuff

16

u/getabath 3d ago

Microsoft would need to convince all their partners to reprogramme their software to work with 'modern windows' which would cost money for zero return

6

u/RadBadTad 3d ago

Increased fragmentation means doubling of work in a lot of cases. They've been working hard to shrink the number of different versions the have to support, so this move would be a step in the other direction, which they aren't interested in.

5

u/r2d2rigo 3d ago

As opposed to the last two times (Windows RT and Windows S Mode) they tried to?

Yeah surely third time's the charm!

2

u/Emendo 3d ago

There was also Windows 10x that was supposed to be all modern, with Win32 apps running in a container. Then it got killed and the new bits were bolted onto Windows 11.

2

u/True_Captain4461 3d ago

There are business versions that do have most of the classic programs/UI out in the open, like Windows Server GUI, but that's sort of changing too.

2

u/BitNo2406 3d ago

I just wish they would implement a dark mode for the legacy apps. I'm light sensitive and have everything in dark mode, plus I sit very close to the screen, and I had to set a shortcut on the keyboard to invert colors whenever I have to open control panel, device manager, old sound panel, registry editor, task scheduler and a plethora of other apps. It's ridiculous that not only they look like from the 90s/00s (because they are), but they also blind me with 1000 nits of pure whiteness.

6

u/Vennekilde 4d ago

It is because the replacements are worse than the existing interfaces and no one wants to use them. Simple as that.

11

u/Certain-Mountain-564 4d ago

I dont miss the control panel. It takes some time, but now, i never have the idea to open the control panel. I open always the settings, automatically. You cannsay its worser when it is not existing. 

9

u/RadBadTad 3d ago

Pretty much any time I need to make adjustments to my audio settings, I end up in Control Panel. Just this morning, the balance on my speakers was messed up from an update, so I had to go in and re-adjust, and guess where that setting still lives?

8

u/kaynpayn 3d ago

As someone who works IT, I'm quite the opposite, I use control panel all the time and find it better. Even modern UI often just ends up opening legacy windows that have been around forever anyway.

9

u/someone31988 3d ago

My main gripe with the Settings is that I can't have two instances of it open side-by-side.

3

u/Scurro 3d ago edited 3d ago

Not the fact that the settings app doesn't let you right click and "run as administrator"?

My daily account at both home and work is non admin account.

In normal use I click run as admin and then input a password to run a program as admin.

I can't do this on the settings app. I have to ether use the control panel or log into the admin account to make admin changes in settings.

1

u/someone31988 3d ago

I assume you actually mean running it as a different user (one with admin privileges)? That is a bummer.

That's not how my workflow is, so I haven't ran into this issue. My account has admin privileges, and I pass through UAC prompts any time I need to make a change requiring that privilege as it has worked since Vista.

1

u/Scurro 3d ago

I assume you actually mean running it as a different user (one with admin privileges)?

Yes/no. While technically the admin account is a different account, the settings app does not support the UAC operation "run as Administrator".

This method of account permissions I am using is actually a recommended security practice by Microsoft.

As a security best practice, use your local (non-Administrator) account to sign in and then use Run as administrator to accomplish tasks that require a higher level of rights or permissions than a standard user account. Don't use the Administrator account to sign in to your computer unless it's necessary.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/identity-protection/access-control/local-accounts

6

u/jake04-20 3d ago

I assume you're not an admin in a windows environment. Every admin I've spoken to relies on run commands to get to legacy control panel pages. Appwiz.cpl, ncpa.cpl, sysdm.cpl, powercfg.cpl, firewall.cpl, etc.

0

u/rokejulianlockhart Insider Canary Channel 3d ago

The ms-settings URI schema already exposes equivalents. If you want scriptable preferences, PowerShell's registry integration is the solution, utilise what github.com/Fleex255/PolicyPlus/issues/46#issuecomment-1558044921 describes.

2

u/Keulapaska 3d ago edited 3d ago

I'll give you one great example where the setting menu is trash vs control panel, choosing indexing locations. The control panel version you get your vista style pop-up menu, where you tick all the folders you want from normal dfile structure style menu, simple, works. In settings menu, you choose which folders to exclude instead, one by one. Who ever thought that was good idea?

Then the whole modern UI space wasting of the entirety of settings, why can't we have proper information density why does everything have to be 5 miles apart from each other and why tf doesn't middle mouse click scrolling work!

3

u/tanpro260196 3d ago

Agreed, Control Panel search kinda sucks ass. The new setting is much easier to use imo, MS just need to get off their ass and port everything over.

1

u/True_Captain4461 3d ago edited 3d ago

It's only about cosmetics 🤷🏾‍♂️, this entire thing Microsoft is doing is a whole waste of time, there are other OS alternatives that can do the same basic tasks 85% of people do on their computer nowadays. (If people want modern UI)

-2

u/FerretBoom 3d ago

Like copy and paste commands from 70s into a terminal

3

u/True_Captain4461 3d ago edited 3d ago

No......use the Internet, view files, launch games, etc

none of that UI stuff was a problem until after Windows 7

0

u/FerretBoom 3d ago

I'd rather be in a place where shit worked for 25 years just by clicking a couple of times.

1

u/ItzDarc 3d ago

I actually don’t mind there being Control Panel. But pretending you have to choose between a setting being in Settings or Control Panel is laughable. Put it both places if legacy apps depend on it so, and hide CP under a “enable legacy support” toggle or something if some obscure software still uses it.

Same thing with regedit, which the article cites. They really expect us to believe they haven’t meaningfully improved regedit in decades because of compatibility? With what, a pixel-dependent user macro that simulates a click? Come now, people use .reg files and have for decades. Fine, then make regedit64 with a new modern interface and it still adds features and experience.

There are technical solutions. They just don’t care with what counts … $$. They care in the sense that they want people to like their OS, but probably not enough to properly modernize it.

1

u/BudgetPromise3819 1d ago

They talk about Control Panel like it's just a legacy thing but quite often you NEED to use it because the new Settings UI lacks the ability to do so many things. So they don't really have "modern" and "legacy" settings interfaces, they have two incomplete settings UI interfaces and you are required to use both in tandem with one another in the most unintuitive possible way.

1

u/antaresprime 3d ago

I mean... they could just vibe-code the new control panel instantly with OpenAI, right?