LordRaptor
Member
Not really. The Win32 API is an utter mess representing the accumulation of of 20+ years of functions, many of which are obselete or needlessly complex. Replacing that with a more rational API is a good idea.
I mean.... it clearly is highly debatable, because a page of debate just emanated from it.
If you want to argue that Win32 is soooooo broken we gotta get rid of it because its so filled with cruft from 20 years of improvements and real world field testing, my response is; so what?
Are desktop PCs so limited in CPU cycles, memory and storage space that what amounts to - at absolute hypothetical worst - a few hundred K of unnecessary includes going to 'break the bank' for anyone developing for Windows?
Are people developing for embedded devices where this might be an issue ever going to be buying Windows licences for their Smart Thermostats / Smart Fridges / Smart Televisions on a per unit basis in a world where Linux exists?
The problem with arguing for UWA - even at a conceptual level - is that it takes for granted the argument that Win32 is so busted and broke ass that literally anything would be an improvement, no matter how less functional that replacement might be, which is clearly operating under a logical fallacy that because Win32 is not perfect that it is irredeemably unfit for use, despite abundant real world evidence that - in fact - Win32 is fine.
Not perfect, but fine.
In much the same way you can point at Democracy as being broken, to paraphrase Churchill, its still better than any existing alternative.