[bsaul]

I think i'd rather be sure my code behave like it did when i compiled it over having unexpected side effets at each os release. If all it takes to get the new features is recompile & deploy a new version of my code, i'm fine with it.

The only exception is security.

[jwells89]

On the other hand, from a user perspective who knows when that recompile will happen in the case of devs who are less attentive, too busy, or only doing this app thing as a side hobby.

[bee_rider]

From the user point of view, the new functionality is usually helpful.

[bsaul]

Sure, but the only case i see it really useful is for unmaintained apps. At which point you can be sure the app is going to break no matter what in a not distant future.

[Linux-Fan]

One of the major benefits of software is that you do _not_ need to re-create it if it already exists and solves your problem.

An unmaintained app that solves a specific problem is never going to break by itself “in a not distant future”. Only if its environment changes so much that it cannot be run anymore (including security fixes missing in the app) does this happen.

I recall a firm making good money while using their internally custom-built software for MS DOS with no way to change it whatsoever -- the software firm that wrote it was probably already long out of business, source code was not available -- and that was in 2019 which was already long past the days of MS DOS.

I think it is worthwhile for OSes and other core software infrastructure to support running even unmaintained apps as much as possible because it reduces the need to rewrite (or overhaul) programs only due to a lack of maintainance for the existent one.

Not caring about this is IMHO accepting to waste a huge portion of the advantages that software gives us compared to other technology (software by itself never breaks from physical defects or continuous use, does not stain, etc.).