POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.beta-test : Windows XP compatibility : Re: Windows XP compatibility Server Time
23 Apr 2024 14:22:57 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Windows XP compatibility  
From: Mr
Date: 22 Jul 2021 09:20:00
Message: <web.60f96fadd5a68e3b16086ed03f378f2@news.povray.org>
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 18.07.2021 um 17:24 schrieb HKarsten:
> > By the way, I fully support Leroy at this point: PovRay is an old program. I am
> > using it since 1991! And there are a lot of tools, running under DOS, Win95,
> > Win2K.
> > So what if you can run PovRay on Vista, or Win7 up to Win10 or Win11 only?
> > Do you like to run an emulator within an emulator to run your tools one day?
> The problem is that as time goes on, there comes a point where we want
> to add new features that we can't implement without breaking
> compatibility with (a) those old operatings systems and/or (b) even the
> newest build tools we can find that still target those operating systems.
> One day, the Visual Studio 2017 toolkit will no longer be supported by
> Microsoft, and some time thereafter we will no longer have access to a
> sufficiently secure build environment featuring that piece of software.
> When that happens, that'll be the day when we will definitely have to
> cease supporting XP for good.
> You just can't expect to forever have access to the latest and greatest
> new POV-Ray features on the oldest and coldest operating systems.
> So what's the solution to continue to use those old tools? Well, use a
> matching POV-Ray version, obviously. One from those olden golden days.
> That, or indeed run those tools under DOS-Box. I'm not sure how that
> emulator works, but it surely will have ways to export and import files
> from it, right?
> But the point has been taken: There are still POV-Ray users out there
> who want XP support, so we'll see what we can do.
> That's why we've asked.

I am surprised, we are not even talking about dropping windows XP or 32 bits
compatibility, right?

Note that the choice between XP-compatibility and performance is a
matter of the build tool used (Visual Studio 2010 will generate
XP-compatible binaries, while Visual Studio 2015 will generate faster
ones), so 64-bit XP-compatible binaries /can/ still be built from the
source code, as can faster 32-bit binaries.

And even if we were: So many other software have just recently made much bolder
moves with successfull results:  Blender dropped 32 bits support, Python even
dropped Windows 7 support! Don't get me wrong. I don't mean POV should just do
what others do, and as a user I love being able to compile POV on as many
platforms as possible. But if it slows down the overall innovation, which in
turns prevents from attracting many potential users and developers. that's not
the safest bet, because more users would then anyway be able to port, adapt,
test (and re-iterate) the sources to more platforms, legacy included.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the POV core team contingent, does not seem so
close from being as numerous and ressourcefull of a community as these ones. So
it sounds reasonable to lower such maintenance burdens on existing developers
temporarily to allow for a later regrowth of ubiquity which is indeed POV's
strongest "selling points". If it does have to happen one day, Now is also a
better time than ever to do such very mild support drops, one at a time, before
POV 4 gets on the rails and too many breakage at once may feel hard.

Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.