I presume that Chromium decided to support Windows 2000 when the project started in 2006. The reasons may be:
(1) The profit is big. There were 6% Windows 2000 users in 2006. (2) The cost is small. There should not be too many differences between Windows 2000 (5.0) and Windows XP (5.1). Afterward, Chromium decided to cut out Windows 2000 when the project grew up in 2008. The reasons may be: (1) The profit is small. There were only 2% Windows 2000 users in 2008. Surely, there would be fewer users in future. Furthermore, most of these remaining users were in corporate environments that were locked-down against using chrome as a third party program. (2) The cost is big. Certain of functions need to be implemented cumbersomely for compatibility with Windows 2000. Moreover, some undocumented features of Windows 2000 lead to extra failures. For example, when initializing an impersonated thread of a restricted sandbox process, nt!ZwMapViewOfSection succeeds on Windows XP, but fails as 0xc0000022 STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED on Windows 2000. Is it right? cpu wrote: > Yes, the real reason is that there is an ongoing cost of keep that > version working including extra QA cycles for each release. In terms > of supporting a windows version with very few users we should focus > our efforts on Win7. > > But you are welcome to keep an external fork. If there is any > consolation, this was argued at length a year ago. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
