Some posts mentioned good reasons for continuing to use XP or maintain backwards compatibilty: If it makes development of LFS easier and allows WINE to work that are perfectly valid reasons.
Similiar with some systems/machines in industrial use where upgrading is not easily possible because production must go on.
(Although I see no good reasons for switching off security updates?)

But: That is all very specifique decisions made by technical peoplepersons.
Such users have the knowledge to keep their system secure. (or can wage the risks, as there is never 100% security)
Problem is most users are not like this:
Many happily double-click on holiday.jpg.exe to see the picture.
Or want to download some file and get fooled into installing some download-accelerator-whatever-trojan.
That does not even cover the more subtile infection forms.
How else can worms like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conficker spread to million of computers?
In tech-orientated forum such as this one it is hard to imagine but not everybody is so good with computers.

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Oh no, please don't do that...

nVidia 3D Vision doesn't run with OGL at the moment.

who cares about nvidia anyway

i dont know if anyone have suggested already but move to mantle! :P

Reminder : there isn't a problem that we are trying to solve.

The only problem is people fantasizing that there is some kind of problem with which operating system I use or which version of DirectX LFS uses.

It's quite puzzling that people think there is a problem. Why should anyone care what OS I use? DX9 has huge abilities that we are not yet using.

It's just nonsense and I can't understand why people keep coming back to it, as if my choice of OS is hindering something.

THERE IS NO PROBLEM. STOP TRYING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T EXIST!

Sorry Scawen, but that was just too fitting not to post it, pls no ban k thx

The problem is that we're talking about 2 different situations;

1: Running XP in a business sense when it's only carrying out a production/developement role.

2: Running XP in a home machine.

1: I understand what you say regarding XP in this role, hopefully it's being used offline, and if not, it's being used without visiting torrent sites or infact, any site which may expose it to malware. This includes Yahoo, Steam, Origin, the latest site to be hacked though heartbleed, or any other hacker.
If you avoid the internet then XP is perfectly safe to use. I still have a client running DOS 3.11 as they don't want to change software. It's not on the net, I have a spare box in case his eventually fails, so no problem.

2: Home PC, This machine is used for everything, especially error code 666 ( Teenagers ), IMHO, Linux is great in this role, no issue with malware, they can't download 'Speed up my PC', conduit, 'Reg Doctor' or any of the other crap that I make money from cleaning up.
In this role, XP is only going to become more and more of a liability. If this is the use your PC gets, Dawes is completly correct. And, in my view, if there's some piece of XP software that really doesn't run under 7 (AutoCad 2002 as an example, ) then that run's perfectly under Win 7's virtual XP mode. Yes, in virtual mode you don't get your video card but that isn't an issue with production software.

TL;DR, Don't run XP unless you know why your running XP.

Quote from Racer X NZ :

TL;DR, Don't run XP unless you know why your running XP.

No. Don't run XP unless you have literally millions of dollars invested in machines that rely on some strange XP setup, and switching away from XP would cost you millions per day of lost productivity.

Sorry but no, if it's not used on the net then there's nothing wrong with XP, as such, as an operating system. In fact, it's damn good.
It's simply no longer supported by micro$oft unless you pay them lot's of $ for ongoing support. Which they are doing, only not publicly. So, you need to pay M$ even more to continue to get the support that they are still doing. But, for the non paying plebs, XP is no longer supported.
Hence my support for open source software !

Edit: Scrawen, I don't care what your using to develop, development is happening, loud cheering from this part of the world.......:huepfenic
The conversation from me is simply about using XP day to day, not for a specific task that you stated months ago could only be done on XP with DirectX9c.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

No. Don't run XP unless you have literally millions of dollars invested in machines that rely on some strange XP setup, and switching away from XP would cost you millions per day of lost productivity.

There's nothing strange about using what works, and nothing more. Don't fix what ain't broke.

Quote from Breizh :

There's nothing strange about using what works, and nothing more. Don't fix what ain't broke.

Then why don't we all drive Model T's? They clearly worked.

Quote from Scawen :

Maybe OpenGL will be the way to go

It might be easier to make a native Linux/Mac port than you think:

https://github.com/ValveSoftware/ToGL

So you can focus on Windows version to have whatever they need. Linux gamers now can't stop fapping that Civilisation V is available for Linux. Linux gamers pay the highest prices for Humble Bundles. Maybe it's worth porting. Maybe not.

