New Matroska release bundle (Liisachan release)

[Gaia]

Is there any reason to actually support Operating Systems that the publisher's themselves dont' support? (NT4, 95... soon 98)

So many people use still Win98se/ME. WinXP is far too expensive for me because i use Windows only for some gaming(mainly older classics), encoding and watching my movies. I use Linux for everything else.

I could get some nice hardware with the money WinXP(pro version) costs atleast in my country. Far too much for stuff i really don't need and use.

Win2K would be ofcourse cheaper but some old games i still like doesn't work with Win2K.

It would be extremly stupid to stop supporting older OS's just because lazyness or whatever. Just think how many people would use Matroska if you could play files only with Win2K/XP?

[gabest]

I don't want to start a flame or anything, but would you use or support a linux kernel/distribution from 1998 when today we write 2003? It doesn't make sense, does it? Should the programmer of a free software add all sorts of extra code and workaround to overcome the bugs and limitations of an older version of Windows just because it is not free to upgrade to the latest?

[kastro68]

I think Win4Lin only works with win98 and not XP.

But then again, who would want to watch an mkv on an emulated windows.

Just for the record, some mainboards are not compatible with WinXP, I believe you need an acpi compliant board-->bios update, if one is available of course.

[Gaia]

Ofcourse developer can decide whatever OS he/she wants to support. All i wanted to say that some people doesn't seem to have a clue how many people still use Win98/ME. Anyway i shouldn't have used word "lazy". I made mistake.

Still most of the software companies take care that their software works with older OS's if it is possible, alltought it is changing fast. Why open source developers should stop supporting them?

Anyway like you said let's not make this to stupid flame war.

[Mosu]

Originally posted by Gaia
Still most of the software companies take care that their software works with older OS's if it is possible, alltought it is changing fast. Why open source developers should stop supporting them?

Generally speaking: There maybe some things which are missing in older versions which are pretty essential or at least hard to circumvent/reimplement. One such thing is e.g. Unicode support which totally lacks on Win98/Win95. Another such case is Unicode support on gcc 2.95 (two totally unrelated cases, mind you!) - the developpers made SUCH a stupid bug that you can either NOT use the wstring class or reimplement it completely. Yes, completely.

What I want to say is sometimes developpers don't see the benefit of spending many hours on fixing a small thing so that they might decide to not support it at all or to only support a subset of features.

(Nothing here is intended as a flame. From my perspective as a developper I just want to make clear that I find it absolutely valid to support only a limited set of features on older software, especially if the software in questions is more than five years old.)

[Hiro2k]

Well thanks for everyones opinions, I saw many end user's opinions and a lot of developer's opinions. I am not a software developer, but I agree with what Gabest said.

If we let older OS's be the deciding factor in whether or not to implement something new, then the developer's have a serious problem on their hands.

[faxmactor]

Yay, what a roar around OSs ;)
Pity that it's impossible to fix Matroska Shellex under W98. Oh, well, it is still very useful (and usable) as it is.

My (not really serious) idea is that I don't use any Microsoft OS, that hasn't reached the second service pack or edition :D

[MarkCoolio]

I would like 2 see an update (who else? :) )...

Could u include:

Matroska Splitter 1.0.1.6
Matroska Muxer 1.0.0.7
VSFilter 2.28?

Thanks in advance!

Both of the playback packs are just great for newbees... so keep up the good work!