XP
Monday, February 10, 2003 by WOM | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Would you buy XP inorder to use WindowBlinds? I have XP but still voted for #2 because a lot of people don't have a couple hundred to get XP.
 |
|
Page 3 of 3 | |
|
|---|
IPlural
Reply #42 Thursday, February 13, 2003 4:30 AM
Reply #42 Thursday, February 13, 2003 4:30 AM
Guess you would have to be really clear on the pages where people would be reading about WB4 and there being a second release because of having to actually put the ( engine?) for lack of better understanding API's and such...
Though some might have to have it tattooed on their forhead before they grapsed it once the jones-ing started for it...
just my pov for what it's worth...
Though some might have to have it tattooed on their forhead before they grapsed it once the jones-ing started for it...
just my pov for what it's worth...
mr.bo
Reply #44 Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:39 AM
Reply #44 Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:39 AM
Frogboy, come on you aren't going to make us wait until fall right? You are just pulling all our legs. 
I think following the MS example on OS support is more than reasonable. I mean come on these are their products, and even they aren't too worried.
I think following the MS example on OS support is more than reasonable. I mean come on these are their products, and even they aren't too worried.
da_zman20
Reply #45 Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:51 PM
Reply #45 Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:51 PM
the way I see it is this brad, if you put out xp4 sooner will gain a better market, and probably keep more customers away from stylexp with the improvements in wb4... then you can always add the features later for Win 98 & win Me... because that is still part of your market... you have to make them happy 
but if you wait to release the final wb4 people might become impatient... and then we get websites like Stardocksucks.com and stuff like that... jk ...if anyone did such a thing... I would go mental.... 
but people would get impatient... and try to find something that they dont have to wait for... even if all they find is an inferior product... they will buy it...and never know any better...
but if you wait to release the final wb4 people might become impatient... and then we get websites like Stardocksucks.com and stuff like that... jk ...if anyone did such a thing... I would go mental.... 
but people would get impatient... and try to find something that they dont have to wait for... even if all they find is an inferior product... they will buy it...and never know any better...
da_zman20
Reply #46 Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:57 PM
Reply #46 Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:57 PM
as I was saying guys... I think a march release would be perfect... from a standpoint that stardock should do what they can now... to make money... because when longhorn comes out they are going to have a whole bunch of new things to skin and that point win 98 users will be even less...
and that point win 98 users will be even less... 
da_zman20
Reply #50 Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:52 PM
Reply #50 Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:52 PM
even less of them.. that's what I mean.... but not that windows shouldn't get windowblinds... they'ed have to wait till september anyways for the new features... but why hold back the xp users... it doesn't make sense... the new features will attract new customers... that's the way I see it
that's what I mean.... but not that windows shouldn't get windowblinds... they'ed have to wait till september anyways for the new features... but why hold back the xp users... it doesn't make sense... the new features will attract new customers... that's the way I see it
WOM
Reply #51 Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:56 PM
Reply #51 Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:56 PM
My guess is MS will stop supporting ME and prior once the next OS comes out.
UBoB
Reply #52 Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:58 PM
Reply #52 Thursday, February 13, 2003 6:58 PM
Release a WindowBlinds for Windows XP now. Corner that market. Perfect the software for users of earlier versions of Windows. Realease when ready. 
sig101
Reply #53 Thursday, February 13, 2003 7:26 PM
Reply #53 Thursday, February 13, 2003 7:26 PM
"Frogboy, come on you aren't going to make us wait until fall right? You are just pulling all our legs...I think following the MS example on OS support is more than reasonable."
I suspect FB already made his decision and framed the question in such a manner so that the public response would be obvious. The only question is why did Stardock announce that WB4 would include 9x and w2k support when FB previously made it clear that he did not want to continue support for "outdated" OS's? And is now apparently making it appear that for SD to provide such support might in some way compromise the timely availability of WB for XP. (Why else suggest delaying WB for XP until the Fall when it can be ready in March?)
Clearly, the decision should be made based on good business sense. By no stretch of the imagination or common sense does unnecessarily delaying WB4 for XP until the Fall appear a viable or even serious consideration. Some might consider that a proposal of doing just that is a tad disingenous and specious, frankly. The question is clearly framed to evoke the desired response.
Just make the common sense decision based on the market and cost/benefit considerations. A delay in WB4 for 9x/w2k is already clearly a given. So of course, that would come later than the XP version that is almost ready for prime time now. If the real issue is whether or not to drop support for those OS's entirely, well then just make the decision based on the facts and sound business strategy. Don't need loaded questions to get public support for that, IMO.
As for those outdated OS's no longer worth supporting, seems like W2K is still viable. If it's not a significant portion of the market to make it worthwhile to continue to support, that's another issue. But dead it ain't yet...at least per MS's own schedule:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/desktop/business/default.mspx
I suspect FB already made his decision and framed the question in such a manner so that the public response would be obvious. The only question is why did Stardock announce that WB4 would include 9x and w2k support when FB previously made it clear that he did not want to continue support for "outdated" OS's? And is now apparently making it appear that for SD to provide such support might in some way compromise the timely availability of WB for XP. (Why else suggest delaying WB for XP until the Fall when it can be ready in March?)
Clearly, the decision should be made based on good business sense. By no stretch of the imagination or common sense does unnecessarily delaying WB4 for XP until the Fall appear a viable or even serious consideration. Some might consider that a proposal of doing just that is a tad disingenous and specious, frankly. The question is clearly framed to evoke the desired response.
Just make the common sense decision based on the market and cost/benefit considerations. A delay in WB4 for 9x/w2k is already clearly a given. So of course, that would come later than the XP version that is almost ready for prime time now. If the real issue is whether or not to drop support for those OS's entirely, well then just make the decision based on the facts and sound business strategy. Don't need loaded questions to get public support for that, IMO.
As for those outdated OS's no longer worth supporting, seems like W2K is still viable. If it's not a significant portion of the market to make it worthwhile to continue to support, that's another issue. But dead it ain't yet...at least per MS's own schedule:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/desktop/business/default.mspx
bmetelsky
Reply #54 Thursday, February 13, 2003 10:39 PM
Reply #54 Thursday, February 13, 2003 10:39 PM
I would vote for releasing WB 4 for XP in March and the other later on. This is, of course, biased since I am an XP user exclusively.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 3 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #41 Thursday, February 13, 2003 12:31 AM
Probably. I use Win2K at work since XP is not our corporately supported OS. I think the current version of WB skins almost every conceivable control in Win2K, so that wouldn't bother me if there was a delay for Win2000. The stuff like skincast doesn't really interest me too much.
The poll makes it sound like WB would be an XP only product - as if it wouldn't run under 2000. That would be a bad idea, to abandon those users.