Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
WinXP is officially dead!
40hz:
What I don't understand is 3rd party developers that make their money off supporting their apps running on whatever platforms their customers are using. If there are still a large chunk of people running XP, why turn them away from buying and using your software, by not supporting XP? Flushing all that cash down the toilet is kind of self-defeating, don't you think?
-rgdot (June 11, 2014, 08:24 AM)
--- End quote ---
-app103 (June 11, 2014, 10:20 AM)
--- End quote ---
For a small indy developer, I think it comes down to accepting XP is now an orphan which will remain running until the inevitable major malware attack finally renders it unsafe to use under any circumstances. At which point, if the small dev doesn't have a product ready for the new version of Windows, they're out of business. And since development resources are limited it's smarter, in the long run, to start developing now for the future rather than hoping to continue to mine the past for as long as possible.
For big developers and those (antimalware app devs for example) who need access to proprietary internal information that goes beyond what an MSDN subscription will get you - or who need a friendly "heads-up" about planned (but non-publicized) changes - it's not a good idea to appear to be working at cross purposes to Microsoft. You could get taken off distribution for all the inside info (i.e the type of detail you usually need an invite and a signed non-disclosure agreement to get access to) that big devs rely on for their own product development efforts. If Microsoft says XP is over - then it's over as far as these guys are concerned.
wraith808:
^ As usual, you said it much more elegantly than I. ;D :Thmbsup: +1
TaoPhoenix:
I meant I wouldn't blame MS and others for not wanting to support XP anymore. No matter how good or bad 7 or 8.
-rgdot (June 11, 2014, 08:24 AM)
--- End quote ---
I can understand Microsoft not wanting to support it, since they are not going to make any more money from XP if they do or don't, so they might as well not, and push XP users into upgrading and putting more money in their pockets. That does make sense.
What I don't understand is 3rd party developers that make their money off supporting their apps running on whatever platforms their customers are using. If there are still a large chunk of people running XP, why turn them away from buying and using your software, by not supporting XP? Flushing all that cash down the toilet is kind of self-defeating, don't you think?
-app103 (June 11, 2014, 10:20 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well I dunno if it's cash, I don't have many "subscriptions" going. But for me it's an Ill Will thing. I don't really feel I'm in any shape to upgrade right now. So I just wish the devs would roll out their updates to XP as well. A bunch of them have.
TaoPhoenix:
...
For a small indy developer, I think it comes down to accepting XP is now an orphan which will remain running until the inevitable major malware attack finally renders it unsafe to use under any circumstances. ...
...it's not a good idea to appear to be working at cross purposes to Microsoft. You could get taken off distribution for all the inside info (i.e the type of detail you usually need an invite and a signed non-disclosure agreement to get access to) that big devs rely on for their own product development efforts. If Microsoft says XP is over - then it's over as far as these guys are concerned.
-40hz (June 11, 2014, 12:41 PM)
--- End quote ---
And I daresay I am part of the problem who will continue to use XP even after major malware attacks! Just because I think this is a special time in computing history. The OS gang seems to want to flip their OS's really fast - MS catching up to Apple and Linux in that respect. Other than that I am a laggard, the basic run of XP feels about right to me - nice and steady. This "We'll stop supporting an OS after about four or fewer years" really makes me nervous!
This comment surprised me, and it's why I gave out one of my MouserBucks to 40hz just now. I get it if devs are just playing simple economics; while it doesn't make me happy, at least chapter 3 of the economics text explains it. And a few of the devs of my favorite apps at least promise to try to support it for a couple more years.
It's a whole other level of sinister if MS decides to get vicious and start playing "leverage games". Fine, stop supporting the OS for your own reasons, but don't turn around and start pressuring the devs of apps with information access blackmail!!
:o
app103:
At which point, if the small dev doesn't have a product ready for the new version of Windows, they're out of business.
-40hz (June 11, 2014, 12:41 PM)
--- End quote ---
Nobody ever said to ignore the newer OSs in favor of the old, and not develop for them. That would be nuts! But if someone like mouser can develop software that works on old unsupported versions of Windows, as well as the latest, why can't others do the same?
I guess my gripe goes back to my old 9x days, when it became increasingly hard to find versions of software that worked with it, 3 years before MS retired it. And I am not even talking about security software...I am talking about ordinary stuff, some of which the latest version would run quite well on 9x, but the developer decided to block installs on those OSs.
There was no excuse for it that I could see, till I contacted a developer once to ask him and was introduced to nasty the world of OS bigotry. It happened to be a freeware app, and the developer said some really nasty stuff to me, equating my value as a human being to the OS I was running. One of the things he told me was that my OS was for poor people and he doesn't develop (freeware) for people that can't afford to pay. :huh:
In his world, the cool people spit on 9x users (and others), to feel good about themselves. These are the same kind of people that did nasty things to IE6 users, with their obnoxious banners telling them to install a "real" browser, even when their sites worked perfectly well in IE6. And the same kind of people that auto-banned anyone with an AOL IP address from their chat rooms or forums, with the reason of "get a real ISP".
I am just wondering exactly when it will become cool to do the same to XP users. Just because I only own 1 machine that still runs XP and have no intentions on booting it up unless it's an extreme emergency, doesn't mean that I will condone the kind of uncalled for OS bigotry that XP users will soon face. It will still bring out the angry warrior in me, when I see it. (if you have a legitimate reason for not supporting XP, then ok, but I won't tolerate OS bigotry)
In other words, please don't make me have to brush the thick layer of dust off my old Snailware blog and add a Wall of Shame page for the names of OS bigots. I would like to leave that blog dormant, for as long as possible.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version