No Windows XP support? :( hack/workaround?

Whoops, didn't think you'd reply so quick so I edit'd my post with some lol's. I don't think 1000 units is shabby at all since a bit higher than that is about where my limit is on APM. I think that's just me though. I'm not all that good at micro, but I am a good strategist when given time to think. I really do love the way RTS play out though, the way they make you think on your feet and punish you for your mistakes rather instantly giving a very easy yet complex road to learn what to do and not do. Eventually, I'll get a better pc and run this game at a higher level, but running it at all is good enough for me.

Good luck with getting to 1m units. I look forward to your success (and/or failure because I like to see end results irrelevant of what happens.) I still hope for the best.

It wasn't fast but yeah it ran descent lol <-- 320x200 lowest settings. no midi.
Same with doom 2 it was a bit laggy.. lol i had to set doom to LOW RES .. OMG lol

I knew about windows ram limits (as I have worked around them in the past myself), but the fact the game was apparently also for 32 bit linux's confused me.

So it makes more sense when told;

That I can understand (as a web developer having at times to support IE6 I cant condemn this at all) but I do wish there was information on this when I was backing the game.
Or at least a "we might not be able too"
The kickstarter page just lists a generic "windows".

I am happy to use a Linux version...as it happens I dual boot anyway. Just feels like I should have known in advance, or a bit more of a public explanation. (appolgise if I missed this - if it was publicly stated in an accessible way and I just missed it then consider my statements withdrawn)

===

As for everyone else;

The reasons to upgrade should only ever be technical. "Its old!!" by itself Its an excuse for company's to be lazy.
As it stands, I am waiting to see where Microsoft goes too. It feels a bit late to invest in Windows7, and Windows8 is...umm...well, there's enough arguments online for that. Needless to say, the core of something can be far superior, and other factors can still be off-putting.

Well technically your OS is out of date so you kinda just answered you own statement .. lol

I wish PA would run on my gaming beast

I mean why shouldn't we go back to supporting Win 3.1 it's probably the best/most stable OS microsoft ever made .. hahahahahahahaha
*jokes*

From personal experience i would recommend windows 7 for the average desktop user who likes the way windows XP or vista feels.
For someone using a touchscreen based device i would reccomend Window 8 its largly based towards supporting touch based devices.
But i will also like to state that Window 8 does actually improve upon windows 7 performance, many will argue the point but i have persoanlly seen the difference between almost every version of windows and how they handle system recources and windows 8 is the least resource hungry OS out of them all bar windows XP wich is soon to be no longer supported. But this also depends on your hardware too!! your hardware needs to be able to support the OS too (Almost anything Core 2 Duo or later is ok for anything upto Window 8).

If you wanted to goto windows 8 but make it feel and act like windows 7 in layout and OS feel , then install Stardock Start8 it will literally turn window 8 into a window 7 styled OS for only $5 and it is perfectly functional.

Or goto Windows 8.1 wich i think returns the old start button and menu too.

It only returns the button, which still opens the start screen

Then stardock Start8 is the way to go

Actually, I'm curious, what's everybody's beef with Win7?
It only seems more stable, more powerful and more user-friendly than XP.

It's more a matter of people are content with what they have and when forced to upgrade they get a completely different interface to deal with wich becomes uncomfortable or awkward untill the person learns the new interface layout.
I honestly think most complaints about OS's are related to people being comfortable with what they know and not wanting to change.

I managed the roll out of both Windows 7 and Office 2007 at the company I work for. This was pretty much the #1 complaint, often accompanied by things like "But I can't do X anymore", all of which were still possible (or easier), they just never even attempted to find it if it wasn't exactly where it used to be.

Sounds rather childish. 'I don't want to learn any new things!' Makes me wonder how they learned how to use an OS in the first place.

Windows 8 on the other hand...

Agreed... but back in the day lol,, i remember people complaing about going to mobile phones and then going from analogue to digital and i even remember old people refusing to buy computers becuase they didn't want to learn anything new "OMG i don't want a computer, what would i ever need one of those fancy thingers for!!"

It comes down to the old saying "You can't teach an old dog new tricks" which totally relates to my post about people are comfortable with what they have and most dont like the idea of new things.
Im not one of those people but there are many of them out there still.

I don't remember anybody doing anything like this for Win7

Silly saying that has no basis in reality, a properly motivated dog can learn tricks at any age. its the people who still have a VCR hooked up that waste our time with these trivial things. I enjoy learning new things, and hate it when advancements are held back due to unwilling adopters.

One of the big reasons I decided to back was 64-bit native.

It's about freaking time.
Glad Uber isn't stuck in the past and is thinking to the future

I've had 8+ gigs of ram for like 7+ years now its about ******* time! I'd really like to use it.

Agreed, "it's old" in and of itself is short-sighted consumerist thinking. Associated behavior could also be "not invented here/by me syndrome".

End of life, that is to say lack of all ongoing support, seems like a pretty big technical problem to me? Hardware will die over time and require replacements (which will not be available/compatible/cost an arm and a leg), security updates will not be made available, developer requests are ignored, declining installation base means targeting older systems is not worth the financial outlay, etc.

Putting technical merit above all else might seem like a good idea but frequently isn't practical. Scope, cost, schedule - pick two.

The problems most seem to have is Microsoft has been breaking the backwards compatibility and changing a generally ubiquitous user interface combined with individual people being ignorant/unwilling to learn. While perhaps not ideal this is generally fair enough.

Windows 7 is actually significantly better to manage in a corporate environment. The 64-bit support is clearly better coming from Windows XP (which is the most likely upgrade path) but for your average user running Office/IE/Explorer and probably bugger all else that means next to nothing. The opportunity to refresh the baked in hardware support is a far more valuable addition.

There was a significant uproar with Vista about hardware/software backwards compatibility. If anything Microsoft had been bending over for years to support backwards compatibility and when they finally tried to clean out some of the cruft users had to wear the price. This was alleviated by the time Windows 7 rolled out due to natural hardware attrition/refocused developer attention. They have to a smaller extent gone and screwed this up again in Windows 8/8.1.

User friendly is a subjective term. The changes in the interface may have been small enough to not overly matter to a power user but even at the corporate management level there is significant differences and a lot of relearning was required between XP/Vista/7. Your average users expect computers to operate like cars, turn it on, turn the wheel, push the brake/accelerator.

EDIT: Part of the beef is that Windows 7/Office 2007 introduced the ribbon interface, another new thing for people to learn.

This is because the converged desktop paradigm is currently in an (arguably) unusable phase for a number of users. To go with the car analogy it's kind of like Windows 8 hid the accelerator in the glovebox.

The noise around Gnome 3/KDE 4 and their convergence attempts has been just as vitriolic (Torvald's called Gnome 3 "completely unusable". It might happen one day but at the moment I'd much prefer to just use a well built interface for the particular input/output paradigm I am currently using.