I'm going to post some more of my comments later as I've got to go... read the full article here: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showAr...782&subSection=

[N]F

don't we all know that? M$ already cutted Windows 2000 support 2 years ago. I thought they already cut Win98/ME...

xboxrulz

Yea I thought they had too, and I mean... it's not like anyone still uses ME anyways haha

Yeah I am pretty sure they have discontinued support for Windows ME sometime last year or the year before.

I actually used to like Windows ME until the file handle limit started giving me trouble with some applications I was programming that needed to use alot of visual controls, I later upgraded to Windows 2000 Professional and now I am using Windows XP Home with Service Pack 1 intergrated.

I thought they still supported Windows 2000 though.

This is YET another great reason to run Linux. All Microsuck sees out of EVERYTHING is $$$$... darn it, isn't William rich ENOUGH?? Well, personally, MS should have coded the previous versions correctly instead of releasing Windows with 200,000,000,000,000 security holes and another 200,000,000,000,000,000 bugs.

Of course, I can't exactly complain because I could never code an operating system. That's why there's alternatives such as Linux!

As far as I'm concered, you can still be running Red Hat 2 and Red Hat is still going to support you. I like laughing at MS because of the rate they "discontinue support" for their customers.. It's amazing how many complaints there are about Windows yet NO ONE does ANYTHING about it except continue to support MS...

[N]F

Windows XP alone has been around for how long now? 5 years or more, and your'e ranting because they are dropping support for older operating systems......

I think after so long it is pretty fair to drop support for them, if that's what they want to do, some people might be left on older Windows Operating Systems but unless they are running ancient hardware I can't see any good reason as to why.

It's logical, really, for Microsoft to cut off support for old systems. After all, I don't think those operating systems are being sold anymore, at least those that aren't secondhand. In any case, though Microsoft has said they will be dropping support for those products, I don't think they'll be removing any 98/ME KB articles from their website. They'll only stop releasing security patches. And 98 and ME users will still have support, of a sort, from the thousands of amateur techies that abound the Web. =^^=

nightfox: While I'm relatively anti-Microsoft myself, I think saying Microsoft released Windows with that many bugs was too over exaggerated. And yeah, I know you meant the number as an exaggeration, but it still delivers a misconception. Technology is constantly evolving, and many of the bugs we see today in 98, ME and, yes, even XP, just weren't bugs at the time of their release. Well, okay, maybe ME is an exception. =^^= A lot of the technology today didn't exist even just 5 years ago, so those bugs weren't an issue then. Now they are.

The same goes for Linux, really. Linux isn't some bug-free programming marvel that some people like to think. Sure, it is a marvel, but in a different way. The difference between Linux and Windows is that the Linux bugs don't take on the same sense of urgency that Windows has — and that's primarily because with Windows as the predominant Operating System, Linux just isn't targeted as much. So what happens is that the Linux code guys have practically all the time in the world to catch and fix their bugs before some malicious hacker attacks the weakness, and they get to release their fixes without all the fanfare that accompanies the discovery of a new Windows bug. =^^=

And as for Redhat 2 users still getting support... you do realize that Redhat — and Linux in particular — is relatively younger that the MS Operating Systems mentioned in article? Also, as far as I know, I don't think there are any new patches for the older versions of Linux. Given that Linux is opensource freeware, it's relatively easier (and cheaper) for a person using old versions of Linux to upgrade to newer versions. Therefore, there really isn't any vital need for the Linux community to release patches for those really old Linux versions when the new ones are available for free. =^^=

My Dad found that out earlier when he went to get new antivirus software and none of them supported Win 98 and got a notice from the Tax people that his accounting program will no longer support Windows 98 after its last release. As far as support for outdated systems, DEC and SUN are two names that come to mind. I was working at a business once that was still running it's inventory software on Solaris 2. When it broke, Sun sent someone out to fix it. That was in 1998 or 1999 (can't remember now). I think they installed the computer system back in the in 1980's. Granted, you pay through the nose up front and later for those support contracts.

Win 98 has been around for 8 years. Most consumers have upgraded their systems by now or will be forced to soon as their systems have been obsolete for quite sometime. My Dad will be buying a new computer this year and proably will be another Windows box. I use Macintosh myself, but with the current switchover to Intel chips and software lagging, I'm not sure if Quicken has new versions out for Mactel yet.

Of *course* it's about the money!

Gates didn't found Microsoft out of the goodness of his kind and generous heart. He did it because he wanted to make money - and apparently he did something right along the way, seeing as he's still a multi-billionaire and the overwhelming majority of computer users use his programs.

Honestly? If I were in Gates's position I would drop support for older operating systems too. Devote the resources to newer software, especially since Vista's release date is less than a year away, and hopefully have enough resources to work the bugs out as quickly as possible.

That's very true, but claims of his very buggy software isn't too far from the truth, at a programmers and even your basic ends users point of view.

There are many flaws in the Operating System that have always been present in earlier versions and I know for a fact many of them have nothing to do with the hardware what so ever. Some of the problems from a programmers perspective are actually easily fixed but they won't fix it.....

One example is the Windows File Open Dialog (explorer version), the box that contains your selected filenames has a hard character limit of around 65500, which is about 200 files depending on how many characters each file has in it's name. Microsoft could have easily released an update that used a Rich text like control that can hold more characters as opposed to the one they use now.

And yet the problem is still in Windows XP......