>Received: by krypton.rain.com (rnr)
       via rnr; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:19:57 -0800
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-Message-From: "da Silva, Joe" <Joe DOT daSilva AT emailmetering DOT com>
Subject: Re: OT: SETVER equivalent for Windoze?
From: shadow AT krypton DOT rain DOT com (Leonard Erickson)
Message-ID: <20021118.201957.4j7.rnr.w165w@krypton.rain.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:19:57 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <01FD6EC775C6D4119CDF0090273F74A4FD695C@emwatent02.meters.com.au>
Organization: Shadownet
User-Agent: rnr/2.50
Received: from krypton by qiclab.scn.rain.com; Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:19 PST
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: opendos AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

In mail (today) you write:

> This is a bit off-topic, but I was wondering if there was a way to
> fake the version that Windoze 9X reports to applications, at bit
> like what SETVER did for DOS?
>
> M$ seems to be deliberately preventing installation of stuff like
> the newer versions Windoze Media Player on Windoze 95 (to
> force people to upgrade;-), but I doubt there is a legitimate
> reason for them doing so ...

I rather suspect that it's *not* to force people to upgrade, but rather
because by not supporting Win95, they can leave out a bunch of code
that's included as part of 98 and later.

-- 
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow{G})
 shadow AT krypton DOT rain DOT com        <--preferred
leonard AT qiclab DOT scn DOT rain DOT com     <--last resort