HI, On 2 August 2012 18:38, Reinier Olislagers <[email protected]> wrote: > Ehmm.. I'm trying to contain myself, but WHY does Lazarus 1 and 1+ even > support Win9x/ME anymore?
Because not everybody feels the need to "fix" what isn't broken. Why must we always pay the Microsoft-tax simply because Microsoft thinks there latest crapware is better that the previous one - and we all know that isn't always true (Vista anyone?). > Speaking for myself, after submitting a patch, I really don't want to be > told that Win9x/ME does things differently and that I should correct my > patch to incorporate support. Welcome to the world of programmers. If my clients still run Windows 98, I can't force them to pay a fortune to Microsoft for a new OS, and force them to upgrade all there PC's because the latest OS doesn't run on a Win98 spec'ed PC. And to answer your earlier question, our clients put together has over 2000+ PC's still running Win98. Would you like to tell them they must all instantly upgrade (and pay a fortune) when those systems still run perfectly for there purpose? Asking Microsoft, they will obviously tell you NOBODY is still using Win95 or Win98 - but in reality it is quite different. -- Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://fpgui.sourceforge.net -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
