Jump to content

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here. X
X


Photo

AutoIt Operating System Support


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
83 replies to this topic

#61 Valik

Valik

    Former developer.

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,879 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 02:10 PM

I know, I know, but so long playing with new stuff...
Again, is it so difficult to keep 9x compatibility?

Thanx for all. J.

Yes, it is. In multiple cases it meant writing the same code in two different ways, one for Windows 9x, another for newer versions of Windows. In other cases, it meant writing some really long-winded and sometimes strange looking code to maintain compatibility with Windows 9x.







#62 sanjkoc

sanjkoc

    Seeker

  • Active Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 04:32 PM

Yes, it is. In multiple cases it meant writing the same code in two different ways, one for Windows 9x, another for newer versions of Windows. In other cases, it meant writing some really long-winded and sometimes strange looking code to maintain compatibility with Windows 9x.

Thank you very much for the explanation.
The fact that there were 2 different exe (3 actually) made me believe that the ANSI version for 9x just didn't include the really incompatible stuff; there are already functions and stuff not available for 9x.
I thought it'd be possible just keep the fixes, the changes and the new functions that don't need "strange looking code" or give problems and just write in the help "not available for 9x"
for all the rest. Sorry for my mistake.

Thanks to you all for all the joy AutoIt gave me. J.

#63 Jon

Jon

    Up all night to get lucky

  • Administrators
  • 10,294 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 04:41 PM

From my point of view the most annoying thing is having to use ancient compilers. Did you know that the last version of Visual C to support 9x was Visual C 2003? None of the compilers after that will even compile code that will execute on 9x. Not even a "Hello world".

#64 sanjkoc

sanjkoc

    Seeker

  • Active Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 08:18 PM

From my point of view the most annoying thing is having to use ancient compilers. Did you know that the last version of Visual C to support 9x was Visual C 2003? None of the compilers after that will even compile code that will execute on 9x. Not even a "Hello world".

I beg your pardon, AutoIt is written (and compiled) with what?
Imho new compilers don't support 9x because... they just don't want to, no other reasons, and I think this is not fair, but I won't start an useless discussion.

Forgive me if I bored you and thanks for your time. J.

#65 Valik

Valik

    Former developer.

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,879 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 09:00 PM

I beg your pardon, AutoIt is written (and compiled) with what?
Imho new compilers don't support 9x because... they just don't want to, no other reasons, and I think this is not fair, but I won't start an useless discussion.

Forgive me if I bored you and thanks for your time. J.

Visual C++ 2008 sets the subsystem version higher than Windows 9x supports. If you try to start a VC++2008 compiled application on Windows 9x, it will refuse to start with a compatibility error (or something like that). Starting with Visual C++ 2005, virtually all applications are compiled with internal system calls to API functions that do not exist on Windows 9x. We have been tricking the compiler for the last few years with Visual C++ 2005 to get those applications to run on Windows 9x.

So yeah, it's more than just "they don't want to support it". It's "they've intentionally done things to prevent applications compiled under newer compilers from running on Windows 9x." Things you can sort of code around with tricks or hacks, but not always, and still it's finicky.

Edit: Re-wrote the post because what I wrote the first time was not specific enough.

Edited by Valik, 08 June 2008 - 09:09 PM.


#66 sanjkoc

sanjkoc

    Seeker

  • Active Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 09:41 PM

So yeah, it's more than just "they don't want to support it". It's "they've intentionally done things to prevent applications compiled under newer compilers from running on Windows 9x."

It's exactly what I mean. (And I think it's a bad thing and that should not be allowed)
Have you ever considered using something not from M$?

Thanks for the explanations. J.

#67 Valik

Valik

    Former developer.

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,879 posts

Posted 08 June 2008 - 10:23 PM

It's exactly what I mean. (And I think it's a bad thing and that should not be allowed)
Have you ever considered using something not from M$?

Thanks for the explanations. J.

You sure do want us to do a lot of needless work, don't you? All to support a 10-year old operating system so that it can get cutting edge features it probably doesn't support anyway?

