| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Jonoman92
United States9105 Posts
My understanding is that with the limited time/energy that can be devoted to developing ShieldBattery, it makes more sense to not bother with Windows XP support in favor of spending developer time on other features. I don't think XP is even that safe to use as an OS anymore. | ||
|
tec27
United States3702 Posts
On October 24 2016 04:06 Jonoman92 wrote: I don't think Windows XP will ever be supported (I believe tec27 said this somewhere, but it's possible my memory is making it up.) My understanding is that with the limited time/energy that can be devoted to developing ShieldBattery, it makes more sense to not bother with Windows XP support in favor of spending developer time on other features. I don't think XP is even that safe to use as an OS anymore. Yeah, we're not planning on ever supporting XP. It's not a developer time issue, it's a "no one should ever be running an OS that hasn't received security updates in 2+ years" thing. | ||
|
halomonian
Brazil255 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10256 Posts
It's not a real issue for me, I was just borrowing it for today while I was over (and my laptop is in the shop). Just remember the XP usage statistics being insane; I imagine this is especially true in those countries where BW is popular like Peru, Chile, some former Soviet satellite nations, etc. It is kind of weird to hear it being described as not a developer time issue - how long do you think such a thing would take? | ||
|
tec27
United States3702 Posts
On October 24 2016 11:44 Jealous wrote: I get that XP is outdated and all that, but I think neither the machine nor my mother can handle a new OS lol. She doesn't really use it for anything internet-related, so I don't think security is a sticking point for her. It's not a real issue for me, I was just borrowing it for today while I was over (and my laptop is in the shop). Just remember the XP usage statistics being insane; I imagine this is especially true in those countries where BW is popular like Peru, Chile, some former Soviet satellite nations, etc. It is kind of weird to hear it being described as not a developer time issue - how long do you think such a thing would take? Basically forever, because none of the libraries we use support XP (for the same reason stated above). On top of that, Chrome dropped support for XP months ago, just a matter of time til Firefox does as well, and our site doesn't support any versions of IE that run on XP. I would not be surprised if the next BW patch doesn't run on XP either, because again, no one should be running that OS. Your assumption about XP's popularity is also incorrect, I've looked and its usage has fallen massively in the last few years. As a further demonstration of this, the number of signups we received from XP users is below that of Mac or Linux users, and is somewhere around 0.25%. | ||
|
Jealous
10256 Posts
On October 24 2016 11:53 tec27 wrote: Basically forever, because none of the libraries we use support XP (for the same reason stated above). On top of that, Chrome dropped support for XP months ago, just a matter of time til Firefox does as well, and our site doesn't support any versions of IE that run on XP. I would not be surprised if the next BW patch doesn't run on XP either, because again, no one should be running that OS. Your assumption about XP's popularity is also incorrect, I've looked and its usage has fallen massively in the last few years. As a further demonstration of this, the number of signups we received from XP users is below that of Mac or Linux users, and is somewhere around 0.25%. I see, that's certainly a waste of time then haha. I misunderstood you; thought you meant that it would take no time at all. And oh wow, times have changed! I keep forgetting that time moves on. Thanks for the informative post. | ||
|
veQ
Poland339 Posts
On October 24 2016 06:06 tec27 wrote: Yeah, we're not planning on ever supporting XP. It's not a developer time issue, it's a "no one should ever be running an OS that hasn't received security updates in 2+ years" thing. Well im both sad and happy. Sad cus I wont get to use it? Happy cus I wont grow my addiction back. Still thanks for clarification on that (XP here - LOL - but playin UT99 from time to time) I see no need to upgrade to newer OS (slow connection, required hardware, new useless stuff(bloat), needing to learn where the needed things are is bothersome + finding the software im using is bothersome as well (especially when u need older versions) | ||
|
tec27
United States3702 Posts
