| When you get a new computer, you'll want to install | | | | witholder programs, it may not. If your older programs |
| yourfavorite software and get everything running just | | | | won't runwell enough to suit your needs, you may be |
| the way youwant it to. Then you'll likely add some new | | | | forced to upgrade tolater versions. Unfortunately, this |
| stuff, possibly over a period of the next couple of | | | | may not solve the problem if the older DLL is still in |
| months. Beyond this point,hesitate to add more. Here's | | | | use. |
| why. | | | | A Horror Story |
| Shared Library Files | | | | I personally do not install upgrades unless literally forced |
| Many software firms use DLL (Dynamic Linked | | | | to do so. (And I do not install new software except |
| Libraries) indeveloping programs. They are kind of like | | | | when absolutely required.) Some time back while using |
| a tool box from whichthe programmer chooses the | | | | an earlier version of IE, I was forced to upgrade. The |
| one needed. Even though the programbeing created | | | | results were disastrous. |
| may need only a couple of "tools" from this DLL,using | | | | I first tried upgrading IE to the latest version, 5.5. But I |
| them saves programming time, which is expensive. | | | | never could get it to run. I dropped back to version 5.1, |
| This is a safe and efficient procedure, for the code in | | | | which ran, but unpredictably. |
| the library is well tested and will run reliably. | | | | My system became unstable. Lots of memory |
| Other software developers use the same library. | | | | collisions (GPFs)that crashed some program maybe |
| Some DLLsare used in many programs. For you, this | | | | two dozen times a day. Even IEwas not running |
| means less disk spacerequired on your system, for | | | | properly and became the program most likely tocrash. |
| only one copy of the library isneeded. | | | | Other stuff was happening that required restarting |
| You also benefit in that you pay less for the software | | | | thecomputer 5-6 times each day. If you have been |
| and it runs reliably. It's hard to see anything negative in | | | | there, you knowhow much this slows you down. |
| such a procedure. Or in software using any other | | | | Further, several of the programs I use routinely, such |
| shared procedures.For example, you might have | | | | asEudora, began failing with troubling regularity. And |
| several programs that use a common routine that is | | | | two wouldno longer run at all. |
| part of connecting your system to the Web over a | | | | My only option was to retire a perfectly good |
| phone line. | | | | computer lessthan two years old and buy a new one. |
| All About Versions | | | | Then install all thelatest software all at once. This |
| Most companies developing software will use the | | | | meant chucking some stuff I liked, then hunting up |
| latestversion of a DLL. It contains changes and | | | | replacements. Both time consuming and tedious. |
| enhancements over earlier ones. Thus differences | | | | So What Went Wrong? |
| exist between them. | | | | I have no idea, really. But the most likely cause of |
| This is true of different versions of other software. | | | | thisfailure was in overwriting one or more DLLs with |
| Thelatest version of IE (Internet Explorer), for example, | | | | later versionsrequired by IE that my other software |
| containschanges and enhancements over the previous | | | | could not handle. That is,my other programs were |
| one. Migrating from the current version to the latest, | | | | designed to run on the previous versions,not the latest. |
| can mean installing whatamounts to almost a new | | | | What This Means To You |
| program. | | | | If you are a casual user of your computer, and load |
| The Catch In Upgrading Or Installing Software | | | | upsomething new about once a month, the chances |
| When you install an upgrade or a new piece of | | | | are you will neverface the problem described above. |
| software, anyDLLs used will also be installed. Windows | | | | The worst that is likely tohappen is that as new |
| makes the rules inthis. An older version of a DLL is not | | | | software is added, older programs do notrun in quite |
| allowed to overwrite alater one. But a newer one IS | | | | the same way. |
| allowed to overwrite an older one. Here's how things | | | | If you are a serious computer user, and depend upon |
| can go wrong. | | | | one as an integral part of your business, take the |
| Suppose you have a program call SPLAT, another | | | | position you won'tupgrade or install new software |
| called SPRANG,and a third call SPUNK. Suppose they | | | | unless you are absolutely forcedto do so. |
| all use a DLL called STUFF. If you upgrade SPUNK, | | | | My tale is not an isolated case. All heavy users |
| and the upgrade includes a new version ofSTUFF, | | | | ofcontemporary PCs have had this experience, even |
| then quite suddenly SPLAT and SPRANG may not | | | | if not quite so severe. |
| run properly. That is, they are now forced to use a | | | | If you need a program, by all means install it and go. |
| version of STUFF theprogrammer had not planed for. | | | | But be hesitant in playing the game, "I think I'll try this." |
| While it's quite likely a new DLL will run just fine | | | | Why risk it? |