#68 GEOSoft

GEOSoft

    Sure I'm senile. What's your excuse?

  • MVPs
  • 10,573 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 02:48 AM

Dropping support for the older systems actually makes perfect sense. Microsoft themselves dropped it 5 years ago. The percentage of people still using the older systems does not justify the number of restrictions that have to be placed on software in order to support it. The solution is simple. If you need to support 9x then use the existing release version. All of the support you will ever need for 9x is already in there and more. Remember that AutoIt is designed to work with Windows so it is best if it is written to support the most popular versions and 9x systems do not fall into that catagory any longer. The average number of posts in the Windows 98 support group has dropped of to less than 10 per day when 5 years ago it was over 200 per day. That's not because people have gotten used to 98 and no longer have issues with it. It's not because 98 has suddenly become more reliable, because it has not changed. It's because the number of users has dropped at approximately the same ratio. Now all of the support requests are coming in on the XP and Vista groups.
GeorgeQuestion about decompiling code? Read the decompiling FAQ and don't bother posting the question in the forums.Be sure to read and follow the forum rules. -AKA the AutoIt Reading and Comprehension Skills test.*** The PCRE (Regular Expression) ToolKit for AutoIT - (Updated Oct 20, 2011 ver:3.0.1.13) - Please update your current version before filing any bug reports. The installer now includes both 32 and 64 bit versions. No change in version number.Visit my Blog .. currently not active but it will soon be resplendent with news and views. Also please remove any links you may have to my website. it is soon to be closed and replaced with something else."Old age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill!"

#69 trids

trids

    Hmmm .. and what have we here?

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,004 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 06:32 AM

If you're going to ditch support for older operating systems, please keep a download link active for the last release that does support them. Even if you have to label it as "no longer supported".

Now that win2K is the lowest common denominator, it is next in line for the chop. But my clients all still run win2K, and are unlikely to budge to XP or Vista. In fact one is considering Linux, but that's another story.

So even though M$ is throwing out the "bathwater", please keep the babies safe for those who can't afford to keep up with the revenue demands of M$.

TIA :)

#70 sanjkoc

sanjkoc

    Seeker

  • Active Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 06:48 AM

You sure do want us to do a lot of needless work, don't you? All to support a 10-year old operating system so that it can get cutting edge features it probably doesn't support anyway?

No, I don't want it. I'm very sorry you think I did. I thought it was easier to keep 9x compatibility. Now you explained all the difficulties and I only have to thank you all for your wonderful job.

Ciao. J.

#71 damian666

damian666

    Polymath

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 08:27 AM

ok, but then the next question, why not support all the nt-based OS's?
is the difficulty also found for nt4?
ofcourse i know it wont support new functions, but it just seems more ... i dont know...
just a question, :)

Damian666
Posted Imageand proud of it!!!

#72 AdmiralAlkex

AdmiralAlkex

    Here be dragons

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,607 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 08:41 AM

ok, but then the next question, why not support all the nt-based OS's?
is the difficulty also found for nt4?
ofcourse i know it wont support new functions, but it just seems more ... i dont know...
just a question, :)

Damian666

Why would anyone ever want that?? :)

I dont understand why because in my opinion NT 4.0 is totally UNusable for humans as Win98/ME and Win2000/XP can do most if not everything better. (I would even go to Neptune or Vista before running NT4.0)

#73 Jon

Jon

    Up all night to get lucky

  • Administrators
  • 10,294 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 10:45 AM

ok, but then the next question, why not support all the nt-based OS's?
is the difficulty also found for nt4?
ofcourse i know it wont support new functions, but it just seems more ... i dont know...
just a question, :)

Damian666


NT 4 was a little easier to support than 9x, but similarly executables produced in VC 2005+ simply don't run on it.

#74 Jon

Jon

    Up all night to get lucky

  • Administrators
  • 10,294 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 10:47 AM

If you're going to ditch support for older operating systems, please keep a download link active for the last release that does support them. Even if you have to label it as "no longer supported".

