MegaGlest Forum

MegaGlest => MegaGlest => Topic started by: Jez2k on 19 July 2017, 23:15:17

Title: v3.11.1 = Last for XP?
Post by: Jez2k on 19 July 2017, 23:15:17
I wanted to put the latest version of this game onto a Windows XP PC that I'm donating. Unfortunately, after installing the game, when trying to run the executable, an error pops up with the message that it "is not a valid Win32 application".

I worked my way backwards through the releases until I found one that did work (v3.11.1).

I could not find anything in the release notes that mentions compatibility with XP has been dropped, despite being a Windows 32bit OS.

Yes I know support from MicroSoft has been dropped but security is never a problem unless you click that suspect link in your inbox or accept a file from someone you don't know. Without those things they can't get into your PC, despite all the scaremongering that goes on. Besides, hackers are more likely to attack an OS that's popular, right?

Anyway, if XP support has been dropped for this game, can I suggest minimum requirements be posted in the download sections?

Thanks.
Title: Re: v3.11.1 = Last for XP?
Post by: tomreyn on 19 July 2017, 23:35:23
Hi Jez2k,

generally only supported operating system releases are supported by MegaGlests' developers. XP has been dead for a while now, and for good reasons - running it is no longer safe, for the reasons you mention, and several others, some of which are discussed in public. (A present with an outdated OS which has known security vulnerabilities is maybe not a good idea, but that's up to you to decide.) The fact that we do not support OS releases which their developers do no longer support is obvious enough that I do not consider it necessary to point this out in documentation (it is a safe bet for any application software and game).

This said, both https://megaglest.org/download (https://megaglest.org/download) and https://github.com/MegaGlest/megaglest-source/releases/ (https://github.com/MegaGlest/megaglest-source/releases/) list (effectively the same) 32-bit builds for Windows. These may or may not work on unsupported Windows releases. If it turns out that they are not compatible, it may be possible to compile a build which could run on Windows XP (by possibly developing patches and) building yourself from source. But ... this is not supported for Windows XP, an answer you, or the new owner of this system, is going to hear regularly from now on, and for good reasons.

Tom
Title: Re: v3.11.1 = Last for XP?
Post by: Jez2k on 20 July 2017, 07:45:07
Although there are no future updates for XP, MicroSoft have kept all previous updates available for download, even for Windows 98. I've only just upgraded to Windows 7 this month, but I dual-boot with XP because I have tons of games that won't work on 7. I've honestly never had any issues with hackers in all these years and as more people migrate to 7/8/10, XP will become less attractive to hackers. As a heavy user, I've yet to witness any hacking, but then I don't go clicking fake links, or fall for those phone scams - which even 7 or above won't protect you from. The so-called known security vulnerabilities of XP are, to my knowledge, unproven in real-world usage. MicroSoft are angry at us for not buying 10, so they spread fear and half-truths to get us to buy their new OS which records and sends back every click and key-press you make (an ex-employee of theirs has uploaded videos about this on youtube).

Just stick Avast and a few other well-known free security apps on XP and you're good to go. Dual-booting is something lots us of gamers do, and have done so safely for years.

I only have Windows 7 to play those very few new games that are worth playing (including this one :D). The last LEGO game was the deciding factor for me - the first one not to include XP compatibility.
Title: Re: v3.11.1 = Last for XP?
Post by: tomreyn on 20 July 2017, 17:17:09
I would just like to reiterate that I disagree that any unsupported OS can be run in a safe way (possibly even if air gapped), and your reasoning does not convince me (but then I do not need to be convinced ;-) ), but will not go into details since this EOL OS discussion is getting off topic, which we should not do here.