On October 24 2016 14:51 Jealous wrote: I see, that's certainly a waste of time then haha. I misunderstood you; thought you meant that it would take no time at all. And oh wow, times have changed! I keep forgetting that time moves on. Thanks for the informative post. Yeah, no worries, I can see how it came across that way. Even if supporting it were realistic, things like that are always a constant drain on developer productivity. If we claim to support XP, we have to test every change on XP as well (along with all the other configurations we worry about currently, but these are thankfully much closer to each other than XP is to any of them). We did begin initially (this was ~4 years ago at this point) with XP support, but things have changed a lot in the past few years. At the end of the day, it may seem sort of ridiculous to some that we're trying to support an 18 year old game but not support a 15 year old OS, but this project is really about ensuring that BW runs nicely on modern machines with modern OSes, and doesn't require you to expose yourself to e.g. bad security practices, vulnerable software, cargo-culted bug fixes, etc. just to play it. | ||
|
Kare
Norway786 Posts
 | ||
KwarK
United States43402 Posts
| ||
|
SC2Towelie
United States561 Posts
On October 21 2016 04:49 pheer wrote: In sc2 and other ladders, when you don't feel 100% you simply do not play, for fear of hurting your rank. SC2 has had non ranked ladder for a long time now. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
I mean what are we talking about, automaticaly ran software trying to get into your system? If you run older software, it may even be less likely that stuff is designed for it? Or hackers manually targetting your system? Most of the time they would succeed regardless? I don't even know what kind of actual effective measures they tend to place in what they call security updates, I just can't see a need for it While Windows 10 itself for example is a huge organized spyware apparently that records and share most of your information online | ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
On October 26 2016 03:44 SC2Towelie wrote: SC2 has had non ranked ladder for a long time now. How many people play on it though? Back when it was introduced, I played about 12 games on it and never touched it. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On October 26 2016 04:17 BigFan wrote: How many people play on it though? Back when it was introduced, I played about 12 games on it and never touched it. You can play versus people that do ranked, so everyone that plays ranked  . You just won't get affected, but if you win your opponent would lose points and have a loss, but if you lose/win it doesn't affect you at all. | ||
|
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
On October 26 2016 04:25 blade55555 wrote: You can play versus people that do ranked, so everyone that plays ranked . You just won't get affected, but if you win your opponent would lose points and have a loss, but if you lose/win it doesn't affect you at all.nope, I meant how many people play unranked? I think most people will either play ranked or do something else. Also, I always felt like it was a bit silly to mix the two groups. I would want to win a game and eventually get promoted against someone who played seriously, not someone who just followed around and made marines against colossi (as an ex). | ||
|
mca64Launcher_
Poland629 Posts
| ||
|
outscar
2832 Posts
| ||
|
LML
Germany1774 Posts
On October 26 2016 04:17 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't rly understand why you'd need to constantly keep making security updates, I don't use any firewall or antivirus on my PC and never update windows I have had no particular virus or malware problems since I learned not to run suspicious .exe files I mean what are we talking about, automaticaly ran software trying to get into your system? If you run older software, it may even be less likely that stuff is designed for it? Or hackers manually targetting your system? Most of the time they would succeed regardless? I don't even know what kind of actual effective measures they tend to place in what they call security updates, I just can't see a need for it While Windows 10 itself for example is a huge organized spyware apparently that records and share most of your information online At least use an adblocker, as that's probably the best anti-virus/malware you can have. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On October 26 2016 06:13 LML wrote: At least use an adblocker, as that's probably the best anti-virus/malware you can have. eheh yes that I do use : ] | ||
|
lun4tic0x2
Peru3 Posts
I hope you take into account, and if not explain why www.rankedgaming.com | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
OSC
Classic vs Krystianer
Solar vs TBD
ShoWTimE vs TBD
MaxPax vs TBD
MaNa vs MilkiCow
GgMaChine vs Mixu
SOOP
SHIN vs GuMiho
Cure vs Creator
The PondCast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
IPSL
DragOn vs Sziky
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
|
|
|
EPT
