Windows When operating systems first came into our hands, we all, as far as we understand, tinkered with every point. Some of us then went to turn on their music your media player He spent hours on his hypnotic videos. Some of us have also spent hours tracing the paths of the pipes in the screensaver.

In this way, each new operating system has given us different features to mess with. Introduced with Windows Vista and reaching its greatest popularity in Windows 7 desktop gadgets was one of these features. So why couldn’t we see them in later operating systems?

Microsoft has issued an official statement regarding this issue.

In the aforementioned statement, the company said that support for the vehicle gallery has ended and that this security issues stated it was due to At the end of the statementthat attackers can control your computer through both tools” like “can change the behavior of vehicleshe added.

These tools too ActiveX was based. ActiveX is Microsoft’s object-oriented program that used to work with the Internet. computer programming was the remedy. Of course there is no need to confuse. You just need to know that the tools in question work on ActiveX.

So was ActiveX safe?

Microsoft for ActiveX based applications whether they are reliable It showed a certificate showing it. However, the problems encountered with the installation of the non-certified application were left to the responsibility of the user. This one End User It’s not hard to guess that it didn’t get much response from the side.

According to Mark Phaedrus, a software developer at Microsoft, most of the tools are the threatening part. connected to ActiveX it was. For this reason, it was possible to access ActiveX controls through the tools (or at least there were vulnerabilities that made this possible). Due to the vulnerabilities of ActiveX,’ActiveX attacksstarted to become popular.

There was only one way left, both to solve this problem and to preserve the survival of the vehicles.

Because, according to Phædrus, it was almost impossible to close the loopholes in the system. With that in mind, we can use tools more reliably without being ActiveX-based to solve the problem. redevelopment had to. So was it worth it?

According to Phædrus, the answer is no, for two reasons.

Let’s start with the simplest. It will be like a hard pill to swallow, but ‘these tools hardly are not considered functional‘. You didn’t need a clock placed on the right, because you only had to look at the bottom right to find out the time. The same was true of the calendar.

Apart from this, while there are a few functional tools (such as performance monitoring), they are too many. system resource complained about its use.

And here’s the other reason: Microsoft already spent all its resources on Windows 8.

Wikipedia

In Windows 8, we had a Start screen and a Desktop screen. And Microsoft, its developers, made popular with Windows 10. Universal Windows platform He tried to direct. We’ve seen the first steps of this on Windows 8’s Metro-style Start screen and on Windows Phone models. But the return was not so good.

However, in this process, applications are generally added to the new operating system. tried to transfer. However, these tools, which are normally placed on the free right part of the desktop, would not be in focus. because Windows 8With , Microsoft started focusing on mobile. In addition, a feature that allows applications to occupy part of the screen was almost able to close the gap between the tools.

The use of split screen in current operating systems was slightly more prominent in Windows 8.

It is problematic in terms of security, it will take a lot of work to adapt to the new operating system, and there is already a lot no fans perpetuating a trait wasn’t worth much either, as Phaedrus said.

So we can say that we have said goodbye to the tools that we keep on the desktop, even if we don’t use them, because of Microsoft’s ideals. Universal Windows Platform was not very successful, but still the company should be congratulated for such a bold breakthrough.

• sources: Mark Phædrus, Microsoft