4 ms·

IE9 not supporting XP at least had some sort of justification, regardless of whether it was a good decision. Vista was a large platform upgrade/rewrite, and the

by lmkg 16y ago

IE9 not supporting XP at least had some sort of justification, regardless of whether it was a good decision. Vista was a large platform upgrade/rewrite, and they mentioned particular features IE9 was using that they didn't want to bother re-implementing for XP (graphics stack, security). But Win7 is not such a drastic upgrade over Vista (architecturally, anyways). So what's the explanation for this?

cookiecaper 16y ago
The explanation is probably, "We want to sell licenses for the latest version of Windows". Microsoft played the lock-in game too well and they can't even get their customers to upgrade to new versions of the same software. Since Windows is a one-time purchase, if no one is buying the new versions of Windows, Microsoft is making much money off of these new versions.
- billswift 16y ago
  I've been using Windows and Linux side-by-side for different things since 1996. Some things have just been more trouble to set up in Linux than I wanted to bother with, with Windows available and easy to use. But Vista annoyed me enough that I am gradually switching more of my work to Linux, hopefully by the time this Vista box dies, I will just switch everything over to Linux.
- nfm 16y ago
  Is it just me, or can nobody else see this working in practice? Upgrading to Windows 7 to get IE 10 seems like a classic "You're doing it wrong"!
  - bruceboughton 16y ago
    By itself, yes. But if there are 5 other MS products where the latest version is not supported on Vista, they start to add up. It could be 3 successive IE releases, for example...
kenjackson 16y ago
What's the justification for Safari 5 not supporting Tiger? Safari 5 came out 62 months after Tiger. If we assume that IE10 comes out in 12 months from today then IE10 will come out 65 months after Vista.
- danparsonson 16y ago
  Hmm that's two different browsers, two different operating systems and two different vendors - what's your point?
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    If you can't see my point, honestly I don't think I could explain it to you. Imagine I just said, "nothing to see here, move along". Don't spend too much time on it.
    - shriphani 16y ago
      Hacker News is the port of call for the more skilled members of the Apple Fan Club. I find it quite amusing since one of the most impressive kinect "hacks" ever was pulled off @ MIX but this is the most upvoted MS article in the last 2 days.
    - danparsonson 16y ago
      Apologies, I think my brain took a holiday yesterday.
  - mkr-hn 16y ago
    Two vendors, browsers, and operating systems competing in the same space. Expecting one of those competitors to support its browser past a certain number of OS releases without expecting the other to is a double standard.
    - danparsonson 16y ago
      Thank you for the straightforward answer - I think I was having a slow day yesterday!
KeyBoardG 16y ago
Probably ARM support thats coming with newer code out of Microsoft. May have been too costly and had too many breaking changes to get it on Vista. Just a guess.
bep 16y ago
Maybe because the Mainstream Support End Date for Vista is 4/10/2012

by lmkg 16y ago

cookiecaper 16y ago

The explanation is probably, "We want to sell licenses for the latest version of Windows". Microsoft played the lock-in game too well and they can't even get their customers to upgrade to new versions of the same software. Since Windows is a one-time purchase, if no one is buying the new versions of Windows, Microsoft is making much money off of these new versions.

billswift 16y ago
I've been using Windows and Linux side-by-side for different things since 1996. Some things have just been more trouble to set up in Linux than I wanted to bother with, with Windows available and easy to use. But Vista annoyed me enough that I am gradually switching more of my work to Linux, hopefully by the time this Vista box dies, I will just switch everything over to Linux.
nfm 16y ago
Is it just me, or can nobody else see this working in practice? Upgrading to Windows 7 to get IE 10 seems like a classic "You're doing it wrong"!
- bruceboughton 16y ago
  By itself, yes. But if there are 5 other MS products where the latest version is not supported on Vista, they start to add up. It could be 3 successive IE releases, for example...

kenjackson 16y ago

What's the justification for Safari 5 not supporting Tiger? Safari 5 came out 62 months after Tiger. If we assume that IE10 comes out in 12 months from today then IE10 will come out 65 months after Vista.

danparsonson 16y ago
Hmm that's two different browsers, two different operating systems and two different vendors - what's your point?
- kenjackson 16y ago
  If you can't see my point, honestly I don't think I could explain it to you. Imagine I just said, "nothing to see here, move along". Don't spend too much time on it.
  - shriphani 16y ago
    Hacker News is the port of call for the more skilled members of the Apple Fan Club. I find it quite amusing since one of the most impressive kinect "hacks" ever was pulled off @ MIX but this is the most upvoted MS article in the last 2 days.
  - danparsonson 16y ago
    Apologies, I think my brain took a holiday yesterday.
- mkr-hn 16y ago
  Two vendors, browsers, and operating systems competing in the same space. Expecting one of those competitors to support its browser past a certain number of OS releases without expecting the other to is a double standard.
  - danparsonson 16y ago
    Thank you for the straightforward answer - I think I was having a slow day yesterday!

KeyBoardG 16y ago

Probably ARM support thats coming with newer code out of Microsoft. May have been too costly and had too many breaking changes to get it on Vista. Just a guess.

bep 16y ago

Maybe because the Mainstream Support End Date for Vista is 4/10/2012