On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Ben Carroll <ben@q9y.net> wrote:

While forcefully dropping XP support would seem like a waste of time, and
> somewhat arbitrary.  If windows builds just stops working for XP, it just
> stops working, however I don't foresee that happening.  I would make a
> reasonable guess that the client probably would even run without fuss on
> Win2k.
>

The _WIN32_WINNT define that is used (0x0501) makes Windows XP the lowest
version that the software will run on. It would be trivial to bump this to
Windows Vista (0x0600).

But in that case the user won't get a helpful message, the software will
outright refuse to run. So I thought, maybe it makes sense to show a
message that XP support is going to be removed - which must happen sooner
or later.

The insecurity of the platform adds urgence to this. So I thought "let's
ask for advice on the mailing list".

But what I get is contortions into unrelated topics (what does auto-update
have to do with this?), paranoid banter about 'manipulating users',
diversions into other topics. Sure, there's a thin line between being
helpful and being seen as manipulative, but it's over the top to compare
this with in-browser banners. It could be so much as a one-time message.

But it's time to close this issue. I'll do nothing here. I will however
stop testing on a Windows XP VM myself.

Wladimir