PDA

View Full Version : Redundancy



Sheamus
10-29-2002, 02:09 PM
While I applaud the effort in this site - many times in the past I've cursed installing the latest version of a piece of software to find that the 'improvements' are mostly adware and slowness - but I wonder about how many of the old versions of software actually function nowadays.

For example, surely old versions of Quicktime, Flash, Netscape or whatever just won't support a lot of the modern .mov, shockwave and .html extensions. Hence using them is kind of fruitless outside of a nostalgia trip.

Don't get me wrong - if you go back one version, then fine. But in two-three more revolutions that old version is likely not going to work, and then you'll *have* to download the version that you're now refusing to support! (If that makes any sense.)

Any thoughts?

OldVersion.com Admin
10-29-2002, 03:11 PM
We expect people that download from our site to know the responsibilty of going back to older versions. Usually, when people download from our site it's a version they have previously used so they know what to expect from it. We don't use all the old versions here, so we cannot provide support for which one is better or not. We archive as many as old versions as we can find for people have different purposes in using them. Some use our site to research the change in technology, some use it because they don't like the newer versions.

igor
10-31-2002, 08:36 PM
If the new version doesn't work on your computer, then getting an old version is the only solution despite its possible shortcomings.

We at OldVersion.com are not trying to push old versions on anyone. We are simply offering an alternative.

- Igor



Last edited by igor at Oct 31 2002, 08:36 PM

Brian Kilby
11-03-2002, 09:03 AM
We at OldVersion.com are not trying to push old versions on anyone. We are simply offering an alternative.[QUOTE]

And we appreciate it tremendously! :D

My friend introduced me to OldVersion.com a few weeks ago and I've been a faithful visitor since. I try to keep an archive of older software, myself, but often have holes. You've managed to fill a good number of them.

Thanks!

Brian Kilby

Ric Gates
11-10-2002, 05:00 PM
I just found this site and I think it's great.
I am a Windows 95 user, even though I also have 98, ME and XP (and actually switching to Slackware), I still prefer 95b without IE4.
Some of the new programs and drivers either aren't tested in 95, or aren't tested with a "IE-less" system. We can find this out too late, and may not be able to find our old copy to go back to - or find they are no longer available for download. Good examples: DirectX, Media Player and Internet Explorer - try to find those on the Microsoft site.
You don't need to store Netscape here, they are all archived at ftp://archive.netscape.com/pub , and actually Netscape 3 still makes a very good browser, I mainly use Mozilla myself, but if you are running an old system, or Win 3.1, N3 is great (only poorly designed sites don't work in N3).
I'm glad I had my original Zip drive CD, I did a new install of Windows 95 and the latest IomegaWare wasn't compatable with my New HP printer. Funny that the old IomegaWare works fine and installs less crap.

I have lots of old software and drivers and will probably donate...

--
| Ric

cg9com
12-06-2002, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by Ric Gates@Nov 10 2002, 05:00 PM
I am a Windows 95 user, even though I also have 98, ME and
what a shame, all those and you dont have the best windows operating system { 2k pro }

zyxmd
01-20-2003, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by igor@Oct 31 2002, 08:36 PM
If the new version doesn't work on your computer, then getting an old version is the only solution despite its possible shortcomings.

We at OldVersion.com are not trying to push old versions on anyone. We are simply offering an alternative.

- Igor
Excellent point. Not all older versions are right for everyone... but it's nice to have a choice :D Thanks Guys!

peppycomputer
04-30-2003, 04:42 PM
:) A computer is an extension of some ones own personality, if you do not believe me study yours and other ones computers. To always have to have, the newest in software is fine for some, but others it is not. As your computer gets older you may not wish to run out and buy the neatest liquid cooled unit you can buy, even if you could afford it. :angry: :angry: The greatest thing about a site like this and a few others is that it allows you to mix the old with the new and to make your mind up on what you want not what microsoft wants! With out this site you would have to go out and buy the latest 3 gh, 60 mg hard, computer around, just to run the new fangled programs. My Grandma always said"quality before quanity" I try to say" install min. then work up to the version that runs the best on your computer" Oh by the way I find this site a very refreshing concept fron most of the others and will donate when I can afford to. We can not afford to lose a site this valulable. :blink:

Guest
05-03-2003, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by Sheamus+Oct 29 2002, 02:09 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sheamus @ Oct 29 2002, 02:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>in two-three more revolutions that old version is likely not going to work, and then you&#39;ll *have* to download the version that you&#39;re now refusing to support&#33;[/b]
Software doesn&#39;t get rusty. The vast majority of PC software that worked on DOS 3 on an IBM XT 10 years ago will still run, with 1000 times the speed, on your modern Pentium. More to the point, if you have an old PC and are basically happy with what it does, then you can extend its capabilities by using vintage software that was designed for old hardware --i.e. small and efficient.
<!--QuoteBegin--Sheamus@Oct 29 2002, 02:09 PM
For example, surely old versions of Quicktime, Flash, Netscape or whatever just won&#39;t support a lot of the modern .mov, shockwave and .html extensions.[/quote]Well, of course if you have to interoperate with modern software, you may have problems. You won&#39;t be able to play that stuff on a 486 with 8MB RAM and an 500MB disk anyway, whatever software you have. But if you want to transfer data in standard formats. like txt, html, rtf, or dbf you can do so -- having translucent buttons doesn&#39;t mean you actually have more or better functionality.

I have a bunch or Real audio files that I downloaded years ago. Rather than install "Real One" and have it insert itself all over my desktop, hook itself into evrything, and nag me to buy/upgrade stuff, I can use Real player 3, a little app that just plays the audio. And you might be amazed at how fast WinWord 2 (for Win3.1) loads and runs.