Frogboy Frogboy

Should Windows 98/ME be supported?

▼

Should Windows 98/ME be supported?

from WinCustomize Forums
It's frustrating. I go over to download.com and see user reviews on WindowBlinds:

http://download.com.com/3000-2326-10131236.html?tag=sptlt

And reading it, you'd think that WindowBlinds was junk. But we know it's not. We know it works really really well, especially on Windows 2000 and XP.

The problem is that on Windows 98 and ME, things get dodgy. Those versions of Windows have a limited number of GDI resources. So sometimes desktop enhancements (not just WindowBlinds) work perfectly and sometimes tweaking needs to be done to them.

According to the stats on WinCustomize, Only 19% of the visitors here even use Windows 98/ME. A year ago it was 45%.

This raises the question - how long should these cutomization unfriendly versions of Windows be supported? We're finding it to be a huge PR problem. People download customization software on their Windows 98 box, some percentage of them has problems due to the crummy neature of Windows 98/ME, and then when they eventually upgrade to a decent version of Windows they only remember that the software in question gave them problems and hence we end up with "I tried WindowBlinds and it was unstable" spread like gospel.

http://download.com.com/3000-2326-10131236.html?tag=sptlt

As I write this, fewer than 7 out of 10 people actually had a positive experience with it. Obviously there are some other issues involved such as registered users don't download the shareware so over time, the only users left downloading the shareware are people who have (for whatever reason) chosen not to register. But it's hard to help wondering that Windows 98/ME is also a major factor.

With only 1 out of 5 people on this site running Win98/ME in a world where 70% of desktops are running Win98/ME, it really demonstrates that those who are into customization or have a positive experience in customizing their comptuers are running Windows 2000 or Windows XP.

Therefore, what do you think? Should support for Windows 98/ME users be phased out and if so when?
53,231 views 96 replies
Reply #26 from WinCustomize Forums Top
WindowBlinds version 4 should not include 98 / ME support.
My 2 pence worth.
Reply #27 from WinCustomize Forums Top
i agree with chichigirl46... have two versions... or you could always just have a note that WB doesnt work well with win9x or ME. then maybe you wouldnt get many complaints, im sure youd still that idiot that doesnt read

personally, i had Wb running on win98 for awhile, and i didnt many complaints about it, cept my computer was slow. but now that i got my new one with XP, i like the Olive Green style
Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion
Reply #28 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I think that (sooner or later) you are going to have to create Win2K/XP-only versions of the OD products and IMO you might as well do it sooner rather than later.

1) You know that 81% of your 'community' (WC users) will be right behind you. The other 19% might grumble a little (ok, some will grumble a lot ), but they will not be any worse off than they are now - nobody will take away the versions that they already have.

2) You already have a precedent with CursorXP. How many complaints do you get from disgruntled Win98ME users who feel 'excluded' - my guess is not many, those people just accept that they can't use it.

3) 'WindowBlinds XP' would probably get a 90+% thumbs-up at download.com (look at the CursorXP reviews there) and that would be much better PR than the current 'this program sux' situation.

Yes, I can be smug because I run Win2K, but even so I am excluded from some aspects of skinning because of my OS - I would love to be able to use some of the XP-only Icon Packages (like FauxS-XP and Noia), but I have to accept that I can't.

Nobody will be forced to upgrade to WinXP just because Stardock brings out 'WindowBlinds XP' (that sounds good - you have my permission to use that name ), they will just have to live without any additional bells and whistles that it may introduce.
Reply #29 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Yeah, I agree with Woodbridge. Version 4 sounds like a good logical step to cut support to WIN 9x. This should give users long enough to upgrade if they want to. Also you could leave the last version of windowblinds 3 to download for the users that wish to keep WIN 9x.

Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #30 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Splitting the program is a good idea.
Have a WindowBlinds 98/ME with features frozen and try to make as stable as possible and a WindowBlinds XP for 2000/XP.
Reply #31 from WinCustomize Forums Top
chichigirl46: In what way are WB3+ versions of WB not compatible with Windows 9x?

