Opera 38 not installing in Windows XP
-
palikacska last edited by
Most of the old models can survive with small fixes. I have a 10-year-old computer without problems. Of course, bloated software won't run on it. However for the daily tasks it would be available with proper software. The advancement you talk about is 90% reinventing the wheel with more resource-wasting solutions and 10% real innovation. And this doesn't belong to the lounge. It belongs here because the fact that Chromium abandoned XP will force a lot of users to trash their old computers that are still functional and will be in the next 5 years.
By the way, how long will you release security and bug fixes for the 36.X branch (that is still supported under XP)?
-
blackbird71 last edited by... Hundreds of millions of working and still functional computers are becoming electronic waste because of the same attitude as yours.
The main problem for users running out-of-support OS software is that the OS maker is now longer 'fixing' it, nor providing answers to apps developer questions related to its APIs. Conversely, most users themselves are utterly incapable of writing and inserting code fixes into a Windows OS for newly-discovered vulnerabilities or changes/improvements to 'standards', both of which will only continue to occur over time.
Certainly an aging computer with old OS software is perfectly suitable for doing the same computational functions it previously has... that reflects its 'tool' aspect. But it is not necessarily capable of being taken on line as safely or comprehensively as it once was in order to network with other systems - a reality which has significant implications for the computer's 'communications' aspect, the software supporting that, and the networked terminals with which it connects, particularly websites. An unsupported OS is frozen in time, new vulnerabilities are left unremedied, and new web standards and coding techniques remain unsupported. That's a situation with far different safety and usability impacts compared with continuing to use an old car or an aging tool.
The expectation that software apps designers should devote extensive, quality time/effort to supporting an OS that is no longer supported by its own maker is simply not reasonable. The user-base represented by the obsolete OS will only rapidly diminish over time, regardless of current usage stats. Concepts that can be incorporated into apps' coding methodologies would either be restricted by supporting an old OS that itself doesn't support them, or the apps' code would necessarily have to include all manner of 'special' code blocks and code-calls just for the obsolete OS and how it needed to operate. That, in turn, would open up additional avenues to unique security vulnerabilities that would have to be headed off or otherwise be dealt with in the app.
The simple reality is that users are free to use an old, unsupported OS and/or computer for as long as they want and their computer remains suitable. However, they have no right to expect that software makers will see things the same way. For users of an unsupported OS, the harsh reality is always a coming world of fast-diminishing availability of OS-compatible apps software and increasing performance/security degradation when accessing sites in the outside world. If the unsupported OS is running on an unsupported computer, odds are that such a user's reality will also soon include a fast-growing inability to replace critical hardware elements on his system in event of failure.
-
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
And this doesn't belong to the lounge. It belongs here because the fact that Chromium abandoned XP will force a lot of users to trash their old computers that are still functional and will be in the next 5 years.
And the fact that Microsoft abandoned XP? And what about other programs that have already abandoned or will abandon XP sooner or later?
So, this discussion belongs to the Lounge. BTW, when i said that i wasn't making a suggestion.
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
Most of the old models can survive with small fixes
Right, as well as old computers also can work. However, most probably they will not be able to do what newest ones do, will not have nor be able to have the sane features and the same security. Also, those fixes may become difficult to do as spare parts stop being manufactured.
However for the daily tasks it would be available with proper software.
It may depends on what those daily tasks are.
-
lando242 last edited by
If you want to continue to use a computer incapable of running a modern version of Windows while still receiving the benefits of an up to date OS just install some flavor of Linux on it. They make a version of Opera for Linux and just about every other program made for Windows has a half way decent analog available for Linux.
-
palikacska last edited by
I don't want to receive the benefits of a recent OS. I think that both business ethics and common sense would suggest that if there are bugs and security flaws in an operating system, it's due to the negligence / mistake of developers so it must be fixed even if they don't plan to add new features to that OS. Keeping up an old OS like XP is not important because I say no to progress and I think everyone should use it. Keeping up XP would have been important because Windows 7 is full of bloated and heavy-weight components that require a lot more resources than XP. So there are a lot of (older and low-end like some Intel Atoms) hardware platforms that can't run Windows 7 the way it would give a decent user experience, but Windows XP manages to do the job well. So what does this lead to? A lot of computers that are in good standing will be trashed because the average user won't risk using an outdated OS thanks to the anti-XP propaganda all around the IT news channels.
-
lando242 last edited by
I think that both business ethics and common sense would suggest that if there are bugs and security flaws in an operating system, it's due to the negligence / mistake of developers so it must be fixed even if they don't plan to add new features to that OS
Nope. Thats like saying if a book you bought has a spelling error then its the authors/publishers responsibility to send you a replacement page every time you find one. Even if the 'spelling error' is the result of the spelling changing after the book was published.
Keeping up XP would have been important because Windows 7 is full of bloated and heavy-weight components that require a lot more resources than XP.
People said the same thing about Windows XP when comparing it to Windows 3.1. Its system requirements were much steeper.
A lot of computers that are in good standing will be trashed because the average user won't risk using an outdated OS thanks to the anti-XP propaganda all around the IT news channels.
If your car can't travel at highway speed you don't bitch and complain until they lower the speed limit so your Model T can travel on them again, you get a faster car. Thats the way life is. You can cry and moan and complain all you want, its not changing. Deal with it.
-
blackbird71 last edited by
... I think that both business ethics and common sense would suggest that if there are bugs and security flaws in an operating system, it's due to the negligence / mistake of developers so it must be fixed even if they don't plan to add new features to that OS. ...
That's just plain silly. There have been virtually no software products ever written that don't have multiple 'bugs' in them, by some definition of that term... and some of those never get fixed because they're obscure enough to not be a significant or noticeable problem during the supported lifetime of the product - after which, no fixes will be issued, period, since that's exactly what 'no longer supported' means. Similarly, security vulnerabilities are continually being discovered even in old software (and firmware) long since out of support - things like buffer overflows, memory violations, and a host of other kinds of issues whose presence is often obscured until somebody stumbles on them while fuzz-testing or playing black-hat games on systems or hardware that happen to contain them. If that software happens to be out of support by its maker, it will NOT be patched. That is reality.
-
littlepiggies last edited by
As usual, bigger is better but like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, utility is in the works of the user. Generally speaking, the standard is about competition and if it doesn't grow and make more $$ it will die. Obsolescence for the masses is the bread and butter of business and of course making an OS that non techy end users can tailor to their needs isn't competitive. Thank you Bill Gates.
-
exoloner last edited by
2016 the year of technologic absurdity. Like in the movie Idiocracy.
In my opinion there's some engineers over-acting things, killing flies with bazokas.I'm still using 2006 machines to do the same things back then.
But suddendly, if you fall into the update-mania sindrome, one could easily end up with a machine that's unable to do the same things 10 years ago.
VLC ?? c'mon. ...javascript? c'mon! no big deal, no rocket science.
Youtube is not delivering holographic 4D frames yet, IT'S THE SAME logic.
We're overacting things, bringing complexity to the code just for the sake of it and
making applications really slow, to do the same things with a very little added value within 10 years.
