My wishlist for PureBasic 4.50

IceSoft · Post by **IceSoft** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:06 am

Yes I know...this kind of wishes comes always with each next PureBasic version.
But I think this wishlist is completly different: My wishlist is completely empty.

I want only an update of all used 'external libraries.
e.g.: PCRE (7.1 ->7.9), Pelles C(5.00.1 -> 6.0 RC3 is released), etc.

And a short statement which say:
Older Windows version (Win95/98/Me/2000/NT) will be no longer supported with PB 4.50 . Use PB 4.4x for this OS versions.
=> Only with this statement PureBasic can update all used libraries.

DoubleDutch · Post by **DoubleDutch** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:44 am

And a short statement which say:
Older Windows version (Win95/98/Me/2000/NT) will be no longer supported with PB 4.50 . Use PB 4.4x for this OS versions.
=> Only with this statement PureBasic can update all used libraries.

Ouch!

Kaeru Gaman · Post by **Kaeru Gaman** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:32 am

I think cutting out older Windows versions would be counterproductive for PureBasic.

there are a lot of services running on NT, 98 or 2000 worldwide, and it makes PB a handy tool to be able to cope with these versions.
(there are also some on DOS, but since this is 16bit it's surely not supported by PB - sad enough)

I can understand the wish to support newest XML and such...
but what is the use of "PellesC"-lib? what is it needed for?

and I don't think it's necessary to no longer support 2000 to be able to use newer libs, or did I miss something?

DoubleDutch · Post by **DoubleDutch** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:52 am

Maybe a 'legacy' switch that would load the 9x/2k/nt older libs? Default on...

IceSoft · Post by **IceSoft** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:06 pm

Hey Guys,
What is your problem?

The only one what I say is:
PureBasic 4.50 and higher should no longer support some outdated OS.

If you want to write a tool/service/game/ for this outdated OS:
-> use 4.4x.
Bugfixes can be also made (we have the 'x' for this x can be 1 or higher)

That is all.

Fluid Byte · Post by **Fluid Byte** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:11 pm

The oldest OS which is still used is 2000 and only has a market share of like 2%. Anything behind XP should really be scraped.

srod · Post by **srod** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:16 pm

Aye anyone still using Win 9x / ME etc. deserve all that they get...... and should be taken out and shot!

IceSoft · Post by **IceSoft** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:23 pm

srod wrote:Aye anyone still using Win 9x / ME etc. deserve all that they get...... and should be taken out and shot!

Only for understanding:
PureBasic was also made for Amiga OS.
...where is the Amiga 4.31 PureBasic version?
You see...it is no longer supported. And no people is crying.
Try it also with PB4.50...you will see not so much people will be crying here too. They are happy with the 4.4x

Kaeru Gaman · Post by **Kaeru Gaman** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:50 pm

omg you can't compare THAT

the first Amiga came out when DOS 3.1 was the current PC System.
the development of the Amiga was terminated four years before Win2000 was released.

so, if you take this as example, wait another ten years before terminating PureBasic for Win2000.

DoubleDutch wrote:Maybe a 'legacy' switch that would load the 9x/2k/nt older libs? Default on...

sounds like a constructive suggestion.

ts-soft · Post by **ts-soft** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:04 pm

Most Windows software does not support Win9x any more and I see no reason why PB this should act.

IceSoft · Post by **IceSoft** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:08 pm

Kaeru Gaman wrote:so, if you take this as example, wait another ten years before terminating PureBasic for Win2000.

Oh dear.
Nothing is terminated. Use PB4.4x and all what you can to today with PB can be to on the future togther with PB and your Win2000.
I never say: Terminate the support for old Windows OSes.
I say only: PB4.50 should use the latest version of each used third party libaries. If your old OS is working with this PB version so you can use it of course.
BUT: It is no longer an official PB release which have to be supporting your old OS.

PMV · Post by **PMV** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:07 pm

:roll:

There is no reason, why fred will not implement the new stabel Pelles C ...
because Pelles C has dropped his support for 9x and ME since
5.00.1

Windows 9X is no longer supported as a build environment, and special handling for that environment has been removed (except in the C runtime; compiled programs should still run on Windows 9X).

but not the support as target plattforms.

I don't know, which new feature/ bugfix ... you want to use, but i don't
think, that fred should implement all beta-versions of any external lib. But
till PB 4.50 ... there could be a stable Pelles C 6.5

Older Windows version (Win95/98/Me/2000/NT) will be no longer supported with PB 4.50 . Use PB 4.4x for this OS versions.
=> Only with this statement PureBasic can update all used libraries.

I don't think so

MFG PMV

naw · Post by **naw** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:32 pm

I'm ambivolent about dropping W95 / WNT, but if this helps the discussion, I perform about 20 Server Consolidation studies a year for anything between 50 and 2-3000 servers. So I reckon I've looked at peoples server inventorys totalling maybe 100,000 servers. These are mostly Windows (say 80%) but in the last 3 years, I came across 1 Windows95 machine (and that was a legacy Tape Controller) and maybe a couple of dozen WNT machines. There's still quite a lot of W2000 out there - but I'm guessing maybe 5 or 6%. Not much more.

Looking at
my Web Site stats from Google Analytics

Code: Select all

1. 	WXP 	 	 	 	68% 	
2. 	Vista  		 	28% 	
3. 	Server 2003		2% 	
4. 	2000 		 	2% 	
5. 	98 			 	.5% 	
6. 	NT 	  	 	 	.5%

Kaeru Gaman · Post by **Kaeru Gaman** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:51 pm

a website statistics is not really a point there.
e.g. my second machine runs on win2000, but it is not connected to the internet and will never browse websites.

All around the world small companies still run part of their systems with win2000, because upgrade to XP is too expensive.
and programming small tools for small offices is definitely within PureBasic's target group.

We have customers in South America, Africa and the Pacific Islands,
not everybody in the world live in the first world industrial states and have new machines with new OSs...

IceSoft · Post by **IceSoft** » Mon Jul 27, 2009 6:15 pm

Kaeru Gaman wrote:a website statistics is not really a point there.
e.g. my second machine runs on win2000, but it is not connected to the internet and will never browse websites.

All around the world small companies still run part of their systems with win2000, because upgrade to XP is too expensive.
and programming small tools for small offices is definitely within PureBasic's target group.

We have customers in South America, Africa and the Pacific Islands,
not everybody in the world live in the first world industrial states and have new machines with new OSs...

Sweet...but this have nothing to do with PureBasic.
So why you told us such information?...we all know it... and you have forgotten the big asia

I have also a Win98 installation on an old laptop.
But I will never use PureBasic on it.

Hold in mind:
A discussion how much Win95/98/Me/NT/Win2000 is still installed on the world is not a basis for an argument to support it with PureBasic 4.50.