If you are having issues then we want to know about them.

Reply #32 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Switching from Windozwe 98/ME to Windows XP was one of the best things that I ever did for my PC (one of the others was getting Object Desktop) Aside from having banished the dreaded "Blue Screen of Death", Windowblinds and other programs run much smoother. Not to mention the icons are light years ahead of Win98/ME. My opinion: it is time to shove Windows 98/ME in the great bit bucket in the sky
Reply #33 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I believe the question posed here was not "should 98\Me support be phased out" but rather "when should it be phased out". It is inevitable that an old OS will stop being supported eventually. When was the last time anyone ran Windows 95 and expected any kind of real support? Windows XP is still a reletively new OS, so I would say give it another year. But, everyone should be aware the XP does everything 98 did, but with the stability of Windows 2000. In my opinion, everyone running 98\Me should upgrade to XP as soon as they can because it's not just Stardock that will eventually stop supporting them.

Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #34 from WinCustomize Forums Top
actually i don´t care about supporting Win98. although WindowBlinds made big progress on resource use recently, Illumination (not under development since three years) is still much faster. it doesn´t skin anything else than the window borders, so it is not really fair to compare the two programs, but it is the better solution for me. and yes, ChiChiGirl is right, there are incompatible WB skins that show ugly black borders in Win98 (on buttons). most prominent example is MetalX.
Reply #35 from WinCustomize Forums Top
The day you support only XP is the last day any Stardock software is installed on my pc's

Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #36 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I am Currently running win ME on my Laptop. Some skins cause heaps of trouble while others don't. The school is hoping to upgrade everyone to XP next year. I think soon people will have no choise but to move on with technology and get XP or whatever comes next. Win 98 is one big glitch, forget viruses, just dent someone win 98! In about 2 years time there will be noone dumb enough to use win 98/ME, there will be no use for them. I would like to see some win 98 support for a little longer although it is a real pain to have the system around. It puzzels me how people could use win 98 for more than 10 minutes. I would even prefer win 95 to 98. The problem with XP is the price and the speed needed to take it, I very much doubt if every family with a computer could just go and spent $2500+ on a new PC/Laptop.
Reply #37 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I am Currently running win ME on my Laptop. Some skins cause heaps of trouble while others don't. The school is hoping to upgrade everyone to XP next year. I think soon people will have no choise but to move on with technology and get XP or whatever comes next. Win 98 is one big glitch, forget viruses, just dent someone win 98! In about 2 years time there will be noone dumb enough to use win 98/ME, there will be no use for them. I would like to see some win 98 support for a little longer although it is a real pain to have the system around. It puzzels me how people could use win 98 for more than 10 minutes. I would even prefer win 95 to 98. The problem with XP is the price and the speed needed to take it, I very much doubt if every family with a computer could just go and spent $2500+ on a new PC/Laptop. By Floyd Dez
Reply #38 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I am Currently running win ME on my Laptop. Some skins cause heaps of trouble while others don't. The school is hoping to upgrade everyone to XP next year. I think soon people will have no choise but to move on with technology and get XP or whatever comes next. Win 98 is one big glitch, forget viruses, just send someone win 98! In about 2 years time there will be noone dumb enough to use win 98/ME, there will be no use for them. I would like to see some win 98 support for a little longer although it is a real pain to have the system around. It puzzels me how people could use win 98 for more than 10 minutes. I would even prefer win 95 to 98. The problem with XP is the price and the speed needed to take it, I very much doubt if every family with a computer could just go and spent $2500+ on a new PC/Laptop. By Floyd Dez
Reply #39 from WinCustomize Forums Top
moshi : As you say Illumination only feels quicker because it skins so little. And even then its actually slower if you benchmark it.

