Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <429F8915.8000904@familiehaase.de> Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 00:32:53 +0200 From: "Gerrit P. Haase" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Drop Win9x support? (was: Serious performance problems) References: <14CEE0B69DBDFC41A192613D8B4098CA016595AB AT XCH-CORP DOT staktek DOT com> In-Reply-To: <14CEE0B69DBDFC41A192613D8B4098CA016595AB@XCH-CORP.staktek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Terry Dabbs wrote: > No! > > I am supporting applications requiring cygwin on '95 and '98 that are > not going away anytime soon. I have not seen any Win98/ME PC since about 5 years, we're using NT all over the place. As I started to work in this business NT4 was current, then W2K came up, now every new box is delivered with XP, all NT based systems. I cannot imagine why someone with a PC not older than 5 years doesn't want to spend 100$ to buy an XP license. It should always be possible to run every Win98/ME binary on XP. I was able to run some old PC Games on XP which I couldn't run for about 5 years because the lack of Win98 in my location. The XP system supports running those old binaries. And if you really need Cygwin for Win98, you may use 1.5.x forever. As I have heard, there are still people out there who are running NT4 Server, for about ten years now, using Cygwin B20 since 1999;) It is fitting their needs, so why should they upgrade? Gerrit -- =^..^= -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/