Please update Libs to VS 2010 /2011 express edition

[IceSoft]

Please update to the Visual Studio 2010 /2011 express edition with all PureBasic libraries. And of course for PureBasic too
The current used Visual Studio 2005 express edition is outdated.

[Polo]

Doesn't that lose compatibility with XP?

[IceSoft]

Doesn't that lose compatibility with XP?

VS 2010 expresion edition will work on XP.
VS 2011 expresion edition maybe not (Not clear at the moment because it is beta and lot of developer want use 2011 also on XP, so Microsoft have to think about it.)

BTW: I will test the Chipmunk4PB userlib which is developed with VS2011 on XP too.
More in a few days.

[Polo]

Alright, then it's a good idea (I guess/hope no one is using 98/me/2000)

[void]

Alright, then it's a good idea (I guess/hope no one is using 98/me/2000)

There comes a point where a deprecated platform can't be reasonably supported any longer. We're well past that time for each of those.

[Polo]

Indeed, though XP needs to be supported (many many companies still use it) hence my question. If it's supported then I can't see no reason why the libs shouldn't be updated

[Foz]

Alright, then it's a good idea (I guess/hope no one is using 98/me/2000)

There comes a point where a deprecated platform can't be reasonably supported any longer. We're well past that time for each of those.

*ahem*

At work we use .net 1.1 (can be used on machines as low at Win98).

In the last year, we have had users (customers company machines!) log in from Windows 98 (3 companies) and ME (1 company). In the company I work for there are still about 40 machines (out of 300) that still use Win 2k.

Please don't write them off just yet...

[IdeasVacuum]

Foz is right. In particular, XP is still being used by a lot of businesses, large and small. That isn't going to change overnight, even though MS will finally drop support for it, because we are talking about PCs that already do everything the business requires of them - there is no business case to change. I think the number of pre-Win7 OS in use is probably colossal - some of statistics that suggest otherwise are based on info collected from website visits, but that immediately excludes a huge chunk of business use machines that are simply not connected to the internet. Surveys of IT Administrators can be misleading too - they might say they will move on to a new OS 'within the next 6 months' but in reality they don't have the justification, nor the budget.

However, what is it that VS is going to do to upset compatibility? I think Microsoft have always done a great job of retaining legacy support, beyond any reasonable expectation - perhaps the opposite approach to some fruit that might be mentioned?

[ts-soft]

It is not only the business, the industry uses mainboard with ISA-Slots, there only Win9x Driver for ISA-IO-Cards.
You can really Buy ISA-Mainboard: http://www.adek.com/PDF/MB800v.pdf

[IceSoft]

All what you say is right. But you forget one question:
What is the reason why there is no update to a newer OS version?

The answer is clear and understandable:
It is a closed system. Hardware and Software is used for spezial stuff with it.
No one of the system wil be used to install an addiditional (newer) program.
It is a running system wich will be never changed.

Tell us your answer for this question:
What is the reason why there is no update to a newer OS version?

[rsts]

There are versions of PB which support those legacy environments (e.g. win9x). I'm against a requirement that all future versions of PB must support each/every win/linux/mac os.

[IdeasVacuum]

What is the reason why there is no update to a newer OS version?

A well-run business does not spend money on a whim. If it is to move to a newer OS, there has to be a compelling business reason to do so.

I'm against a requirement that all future versions of PB must support each/every win/linux/mac os.

I agree the legacy versions of PB can be used for legacy OS versions. I don't agree that XP is truly a legacy version yet by virtue of the fact that nearly all my customers still use it. It brings back my question - what incompatibility does using VS2010 bring to the table? If coding in C, isn't it more to do with the Microsoft APIs rather than VS itself?

No one of the system will be used to install an additional (newer) program.

No, that's not true at all - moving to a new OS is unlikely to deliver greater working efficiency and is likely to cost more in the short term because it has a learning curve and some existing apps/hardware may require upgrading. The OS is called a platform for a reason. Businesses are not overly interested in the OS providing the platform remains adequate for the software they use - because that is what affects their bottom line. So, if there is a new app that would in some way help the business make more money, then they are much more likely to invest in a new app than a new OS.

[Polo]

Basically, Windows should be supported from XP to newest. On OSX only the last 3 versions should be supported. On Linux, there are too many distributions, no idea.

[Foz]

Tell us your answer for this question:
What is the reason why there is no update to a newer OS version?

The OS and the computer to most people are one and the same - most people and businesses don't update the OS, they simply replace "the computer" when it dies.

When I joined Target Express in 2005, out of the 300 or so machines, there were only about 40-50 XP machines. Everyone was on 2000. Fast forward 2012, and the reverse has happened - there are now only 40 or so Win2k computers left, and that is entirely down to hardware failures - as computers die the new ones come in.

I suspect that by 2014, there will be no more 2000 machines left, as the machines are creaking along and it's only a matter of time before solder cracks, accidents happen, etc, and they will be replaced with Win7/8 machines, whatever is installed as the base OS from the suppliers.

The same will happen with the current XP machines, and then Vista, etc. As long as the computer does the job of running the required programs, people will simply grumble about "the new fangled mangled interface" and just get on with it.

This is truly the real success of Microsoft Windows. And this is why we still need to support older platforms until they are truly gone.

[IceSoft]

And this is why we still need to support older platforms until they are truly gone.

Do you realy write new programs for Windows98?
I belive you mix somethings here.