Remember when you are renting other peoples computers they can and will change the terms for their benefit. They own it. You dont. You rent it.

IoT really comes into its own space though when you pair it up with something that is a real pain to get to. Think somewhere you have to have a crainlift and a 4 hour drive just to touch the 20 year old computer something is hooked up to. Or basically anywhere that takes hours to get to. The space my company typically targeted was high rise air con companies. Or companies where the customer would service out any sort of PLC work to a 3rd party. At that point the savings of having to roll a guy out there vs looking on a computer has the thing pay for itself in 1-2 trips. Also the ability to show up on site with the correct parts. That alone was a huge savings.

IoT's big issues is you have to beat many things that are already dead simple to do.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/reference/subsys...

Pretty sure it just changes out what the default function that is called before winmain. So you probably could just switch out the first function called (dont remember the cli option for that).

Most of the time you just picked the right type at project creation so it would feed correctly into the project solution which would set the right flags on build. But technically you could pick the most basic one and do it all yourself.

With some of them it was dead easy and you can do it on window creation.

Others you had to hook it out by playing with the window params (SetWindowLong) and getting the underlying control and then changing it.

Some controls had their own bespoke way where you would send messages to the control then it would take care of it.

Some you would have to iterate over the control list that window controlled and change it.

In some cases it was just such a pain you were better off making your own custom control window that was just a mashup of other controls that you could control.

It was one part experimentation and one part reading the docs (if the control had it). Now if it was a built in windows control you were playing with. You had to take on the risk on windows version update the customization you did would break if you did non documented things.

Yeah that was my memory of doing this stuff. You basically just added what you wanted to the case statement (or other hooks depending on your framework). Then dump the rest onto the default proc. The default 'wizards' usually made the standard petzold structure for you and you didnt even really have to think much about it. Now if you were doing everything by yourself just make sure you read the docs and make sure you call the default in the right cases.

However, I do seem at least 2 downsides to this method.

Number one it is at least 2x the memory. That has for a decently long time been a large cost of a computer. But I could see some people saying 'whatever buy 8x'.

The second is data coherency. In a read only env this would work very nicely. In a write env this would be 2x the writes and you are going to have to wait for them to all work or somehow mark them as not ready on the next read group. Now it would be OK if the read of that page was some period of time after the write. But a different place where things could stall out.

Really liked her vid. She explained it very nicely. She exudes that sense of joy I used to have about this field.

Using the session manager that is one I used to use. But backed away from. I use a lot of tools to keep me on task and not wander off into random things.

For me it is about attention and focus. You seem to have a very different pattern than what I use. ctrl-w and alt-left arrow are my buddies.

MS ended up where it was at because there was basically NO upgrade path between the few different GUI frameworks they had. They broke the whole thing in 2002 when they decided .NET was the way.

You had to basically retool your whole GUI for whatever they were pushing at the time. Then they basically abandoned win32 GUI items and put them in mothballs. Then change their minds every other year.

No sane person is going to pick that model of building an application. So the applications kinda stagnated at whatever GUI level they came into being with. No one wanted to touch it. If I am doing that why am I sticking with windows? I can get the same terrible effect on the web/mobile and have a better reach.

Even their flagship application windows is all over the place. If you click on the right thing you can get GUI's that date back to windows95. Or maybe you might get a whitespaced out latest design. It is all over the place. It has been 10 years at this point. They should have that dialed in years ago.

I do not think Google will be able to pay attention long enough to have a stable GUI. Apple maybe. As for MS you can see it from the outside there are several different competing groups all failing at it.

MS needs another 'service pack 2' moment. Where they focus on cleaning up the mess they have. Clean up the GUI. Fix the speed items. Fixup the out of the box experience (should not take 4gig of used memory just to start up). Clean up the mountain of weird bug quirks.

It got ridiculous pretty quickly. The overhead to spam was so low as the protocol was designed to be low friction for posting. The system then took care of carrying the payload everywhere in a reasonable time. People fought back with filters and kill lists. But was not really enough.

Once the ISPs decided they did not want the added cost of running the servers usenet tanked pretty quick. Still alive here and there. Not even close to what it could have been or even was.

Surprised someone has not made a mastadon to usenet transfer protocol. It almost fits both projects goals.

It was at win8 where everyone just noped out and just started doing whatever they wanted. XP/2000 was the last era where anyone really cared.