Re: VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
- From: "Dave" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:49:55 -0000
"Ted" <2000@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:O5baJ%23T6FHA.2036@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> All I can say, that you are dumping Win 98 too soon,
> we know it is going to be faded out.
> You are going to have many unhappy customers that
> will not buy from you, for the simple reason that you
> don't support your product long enough for older OS.
I'm sorry but that's total rubbish, you have no idea of the customers we
deal with. Before we dropped '98 we asked some of our larger customers if it
would be a problem, not a single one said that it would be as they all have
already or had plans to upgrade all the relevant systems. As I said before
it may be an issue with high volume low cost software sold to the public,
but we deal in low volume high cost software for a small market who will
always use the correct equipment for the job.
It is a question of knowing your market and not just going on with redundant
effort regardless.
So you go back to '95 and even 3.1, what about NT3.5 or DOS 2.2 or GEM or
CP/M or OS/2 or George - There is no point except for historical interest in
maintaining redundant operating systems.
Best Regards
Dave.
> 90% of the hardware still support Win 9x, you should
> follow them.
> Personally, I am upgrading my computer with hardware
> that is compatible with Win 98. I will keep using
> it until it can go no more.
> I still test my program and setups on Win 95, NT,
> and 2K. From that I learn a lot on how to improve
> my setups.
> What I do, is install fresh Win 95, copy the contents
> of the Windows directory to Windows1.
> I test setups, then from the command prompt, I rename
> Windows to Windows2, rename Windows1 to Windows,
> and restart computer, I get a bare Win 95 again to test
> more programs.
> I keep another backup in Windows3, just in case I
> forget to backup again.
>
> I do the same for Win 98 SE, which I fully support.
>
> By dumping Win 98, that means you are dumping Win NT,
> ME, and 2K.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Dave" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:eIVY0pT6FHA.2576@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> What does have to do fixing his problem.
>>
>> Well if he doesn't actually need to support '98 then he does not need to
>> worry about it.
>>
>>> Huge number of government departments still using
>>> Win 95 and Win 98. You just can't turn your back on them.
>>
>> Of course one can, very little commercial software is produced to support
>> '98 etc. The company I work for deal with government departments both
>> here (UK), North and South America and several other countries (Oz, SA,
>> several European states) and we stopped supporting '98 last year and have
>> not lost a single sale or had any cancellations.
>>
>>> Any company that dumped Win 98 is hurting, 20% less
>>> in sales is quite a bit.
>>
>> Only if the extra effort is less than 20% of the development & testing
>> costs. If we were to support them we would need extra testing staff to
>> make sure everything worked in all operating systems.
>>
>> Anyway I doubt that 20% figure is current, even if it is it will diminish
>> quickly.
>>
>> But of course it depends on ones market, if selling to individuals then
>> there may be a case for '98 support.
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Dave O.
>>
>
>
.
- References:
- Re: VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
- From: Dave
- Re: VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
- Prev by Date: Re: How to pass a 2-D array into a function?
- Next by Date: Re: Run VB6 .exe on server from a remote machine on same network; db is SQL Server 2000
- Previous by thread: Re: VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
- Next by thread: Re: VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