Shall I burst your bubble with Mac's idea of just ensuring that their later OS's won't run on older hardware?. At least M$ don't do that, well, sort of.........

If your only actually being productive then the OS is simply a filter to the hardware, and a way to be productive.
TBO, XP can work well on older hardware for years, it's only our disposable society that says 'NO' this is old and you can't use it any more !

Yes, at least a Model T still works, (unlike XP !) it works as an old vehicle, it isn't a Vayron, but it still works within it's parameters. M$ have decided that XP can't even do that.

Just a minute, just found myself standing up for XP, slaps face, Like a Model T, XP works within it's boundries. It's not the latest but it works, and in the right situation, it works well.

Car example, rutted, corrigated dirt road with a river crossing. Race between a Veyron and a model T, guess which will win ?

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Then why don't we all drive Model T's? They clearly worked.

Because people wanted to go faster? Because sales was more important than they are to LFS? What is the analogy with what Scawen wants to do with LFS for LFS players? Regardless of whether that's Scawen, or players in the usual meaning.

The person himself, that is making LFS, says there's no lack of performance to get from XP. Unlike in the Model T analogy.

If I did not use XP, then I would have to move to a later version of DirectX and that would mean LFS could not be run on XP, Linux or Mac.

Explanation here: https://www.lfsforum.net/showt ... php?p=1857760#post1857760

Some people are offended that I am using XP, or that LFS uses DX9. I guess that is simply unexplainable, like people who get angry about women feeding their own baby from their breast, which is entirely natural and the best thing for the baby.

But as there is no good reason at all for me not to use XP or DX9, the important thing is to allow LFS to run on as wide a range of hardware / OS as possible. There really are people out there using XP, Linux and Mac! Nothing wrong with those guys, it's good that we have choice! Some people would like to eliminate them from our community simply because they are personally offended by my choice of operating system.

Well it is a funny old world out there hahahaha!

Quote from Gunn :

At my workplace we use XP on several machines as a neccessity for backwards compatibility. Our company deploys and manages cutting edge radio technology and is not a big company at all. We were also able to strip XP down to the essentials and it runs very very fast and is very stable. It is easy to get rid of the junk in XP.

While I much prefer Windows 7 as an OS, I'd be an imbocile to state that XP is useless or redundant, having seen it flawlessly operate year in - year out with no issues at all. As for security, there is plenty you can do to protect your network and system without Microsoft's help. Most security issues concerning home computing lie somewhere between the chair and the keyboard.

Every statement made here denouncing XP as useless or dangerous or past its useful life smacks of ignorance about computing in general and of operating system use in particular.

Repeatedly stating the situation to the contrary will not change the facts.

Some people just seem to think if it's not the latest and greatest, it's not any good.
LOL our paint and screen printing departments still use 98. But then again their computers are pretty much just file cabinets for color formulas. I really don't see where our company should spend any extra money updating that.
Just because Microsoft made a new OS. How would the newer OS help them enter data over the 98 dinosaurs they have now?... Oh well... Speaking of...

It all depends on the final goal. If the goal is to run the LFS with the maximum possible devices and OS, stick to XP and DX9, why not?

Any way, which are the advantages of using DX11 or Win8.1? Can LFS look a bit modern using DX11? Or could it be modernized using DX9? Is DX9 capable of rain effects? Sun reflections? Realistic smoke particles? Better physics?

I'm not a fanboy of the last hardwares or software. But generally, not always, newer means better.

Quote from Racer X NZ :

The problem is that we're talking about 2 different situations;

1: Running XP in a business sense when it's only carrying out a production/developement role.

2: Running XP in a home machine.

1: I understand what you say regarding XP in this role, hopefully it's being used offline, and if not, it's being used without visiting torrent sites or infact, any site which may expose it to malware. This includes Yahoo, Steam, Origin, the latest site to be hacked though heartbleed, or any other hacker.
If you avoid the internet then XP is perfectly safe to use. I still have a client running DOS 3.11 as they don't want to change software. It's not on the net, I have a spare box in case his eventually fails, so no problem.

