What am I saying???

[NewsArchive]

This has probably been asked-and-answered many times here, but as I was
clicking the "windows 8 compatibility level" on my manifest I wondered what
I was actually attesting to.

With the Vista manifest, it was obvious. There was the whole paradigm shift
of saying "I understand UAC. Don't virtualize me!"

But Windows 7 and the buffoonish Windows Ate weren't as obvious to me.

I found these links useful. Somebody else as far behind the curve as I am
might also.

Also interesting to add the Operating System Context to the CPU tab in
resmon and see who's claiming what.

jf

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh848036%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=27416

[NewsArchive]

Hi Jane,

The cool thing is that the latest SetupBuilder version is already Windows
8-aware and so it does not give you a "This program might not have
in-/uninstalled correctly" Program Compatibility Assistant (PCA) mitigation
under Windows 8.

PCA plays a significant role in application compatibility in Windows 8. The
service displays a compatibility warning window if compatibility issues have
been detected during de-/installation or program starts. The user usually
does have a choice to continue, but programs are sometimes blocked from
running as well. If that happens, users have the option to check online for
possible solutions.

All SetupBuilder 7.7 and 8.0 Preview compiled install and uninstall apps
(including the web update clients) are Win8 compliant. And the "#embed UAC
manifest..." lets you embed a Win8-aware manifest into your own application
to make it Win8-aware (to avoid PCA mitigation).

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

Friedrich, m'dear... I'm aware that SB is on top of things <G>. And have
every confidence that the fact that SB's own manifest is marked as Windows 8
compatible means that the installer is exactly that.

My question is what is the implication of asserting that my apps are Win 8
rather than Win 7 or Vista.
I wouldn't want to arbitrarily put a Win 8 manifest into something if *I*
was doing something that isn't Win 8-compatibile.

Jane

[NewsArchive]

> Friedrich, m'dear... I'm aware that SB is on top of things <G>.
> And have every confidence that the fact that SB's own manifest
> is marked as Windows 8 compatible means that the installer is
> exactly that.
>
> My question is what is the implication of asserting that my apps are
> Win 8 rather than Win 7 or Vista.
> I wouldn't want to arbitrarily put a Win 8 manifest into something if
> *I* was doing something that isn't Win 8-compatibile.

Hehehehe :-) The problem is, if you do NOT add a Win8 manifest then this
fact alone switches your app into "legacy mode" -- with unknown side effects
(e.g. PCA mitigation). Similar to a "Vista-only" manifest on Windows 7. If
the app has only a Win7 manifest tells Windows that the application does not
know anything at all about Windows 8. And bang, legacy mode is set to ON.

So you have to add a Win8 manifest to tell Windows that your application
"knows" Win8. Then test it to check if it works as expected.

BTW, the new manifest alone can make a big difference. Quite a few
customers got the PCA mitigation on a regular basis on Win8 Preview and
Final. The same apps and Win8 manifested work like a charm.

Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

And it turns out that that's the bottom line - test and see if it works <g>.

From the first link: "An app can specify multiple supported operating
system IDs. You should add a supported operating system ID if you have
tested, or are in the process of testing, the app on that operating system."

That second link/download goes into excruciating detail on which "Windows
components provide divergent behavior based on the compatibility section"...
But as you said - if it works, it works.

I do like things stated in simple terms that even a blonde can
understand....

Jane

>Then test it to check if it works as expected.


>Friedrich

[NewsArchive]

> I do like things stated in simple terms that even a blonde can
> understand....

<VBG> :-)

Friedrich