As for the incompatible skins, I guess they are using per pixel alpha and not using magic pink in those areas too. WB on 9x does not currently support per pixel alpha, so it ignores that part. Perhaps that is something we need to implement on 9x (though with a performance hit obviously)
Reply #40 from WinCustomize Forums Top
IMO, the FIRST edition of Windows 98 was perfect for the 9X platform. The Second Edition screwed everthing up and then ME came out with more tweaks (READ: bugs) just to make Second Edition look pretty to new customers without taking care of the issues that Second Edition still had.
I have a PC made of parts thrown together and an old 98 upgrade (FIRST edition) that runs perfectly with all Stardock software.

Just my two cents.
Reply #41 from WinCustomize Forums Top
It seems to me, from above, that things are already moving towards XP only. Cursor XP, Logons, XP only Icons, XP versions on WMP, XP only features in WB already! The list is only going to get longer.

Support for 95/NT has already been dropped, has it not?

People on 98 / ME will still be able to use what they have purchased, it just wouldn't make sense for them to upgrade / renew to newer versions of Stardock products, correct?

Seems to me that it is coming down to the Time & Money issue:

Do the developers have the time to continue to code for the older versions of windows?

If the amnount of money coming in from renewals / new purchases for those on 98 / ME is less than the money that could be generated by a providing a better product, hence more sales to those on XP, then it would be a good business decison to discontinue support for 98 / ME.

Those on 98 / ME who can't afford to upgrade to a newer OS or computer would probably thank Stardock for saving them the money it would cost to renew every year.
Reply #42 from WinCustomize Forums Top
uhm .. every time I see one of these threads I am constantly reminded of the age old axiom that I live by in the PC world

" the most important part of any well run PC is the nut usually found between the keyboard and chair "

having said that as long as one is aware of the limitations of the 9x kernel you can have a fairly functional 9x box .. I know I had mine working okay ( although I agree 2000/XP is much better )
Reply #44 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Can you think of any other software company that would even bother to ask this question? Software support for older operating systems will disappear - always. A fact of life.

Stardock constantly amazes me with their attempts to satisfy everyone. They work hard at meeting user needs. BakerStreet has stated it - support is there and the apps do work on old OS's.

Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #45 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Really it doesn't matter what os you use if you know what you're doing you shouldn't have any problems at all. I have used used the software on windows 98, ME, and XP so it shouldn't be that difficult. Unused programs in the system tray? Take them out of the system startup that's all as well as any extra programs that are not being used.
Reply #46 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Does it matter whether they ask or not? It'll be dropped anyhow. If fixing bugs caused by a four year old OS instead of the app itself is starting to get too annoying to the developer, he or she should drop it.

From a users point of view though, Win98 can have some advantages over WinXP, which I run dual boot. Stable as a rock.
Reply #47 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Hmm, insert a "which is why" somewhere in there.

/me thinks faster than he types, fingers have latency
Reply #48 from WinCustomize Forums Top
drop support for 98\ME, especially if it's hindering advancements that would only be supported on Win2k/XP platforms.
Reply #49 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Frankly I think u people should comtinue making 9x compatable software since there are still many users that use 9x.Sure enough we'll all upgrade to Xp when have money and also increase our computers speed.I use Wb on 98.I admit its runs sometimes slow but i think it is due to my slow computer
So don't push us out yet frogboy
Reply #50 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I can't see support dropping on 98/WinME for quite some time (though, I wish it would so that I could quit testing on it..hehe). there are still too many people using it to not support it. (A few years may change that, though).

However, developing new versions for it and new products for it, is a totally different question. And, I'm not sure of the answer for that.

I *do* know that 85% - 90% of tech support email comes from 98/winME users. There is also the questions of supporting new video card drivers for the old OSes, too.

I run two machines. they are clones of eachother (including the video card). The one with XP is a dream, the one with ME...well...let's just say that I only use it when I have to test on it. The software runs fine on it, but I really get sick of rebooting because of any little things going poorly...like looking at it wrong...