2: Home PC, This machine is used for everything, especially error code 666 ( Teenagers ), IMHO, Linux is great in this role, no issue with malware, they can't download 'Speed up my PC', conduit, 'Reg Doctor' or any of the other crap that I make money from cleaning up.
In this role, XP is only going to become more and more of a liability. If this is the use your PC gets, Dawes is completly correct. And, in my view, if there's some piece of XP software that really doesn't run under 7 (AutoCad 2002 as an example, ) then that run's perfectly under Win 7's virtual XP mode. Yes, in virtual mode you don't get your video card but that isn't an issue with production software.

TL;DR, Don't run XP unless you know why your running XP.

there isnt a problem
who the hell cares where they are developing lfs? will it matter if it was in a xp or in 7 8 or freaking windows 100.000.000?

no NO no one cares where they are doing they work no one will say "oh he has an amd 631 thats bad developer i wont buy lfs"
when the time comes and he will be able to pass on newer (or whatever else) api then he will update according to his needs


@scawen
i think i heard that ms "reinstall" some sort of "old panel" for debug in dx 9.0 and back into windows 7 some months ago if my memory is correct

(and just because we are in 2014 doesnt mean lfs needs to have top notch graphics..i would love some slight update just enough but not to make graphics card to struggle to render 30+ cars..)

Quote from giannhsgr1 :

@scawen
i think i heard that ms "reinstall" some sort of "old panel" for debug in dx 9.0 and back into windows 7 some months ago if my memory is correct

I have only heard the opposite. Windows 7 did originally allow developers to switch on the debug version of DirectX 9, but recently disabled that ability. My understanding of it is a deliberate move to discourage developers from developing for anything other than the latest versions of Windows, to subsequently increase sales. It's a heavy handed approach that basically turns me away from wanting to support them in the long run.

Quote from giannhsgr1 :

(and just because we are in 2014 doesnt mean lfs needs to have top notch graphics..i would love some slight update just enough but not to make graphics card to struggle to render 30+ cars..)

On this subject, there is a well known misconception that increasing the version of DirectX can magically make the graphics look better. But it doesn't work like that. As you can see, we recently upgraded to DX9 and it looks pretty much identical. In fact, DirectX 9 is very advanced, a 'mature' version of DirectX that allow many possibilities for programmable vertex and pixel shaders. It allows a whole world of possibilities. LFS hardly scratches the surface of what you can do with it.

The later versions of DirectX don't really add very much. To that extent it's a bit like XP vs later versions of Windows. Microsoft reached a good level with XP and DX9, and can't really sell later versions on their own merit. So, to keep sales and cash flow up and make the shareholders happy, they are having to resort to bullying tactics, force, scaremongering and deceptive advertising to try to get people to upgrade.

I'm pretty certain I remember the dx9 debug discussion from one of the test patch threads, petern got debug output to work on 64bit windows 7. I don't know if that changed by now though.

Edit: as mentioned by peter here https://www.lfsforum.net/showt ... php?p=1830896#post1830896

I tried to install Visual Studio Express 2013 on my Windows 7 computer but it wouldn't allow me to...Apparently I need Windows 8 but the next time I format my PC it will be to install a Linux distribution. Microsoft is treating developers like aseptic sheep. They try to manipulate you into thinking that you are supposed to upgrade and pay.

It's annoying especially when you know that Microsoft has the know-how to make productive software. I always longed for a Windows 7 light (faster OS stripped of unnecessary things) but it seems to me Linux is the new haven. For me an OS should be improved, optimized and not replaced every time the shareholders are not happy about their dividend...

Quote from troy :

I'm pretty certain I remember the dx9 debug discussion from one of the test patch threads, petern got debug output to work on 64bit windows 7. I don't know if that changed by now though.

Edit: as mentioned by peter here https://www.lfsforum.net/showt ... php?p=1830896#post1830896

I can't tell you how many hours I've spent trying to get it to work. It took a long time to believe that they actually disabled it.

I can't find the thing I've seen on MS site that actually states that, and I don't want to waste any more time on it, because there is simply no reason to. This conversation is going round and round like something very crazy indeed, although there isn't actually a problem that needs solving. But you can have a look here.
http://xboxforums.create.msdn. ... rums/p/111379/664676.aspx

I'm not going to reinstall Windows 7 without the appropriate patch and switch off updates, just so I can use the lovely lovely Windows 7 and still program LFS.

