Posted on 03/28/2007 6:51:38 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I just have to wonder. Are all your interactions in life as adversarial?
No but this is the only place I have to deal with such dispacable liars. Do you see that guy right on on this thread still trying to claim Windows 2000 is "unsupported" even though security patches will be avaiable till 2010? Why don't you ask him if he lies everywhere he goes instead.
"dispicable"
Not a word I use often, but appropriate here.
Actually it's even more versions ago. According to How MS is calling versions in Workstations it's Vista, 64-bit XP, XPMCE, XPSP2 (MCE and XP2 are mostly the same), XPSP1 and XP base, then finally Win2K. The cutoff point for IE7 is XPSP2, since then they support it before then they don't, so not only is Win2K out in the cold so is XPSP1 and XPbase.
No actually your demands beyond standard scope. Depending on how you want to view MCE and SP2 MS is supporting either 3 or 4 versions of the OS, Win2K is 3 more back from the support line.
Actually MS is making that case by cutting off support at XPSP2 they are clearly declaring that previous versions of XP are different enough to be beyond consideration.
No actually it's a perfectly legimate choice to have to make, if you want to stay current then you need to STAY current. If you don't want to stay current then you shouldn't bitch when something new and exciting comes out and you can't run it. If you want to watch HD-DVDs you need to get an HD-DVD player and plug it into an HDTV, same kind of thing, you need the new stuff to run the new stuff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.