• @masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    No that perspective is what makes me understand that when corporations talk about obsceleting things for security reasons, it’s almost always not actually because of security, because it would be a little less profitable to continue support.

    And Valve didnt have to build a business around always checking in DRM if they didn’t want to support old clients, and they have more than enough resources to continue support.

    • HarkMahlberg
      link
      fedilink
      41 month ago

      Can I hold you to the decisions you made 20 years ago? I bought that program you built decades ago, that means I’m entitled to your continued support. And don’t you even think about getting paid, your support should be free. You shouldn’t have built and sold the software if you can’t support it…

      • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 month ago

        We’re not talking about support, we’re talking about not breaking the software we bought after the fact.

        • missingno
          link
          fedilink
          31 month ago

          It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows, they would just have to hire a few more people to do it.

          You literally did say support.

        • HarkMahlberg
          link
          fedilink
          21 month ago

          It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows

          • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 month ago

            Yes, they can have their software continue to support Windows by simply not breaking the version that works for windows, without having to provide full customer support and service for it.