Importance of Windows XP support

[Greg Strong]

Well, I'd get to blame something other than myself, so there is that.
Just to be sure: could you verify that the binaries in http://www.eglebbk.dds.nl/program/downl ... RC-win.zip work for you? They work for Martin, but they're spotty for me under Wine (they sometimes stall waiting for input while thinking; just start them up and tell them "go". If they don't keep going at 100% CPU they're waiting for input; just type "quit" and they should exit cleanly).

Yes, this version works fine. Can just run it and type go, and also works fine under ChessV 2

[jdart]

I am compiling with /D_USING_V110_SDK71_

The Windows input code uses ReadFile.

--Jon

[jdart]

Lack of support does not mean people stop using it. If upgrading is too costly, they just keep running the box until it dies. I have also seen even corporate users who have machines they never patch.

--Jon

[Colin-G]

For linux users, the default setting of wine is Windows XP.
I suspect most users, like myself, leave it like that unless there is a problem.
About half of my chess engines do not have a native linux version, but they all work ok with wine.

[Engin]

go aheah and don't think about such problems.

windows xp is dead, i never care about it.

if you want to support windows xp mode too, so your engine will be some little slower running on modern systems.

you can't have made both, windows xp and modern computers, for everthing that want to wisch.

same with diffent CPUs , Intel or AMD, you can't compiler for both is optimize code.

also i give it up to compile for 32 bit systems, there are many CPU around that support now 64 bit and thats enough.

[Greg Strong]

For linux users, the default setting of wine is Windows XP.

I believe this is just the version that Wine reports to program that ask what the operating system is. This doesn't necessarily mean that Evert's non-XP-compatible builds won't run.

Compatibility with other platforms may be a good reason to continue to support XP, though, for example this guy, which aims at Windows Server 2003 compatibility: ReactOS

[bnemias]

You can no longer run XP at all - at least not if you want to connect to the internet. It will get wrecked with spyware in no time flat. It's too bad, it was one of the best and most popular OSs of all time, but you just can't run it any more.

Not true in my experience. I switched to Debian a few months ago, but before I did, I had run the same XP x64 installation since 2009. Zero instances of malware. Spyware, I can't say for sure, but certainly no evidence of any. It is easy enough to protect yourself from these things. Don't run IE and run a non-administrative account, and use a hardware firewall. Also, browse with noscript + adblock (I now use ublock origin).

If you want to use a browser, though, it becomes increasingly difficult and THAT is why I made the change. The problem is certificates. Right now, you can bypass that problem if you use Firefox, but even that browser either has or is about to stop XP support. At which point you will be unable to connect to an increasing number of sites due to root certificate problems. Also, it is possible to run XP as your main OS and virtualize your browser. This will further protect you while also allowing you to use any browser you desire.

But my take on chess engines and XP support is that there is no earthly reason NOT to. If you find yourself unable to run your engine on XP, then it is either because you are utilizing system calls you don't actually need, or because you are using tools (read Microsoft) that intentionally use such calls EXPLICITLY to break XP support.

If your engine is single-threaded, there isn't any real reason not to support windows 95 because it is easy. XP has all the threading capabilities you need and really anything you need to make it work. To fail to do so is just laziness.

[bnemias]

If your engine is single-threaded, there isn't any real reason not to support windows 95 because it is easy. XP has all the threading capabilities you need and really anything you need to make it work. To fail to do so is just laziness.

One thing regarding this, it ignores the 64-bit issue. Obviously you can't target 32-bit operating systems if you have a 64-bit engine. It is probably reasonable at this point to abandon 32-bit for some people. Not for me, since I use a LOT of 32-bit hardware still (almost all ARM based), but there are good reasons why one might prefer to target only 64-bit.

[Evert]

You can no longer run XP at all - at least not if you want to connect to the internet. It will get wrecked with spyware in no time flat. It's too bad, it was one of the best and most popular OSs of all time, but you just can't run it any more.

Not true in my experience. I switched to Debian a few months ago, but before I did, I had run the same XP x64 installation since 2009. Zero instances of malware. Spyware, I can't say for sure, but certainly no evidence of any. It is easy enough to protect yourself from these things. Don't run IE and run a non-administrative account, and use a hardware firewall. Also, browse with noscript + adblock (I now use ublock origin).

If you want to use a browser, though, it becomes increasingly difficult and THAT is why I made the change. The problem is certificates. Right now, you can bypass that problem if you use Firefox, but even that browser either has or is about to stop XP support. At which point you will be unable to connect to an increasing number of sites due to root certificate problems. Also, it is possible to run XP as your main OS and virtualize your browser. This will further protect you while also allowing you to use any browser you desire.

The problem is, you cannot install XP very easily (or at all?) because in the time it takes to download updates/another browser the system has already been infiltrated (I suppose a hardware firewall can prevent that of course, but it's a lot of hassle).

But my take on chess engines and XP support is that there is no earthly reason NOT to. If you find yourself unable to run your engine on XP, then it is either because you are utilizing system calls you don't actually need, or because you are using tools (read Microsoft) that intentionally use such calls EXPLICITLY to break XP support.

If your engine is single-threaded, there isn't any real reason not to support windows 95 because it is easy. XP has all the threading capabilities you need and really anything you need to make it work. To fail to do so is just laziness.

Using language or compiler features that aren't available in older compilers is a reason.
Or in this case: using MinGW to compile SjaakII adds a rather large dependency on the GNU runtime. Using MSVS reduces the size considerably, but then it turns out there is a bug in the runtime for XP.

[Evert]

I am compiling with /D_USING_V110_SDK71_

The Windows input code uses ReadFile.

I use fgets() to read input from the console, on all platforms. I believe it is this specifically that is broken.
Is there a reason you use ReadFile rather than fgets()?