XP

I also have XP, but wouldn't buy another operating system just to use a software package. I can see not offering support for older OS's, such as Wndows 95 (which incidentally, I still run on one system, with only LiteStep as my sole customization), but 98, ME and 2000 are still quiet common on desktop systems. So, I also voted for #2.

98 is questionable MS will discontinue active support this year for win98. Their knowlege base and current downloads will of coarse remain online.
To expect software vendors to continue to support an operating system that even the OS maker no longer supports hmmmm.... can we really?

I have to be honest and say that I bought XP to keep up with WindowBlinds What can I say I love WindowBlinds and OD that much, But i also chose #2 on the poll. New Stardock software for XP would leave many 98-ME-2000 users out.

I think it largely depends on your income and such. If you can afford to buy another OS without killing yourself just for the stuff other people make, I guess you would

I think if some new software they think of will only work on XP that's okay, include it, but don't stop supporting the other OS's too. There's already functions in WinFX and WB that only XP users get to enjoy, and there's Logons and CursorXP. No problem, but the thing that makes Stardock software unique is that their programs work so well on any version of Windows. There must be millions of Win98 users and Win2k users out there (I'm one).

I felt there was no appropriate answer to the poll for me, I'd pick a combination of #1 and #2... so I checked #2

Well, W2K's lifecycle has a way to go still. Is the feeling at Stardock is that there aren't that many W2K users out there and those really into skinning would upgrade to XP?

I bought the upgrade version of XP. Fortunately I qualified. Primarily, I did it so that I could run Stardock products better.

Here is an interesting sidebar:

At my local computer shop I can purchase WinXP(Pro)full version for $500.00 (CDN) However, for $600.00 (CDN) I can get a new computer that is twice the computer I have now, with XP installed. Sure, it's an OEM version, but considering the price advantage, if I were to do it all over again I'd go this route.

motion I'm willing to bet that the $600 computer is XP Home. So your full version XP Home is $300 or an upgrade for $150. When I consider the costs involved in purchasing software like Photoshop or Corel Draw... the operating system that runs it all is not so expensive. Most users even advanced users don't require XP Pro for their personnal PC. In my case I opted for XP Pro... mainly so I could be more familiar with it, since my work involves supporting users of XP Pro. Just me mostly thinking out loud.

"So your full version XP Home is $300 or an upgrade for $150"

Wow. $199 & $99 everywhere you go (or at least I go ^_^) in the use.

Me, I've got 2 copies of Home (1 came with my latest notebook,) and 2 of Pro (both legal, only 1 of which I've had to purchase.)

Of course, I have 2 copies of Windows 2000 (Pro and Adv. Server,) that my last job bought for me too.

Welcome to Canada...

Aye. 'in the use' should have read "in the US"

Tiiiiired tonight.

You're right about the home vs. pro thing §tatic. The one installed on my present computer is the pro version. Even still, 300 for the home version of the OS or 600 for a new computer that is twice as good as my present one, plus, the OS installed. The only drawback is dealing with the OEM.

Believe it or not, the only reason I purchased XP Pro was Object Desktop and the 32-bit icons...

Ever since I learned to put a computer together by myself, I always go with that idea...

I had XP Pro. long before I even heard of WB. I love XP and would only change if something way better came out. To answer the question, I just would not use a program that did not go with what I already have.

Speaking of XP - I think I've backed up all of the stuff I need to save - so, for some indetermined amount of time today, I suppose I'll be vanished while I replace XP Home with Pro!

Hrm... or maybe I'll just wait until tonight...

Good luck with that!!

Whee!

Well, back and running XP Pro. Now I just need to get all of my drivers and software installed again... the 'fun' part.

Ugh. Amazing how much more quickly windows runs after a clean install. The thing I like best? Memory used at the desktop: 70MB. Sheesh. Wish you could /keep/ it that low!

do you have an disk imaging program? Like Ghost or something.

Yeah - I'm just too lazy to ever image my HD.

(Grrrr - W2's /finally/ got here - and wouldn't you know - one of them isn't even /partially/ correct. Wrong SSN, and my total witholdings for the -entire- time that I worked there are less than I got withheld from a /single/ cheque! *mutters*)

bummer

Haven't received all mine yet

No kidding - I was hoping to be able to file them today. I could -really- use the money. *sighs*

Oh well. Back to reinstalling stuff!

So would people be willing to wait until next Fall for WindowBlinds 4 to be officially released in order to have Win9x/ME/2K support?

Or would they prefer a WB4 release for XP to be in say March and then Win9X show up in Fall of this year?

XP is already a theme aware OS. A lot of the improvements on XP in WB are things we can leverage from the OS itself. But on Win2K/Me/98 we have to build it from scratch.

Object Desktop users:
83% are using Windows XP
12% are using Windows 2000
5% are using Windows 95, Windows 98, ME, or NT.

well from a strictly selfish point of view, I'd like the March release.