That's the plan.

#75 damian666

damian666

    Polymath

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts

Posted 09 June 2008 - 10:55 AM

Why would anyone ever want that??

I dont understand why because in my opinion NT 4.0 is totally UNusable for humans as Win98/ME and Win2000/XP can do most if not everything better. (I would even go to Neptune or Vista before running NT4.0)


then you dont know how much servers there are still running on nt4 software man :)

@ jon , thanx for the reply, if thats the deal, then i totally understand.
we will just use the current version for it, as you keep a link up, it cant hurt.

thanx for getting me in a world i could have never dreamt up on my own :)

Damian666
Posted Imageand proud of it!!!

#76 BasicOs

BasicOs

    Universalist

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 459 posts

Posted 10 June 2008 - 03:48 AM

Hi, I congrat Autoit Team for the great work done,
Before, I was writting here, about a no-end street (a T street), about jumping into 2008 Compiler :
http://www.autoitscript.com/forum/index.ph...st&p=492585

Hardware prices is dropping so fast that XP will be forgotten in a few months, Vista will be the next OS as stated by M$ non written laws, anyone can keep working with old Autoit exes for more reasons but because OS 98 changes. I mean previous versions of Autoit are also very good versions, lighter, and quick. "autoit was allways good" :)

My problem for that all is to code, the programming in a new way (version changes) not the OS underneath, :)

Questions:
1._Will this changes involve also syntax changes? If they dont, new Vista machines are really cheap, and I can recompile old .au3 into new .EXEs with new Autoit versions. Nowadays OS changes are more than 10 times cheaper than 5 years ago, but handwork of recoding .au3 syntax. Value Handwork (as ours, he, is expensive) Is it right?
2.- Is it not possible to move the old 98 code into a 2008 non MS compiler?, that do not force you to a "must" make .exes only for Windows but for other different OS. Nowadays, Autoit is not only for low level processes, but for colourfull data interfaces and database accesses that can be moved into a friendly web page or any OS. :)
3.-Similar to point 2. I have heard and seen, new compilers let you create web apps, from the code, with AUTOIT "save as Web".
Do the new compiler create an autoit.exe - engine where you can copy your au3 files for been used as web pages directly?. I mean, you get 2 versions of Autoit, one for binaries and scripts, another one where you can ADD some autoit scripts to be executed as php. (I know there are now a days some engines but not native to Autoit, YOU CAN NOT COPY one script and in one second and run it from web). The good side is that autoit can script (not only compiling), so the changes can be made in the autoit.exe, as autoitweb.exe, so you get your GUI into a Web page directly, and SQL database access also. Is it too difficult to have an autoitweb.exe that rewrite on-the fly output, these beatiful au3s we make every day. (I know low level access UDF could not be done). You could have no knowledge of html, and run an autoit web page.
The good side of it all is that we can have working autoit into any PDA, linux or whatever, when the server got autoit.exe

Thanks to all, great Autoit programming. Remember programming is not only programming it is thinking, that belongs to no OS directly. Do not mix coding with algorithm, Autoit makes algorithm and coding very near, and that is the great point, do twice job done with one hit.
Salu2 :P
Do not forget Windows Vista can be LAST Monopoly OS, AS new competitors arise like PDA´S OSs, it may fail in next version or not, Roman Empire was bigger than MS, and it dissapeared.
Edit: better explaining.
Moving into something new with a good reason for future, estrategic is not only for today but also for tomorrows programming.

Edited by BasicOs, 12 June 2008 - 01:20 PM.

Autoit.es - Foro Autoit en Español Word visitors Image Clustrmap image: Posted Image- Football Spanish team - Spanish team: Casillas, Iniesta, Villa, Xavi, Puyol, Campdevilla, etc..Programando en Autoit+Html - Coding Autoit-Html - Arranca programas desde Internet - Preprocesador de Autoit a http

#77 sanjkoc

sanjkoc

    Seeker

  • Active Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 14 June 2008 - 10:35 AM

For the records: M$ in his war against his own old o.s. still has proud opponents like the guys of browser Opera.
Opera 9.50 is just out, is fast and free and works in "any system running Windows 95 (or later)".