Lovely lovely Windows 7 is an awful timewasting mess and also doesn't even allow LFS to run on my two monitor setup. As I've stated before, for my purposes it is much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much worse than XP. So I have little incentive to use it, and don't even have the choice to use it, as I have explained many, many, many, many times.

"Hello, here's something that is a bit like what you have, but it doesn't do some of the things you want it to. It doesn't do anything better and it makes very easy tasks turn into a hair pulling nightmare."

"No thanks, I'll stick with what I have that doesn't have any known problems, thanks anyway"

By the way, do you start to see why Eric doesn't like posting here? These crazy conversations you end up having with people who can write but can't read. They are quite mentally tiring because you have to say the same thing dozens of times and still it is ignored and the conversation goes round and round like a wheel of deja vu. It seems like people have nothing to do so they play a fun game "wind up the developer who likes talking to the community". "All we have to do is keep repeating Microsoft marketing at him, regardless of his reply, and soon he'll become agitated which is great fun". That's probably not the case but it starts to look that way, when people talk to you and don't read the reply.

After a while it seems like there isn't any point saying anything because what you say is ignored.

OK, I know what will happen now. Someone will tell me that DX9 is only used by dinosaurs, XP is the Model T Ford of operating systems, it's time to move on to the latest and greatest thing.

But I've already explained why it isn't possible or desirable or necessary to do so.
https://www.lfsforum.net/showt ... php?p=1857760#post1857760

Quote from Scawen :

By the way, do you start to see why Eric doesn't like posting here? These crazy conversations you end up having with people who can write but can't read.

I feel a little like that myself, to be honest. Earlier in this thread you asked for a real-world example where security was able to be compromised simply by using unpatched software and running without an AV or some form of real-time protection (i.e. not by visiting shady sites or running .exe files from unknown sources). I provided such an example here (i.e. malvertising being served by major/popular/reputable websites which don't require any user interaction and don't require the user to visit a shady site), but you chose to ignore that post.

Oh come off it.

Eric never posted here when everything was unicorns and rainbows either.

Quote from edge3147 :

The fact that the devs are trying to cater to a now unsupported OS and it's hardware is just another fine example of wasted time on things that need to be forgotten and moved on from.

XP IS DEAD, do yourself a favor and buy a new PC. Any new PC that is purchased today or any day after this day will more than be capable of running LFS without any sort of upgrade.

This was the post on the first page that led to the debate over OS's. My question - How did a thread about Physics lead to this? Also, am I correct in thinking that it is ONLY Scawen that has to use XP? We can use Win7/8, Linux, Mac, Win 98 (can we still?) and XP if we want. Is this correct or have I missed something? Isn't that the message Scawen is trying to get across to people?

Quote from amp88 :

One of the most obvious examples would be some form of malvertising/drive-by-downloading which exploits vulnerabilities in browsers or the OS itself. The HTML5 FillDisk proof-of-concept exploit (see this video) is an example of effectively a browser exploit which requires no interaction from the user other than visiting a site with the exploit code. Due to the aforementioned increase in malvertising, this type of exploit code could be served by even popular/reputable websites (meaning you could be hit even if you didn't visit shady sites). All it takes is one compromised advert. These type of implementation bugs (the FillDisk exploit effectively worked by exploiting a poor implementation in major browsers) are exactly the sort of real world threat you leave yourself up to by using unpatched software. Up-to-date browsers and operating systems (along with AV/security applications) definitively decrease the risk of this type of infection e.g. by scanning or blocking remote scripts.

I'm also not sure how you can claim with absolute certainty that you've been virus/trojan/malware free for a decade, since there are certain types of malware which are very difficult or even nearly impossible to detect (rootkits, for instance, would be a classic example).

Here's your post. I did read it but it was basically about using browsers without patches. I always use the latest updates for my browser, but as I already said before, I don't use MS IE browser, so don't need to rely on MS updates.

I agree I can't say for sure my computer has not been infected. But I have not seen any ill effects at all. By using (an old version of) ZoneAlarm (from when it was good) I can stop any program that tries to access the internet without good reason do do so. I don't connect to unsecured networks and I don't allow Microsoft software to connect to the internet, I don't run "Boobies.jpg.exe" or "Your_Accounts.exe" type of programs that occasionally arrive in spam emails so I am still very confident that continuing with XP, behind a secure router, leaves me no more vulnerable to any threats than I was before (particularly as I didn't get MS updates before anyway).