why p3d 2.4 does not support windows 8.1

[jmdriskell 178]

My point is that ANY software developer who ignores Win 8.1 (and whatever comes after it) and bases his products to older versions of Windows is probably heading for oblivion.  According to the data above, a sizable percentage of users are still running XP and a few are running NT!  These are probably specialty system such as point of sale or such written by vendors who are either too lazy to update the product or who are now out of business trapping the end users in old operating systems.  This is not to say that Windows 7 is going anywhere soon, but developers need to embrace the current release versions of Windows to meet a ever growing population of end users.

 

Jim Driskell

[Tabs 2,790]

My point is that ANY software developer who ignores Win 8.1 (and whatever comes after it) and bases his products to older versions of Windows is probably heading for oblivion.  According to the data above, a sizable percentage of users are still running XP and a few are running NT!  These are probably specialty system such as point of sale or such written by vendors who are either too lazy to update the product or who are now out of business trapping the end users in old operating systems.  This is not to say that Windows 7 is going anywhere soon, but developers need to embrace the current release versions of Windows to meet a ever growing population of end users.

 

Jim Driskell

 

Come back to me in a few years - I'll bet you we're still here despite not supporting Windows 8.

 

There are a lot more reasons besides the joystick disconnect thing that developers like us aren't supporting it. Start with the way the OS enforces MS's paradigm of processes not being able to write to the Program Files folders or their subfolders - the core FSX exe and engine were written long before these OS paradigms were put in place and it causes all sorts of issues when you can't write to your addon's config files or panel states etc because the OS denies the exe the write permissions to do it. In Windows 8, even running as administrator often does not get around this issue as it usually does in 7. If LM can get around this in the code, then great, but my guess is (as usual) it's not nearly as easy as the armchair experts thing.

[mgh 89]

My point is that ANY software developer who ignores Win 8.1 (and whatever comes after it) and bases his products to older versions of Windows is probably heading for oblivion.  According to the data above, a sizable percentage of users are still running XP and a few are running NT!  These are probably specialty system such as point of sale or such written by vendors who are either too lazy to update the product or who are now out of business trapping the end users in old operating systems.  This is not to say that Windows 7 is going anywhere soon, but developers need to embrace the current release versions of Windows to meet a ever growing population of end users.

 

Jim Driskell

 

In the commercial worlld companies don't care about the operating system - what matters is the applications they use.

 

Having to change an operating system is an wanted overhead. Not only do companies have to buy new operating system licences, but they face the cost of have revalidating  their existing applications and,  In critical areas may have to run them in parallel on the old and new operating systems. That's why most companies i've worked for run old operating system and then only now and again update when there's a real need to do so - not because pressure from the computer industry.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

It's also because there isn't really a cost advantage in upgrading an OS from one version to the next. Every upgrade has a lot of overhead associated with it, as it keeps the IT staff busy. Microsoft keeps telling people that each new OS is better, but there's really no proof of that. The only major change  to Windows that was useful was moving to 64 bits. Most of the UI changes are either basically fluff or worse, distractions.

[Guest]

 

 

in p3d website only windows 7 is support it

 

that's not correct ... see here: http://www.prepar3d.com/frequently-asked-questions/

 

 

Is Prepar3D v2 Compatible with Windows 8?

Yes, Prepar3D v2 is compatible with Windows 8. However not all hardware drivers have been updated for Windows 8 so it is important to check with the manufacturer of your hardware when upgrading to Windows 8.

 

 

Cheers, Rob.

[mgh 89]

that's not correct ... see here: http://www.prepar3d.com/frequently-asked-questions/

 

 

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

And will the manufacturer of the hardware tell us which drivers are needed for Prepar3d?

[spirit_66 2]

 

 

And will the manufacturer of the hardware tell us which drivers are needed for Prepar3d?

That's a naive question. But you can ask the hardware manufacturer about this.

 

I recommend to use always the newest drivers if one doesn't have a specific reason to stick with one specific driver.

Spirit

[mgh 89]

That's a naive question. But you can ask the hardware manufacturer about this.

 

Your naivity is in thinking the hardware manufuctures will even know which Prepar3D drivers are needed. They possibly aren't even aware of Prepar3D.

 

EDIT

 

Does Lockheed Martin even publish a list of the drivers needed for Prepar3D to use Win 8?

[vgbaron 3,627]

Your naivity is in thinking the hardware manufuctures will even know which Prepar3D drivers are needed. They possibly aren't even aware of Prepar3D.

 

EDIT

 

Does Lockheed Martin even publish a list of the drivers needed for Prepar3D to use Win 8?

Why on earth would they? It's hardware drivers - LM really doesn't have to research every obscure bit of hardware now do they?

 

Are we getting so lazy we cannot get off our duffs and assume the responsibility of making sure our hardware is compatible with our software?

 

Vic

[ubersu 78]

It takes the Government and DOD a couple of years to verify and authorize new OS's - Lockheed knows that.  It has nothing to do with how good or bad the OS may be.

 

DJ

[mgh 89]

 

 

Why on earth would they? It's hardware drivers - LM really doesn't have to research every obscure bit of hardware now do they?

Are we getting so lazy we cannot get off our duffs and assume the responsibility of making sure our hardware is compatible with our software?

 

That was a rhetorical question about Lockheed Martin telling us about the requieed drivers - as was my response about hardware manufacturers telling us which drivers are needed for Prepar3d.

[vgbaron 3,627]

That was a rhetorical question about Lockheed Martin telling us about the requieed drivers - as was my response about hardware manufacturers telling us which drivers are needed for Prepar3d.

Understood. I remember when Windows NT first came out. There was a very short list of compatible hardware published by MS. From then on it was up to the individual user to find out if their unlisted hardware would work. PITA

 

Vic

[harrry 322]

One of the best reasons to change to WIndows 8 is that you will next year not be able to buy Windows 7 and it has reached the end of server life.  This also means that new hardware may not run on Windows 7 as they need not provide drivers for it.

[mgh 89]

 

 

One of the best reasons to change to WIndows 8 is that you will next year not be able to buy Windows 7 and it has reached the end of server life. This also means that new hardware may not run on Windows 7 as they need not provide drivers for it.

 

I have no of changing my operating system next year.  Most commercial organisations won't either.

[harrry 322]

I have no of changing my operating system next year.  Most commercial organisations won't either.

I do not know where they will buy any new licences. or where you will buy a copy if need another one for say another computer if you have been using OEM versions.