Long life to AutoIt (and to Opera). J.

#78 MrCreatoR

MrCreatoR

    Must AutoIt!

  • MVPs
  • 3,250 posts

Posted 14 June 2008 - 11:40 AM

For the records: M$ in his war against his own old o.s. still has proud opponents like the guys of browser Opera.
Opera 9.50 is just out, is fast and free and works in "any system running Windows 95 (or later)".

Long life to AutoIt (and to Opera). J.


Well, Opera is one of those products that will support everything Posted Image (and i mean it in a good way) - It's supporting Linux platforms as well :)
Using OS: Win 7 Professional, Using AutoIt Ver(s): 3.3.6.1 / 3.3.8.1

Posted Image AutoIt Russian CommunityPosted Image Projects: ATT - Application Translate Tool [new] | BlockIt - Block files & folders [new] | SIP - Selected Image Preview [new] | SISCABMAN - SciTE Abbreviations Manager [new] | AutoIt Path Switcher | AutoIt Menu for Opera! | YouTube Download Center! | Desktop Icons Restorator | Math Tasks | KeyBoard & Mouse Cleaner | CaptureIt - Capture Images Utility | CheckFileSize ProgramPosted Image UDFs: OnAutoItErrorRegister - Handle AutoIt critical errors [new] | AutoIt Syntax Highlight [new] | Opera Library! | Winamp Library | GetFolderToMenu | Custom_InputBox()! | _FileRun UDF | _CheckInput() UDF | _GUIInputSetOnlyNumbers() UDF | _FileGetValidName() UDF | _GUICtrlCreateRadioCBox UDF | _GuiCreateGrid() | _PathSplitByRegExp() | _GUICtrlListView_MoveItems - UDF | GUICtrlSetOnHover_UDF! | _ControlTab UDF! | _MouseSetOnEvent() UDF! | _ProcessListEx - UDF | GUICtrl_SetResizing - UDF! | Mod. for _IniString UDFs | _StringStripChars UDF | _ColorIsDarkShade UDF | _ColorConvertValue UDF | _GUICtrlTab_CoverBackground | CUI_App_UDF | _IncludeScripts UDF | _AutoIt3ExecuteCode | _DragList UDF | Mod. for _ListView_Progress | _ListView_SysLink | _GenerateRandomNumbers | _BlockInputEx | _IsPressedEx | OnAutoItExit Handler | _GUICtrlCreateTFLabel UDF | WinControlSetEvent UDF | Mod. for _DirGetSizeEx UDFPosted Image Examples: ScreenSaver Demo - Matrix included | Gui Drag Without pause the script | _WinAttach()! | Turn Off/On Monitor | ComboBox Handler Example | Mod. for "Thinking Box" | Cool "About" Box | TasksBar Imitation DemoLike the examples/UDFs? Please rate the topic (up-right corner of the post header: Rating Posted Image)* === My topics === *

==========================================================Posted Image==========================================================

AutoIt is simple, subtle, elegant. © AutoIt Team


#79 sanjkoc

sanjkoc

    Seeker

  • Active Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 18 June 2008 - 08:14 PM

Even if just released Firefox 3 is said to work only in Windows 2000, XP, Server 2003 and Vista, it seems to work very well on Win98SE that has KernelEX ( http://x86.neostrada.pl/KernelEx/ ) installed. Too bad I also tried AutoIt v3.2.13.2 and it doesn't work, even if its Au3Info does. It would have been nice.

Hurrah for AutoIt! J.

#80 damian666

damian666

    Polymath

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts

Posted 18 June 2008 - 09:33 PM

so, will teh future release be able to install side by side with the last supported legacy one then?

you know, just like in the beta one?
els we have to fuck around with the different versions and stuff.

could be a good idea right?

damian666
Posted Imageand proud of it!!!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users