So that's why python screwed Windows 7

[PlainName]

"Microsoft currently employs Python creator Guido van Rossum"

and from https://www.python.org/psf/members/

"President: Guido van Rossum"

Call me a conspiracy theorist if you want, but this kind of thing is exactly what Microsoft gets up to. They have form for buying up software that runs perfectly well on Windows 7 then making it W8+ only and removing the previous versions from the web.

[ataradov]

Sometimes software needs to use new functionality in the OS to move forward. Especially for the OS that is no longer supported by the vendor.

If you need to be on the old OS, then stick with the old versions of the software too.

What downloads were removed? Here are all the downloads going back to 2001 -  https://www.python.org/downloads/windows/

[free_electron]

it's funny how they wave it away with things like "are people really using these old Os's".  Think about tons of test equipment and factory floor. Many people use python for data collection/processing. you don;t just go about upgrading machinery willy nilly. in many cases it is simply not possible cause the application does not run. That's why we are still dragging along things like windows XP for cash registers...

It's a programming language it should be able to run on windows 2000. (technically nt3.51 .. but that would be really far fetched )

[langwadt]

you want it to run on DOS too? win7 is 13 years old and end of life was 2.5 years ago

[ataradov]

Think about tons of test equipment and factory floor.

Use a version appropriate to the age of equipment. If you are actively updating the software on that equipment, why not update the OS?

you don;t just go about upgrading machinery willy nilly.

Yet you install software willy nilly?

in many cases it is simply not possible cause the application does not run.

Python is one of those applications.

That's why we are still dragging along things like windows XP for cash registers...

That's fine. You probably don't need the latest Python on a cash register either.

[free_electron]

you want it to run on DOS too? win7 is 13 years old and end of life was 2.5 years ago

no, i said windows 2000. same "new technology" base. But i'll take XP.
many other compilers for other languages work run fine and can compile to XP or later. and this isn't even a compiler. it's an interpreted language.

[free_electron]

Use a version appropriate to the age of equipment. If you are actively updating the software on that equipment, why not update the OS?

The machine application may not run on a newer OS. The python scripts you run in parallel may want to use a feature only available in the newer version of python.
Or even the machine hardware may not work on a newer OS and no replacement. Try getting something as silly as a printerport running these days. No modern hardware works at the standard addresses. it's all remapped and the control programs can't deal with it. Modern computers don't even have printerports anymore. PCIx doesn't work. Only a port on the LPC would work and possibly some very esoteric PCI cards. i've been trying at least 7 boards so far. nothing works. Run it on a motherboard with a true printerport and it works. (even on windows 7). anything else doesn't.

Python is one of those applications.

yeah i know. i have lived through the 2.xx to 3.xx nonsense. I had to take on a project made by some guy who made it as part of his university coursework and since he had to learn python for one of his classes he decided it was going to be written in python so he could do his university work during working hours. (he was pursuing a degree while working, so he spent his time learning python on our dime and time)  Once done it got tossed over the wall into my bucket. The thing wouldn't run on 3.xx This thing was using py-visa and some other stuff that hadn't been ported .. i tossed it straight back.

Anyway python is not my circus , not my clowns. But is still find it silly , especially since, as explained in many threads, it all pivots about a little thing. some guy fixed it with a fork and 3 lines of code.

[SiliconWizard]

it's funny how they wave it away with things like "are people really using these old Os's".  Think about tons of test equipment and factory floor. Many people use python for data collection/processing. you don;t just go about upgrading machinery willy nilly. in many cases it is simply not possible cause the application does not run. That's why we are still dragging along things like windows XP for cash registers...

You make a good point here. While for desktop use, they can always use the argument that you gotta upgrade anyway, blah blah... for machines running on Windows (or driven by a PC using Windows with a dedicated software), it's extremely common to have older versions that keep running for a long time. Heck, there are machines still driven by Windows XP or even older. Sometimes the equipment in question is extremely expensive, works completely fine and the company making it may not exist anymore (or may have stopped supporting the machine in question). This is a very common occurence in industrial equipement IME.

But this should be a wake-up call: Python is definitely NOT made for long-term compatibility, never was and likely never will be. Even the whole havoc between version 2 and version 3 should have already shaken the tree. Many companies having developed tools in Python 2 still haven't made the changes for Python 3. Just something to keep in mind.

Yes for now you can still have access to downloads for earlier versions. Who knows for how long. And also, as long as some software you use, relying on Python, doesn't actually *require* a newer version of it.

It's of course a complex management matter. Sure, one piece of software can't keep supporting older OSs, older versions of whatnot they would depend on, forever.
But if you want some chance of having more leeway, you should probably not use "trendy" tools. Just my 2 cents.

[Fredderic]

I would like to know what has actually been changed that requires the newer Win8.1+ libraries.

I read somewhere that it's only the Windows library and GUI support.  The entire core of the Python language — the same core that runs on Linux and MacOS just fine without those Windows-specific libraries — should continue to still work just fine, even if it needs to drop back to "Posix compliant" mode.

For most things I where I want to use the newer Python on my old Win7 laptop, Posix Asyncio is all it needs.  So a "Python Console Core" edition would work just fine.  Anyone know any specific reason that wouldn't have been possible?

Failing that, it really just feels like Microsoft forced the break to push their new Windows versions, counting on that the break would flow through to a LOT of other software that uses Python in one way or another.

[Karel]

Use a version appropriate to the age of equipment. If you are actively updating the software on that equipment, why not update the OS?

The machine application may not run on a newer OS.

Well, that's the fault of the manufacturer of  that machine. The machine vendor should make clear for how long
the hardware is supported. Also, the buyer of that machine should have a plan about what to do when the machine is EOL.

I have absolutely no pittty for companies and engineers that use certain software on their hardware without a plan about
what to do when the software supplier declares it EOL.

You want to stick with an OS from Redmond? Then stick with their forced updates and programmed EOL's and don't whine
if your precious hardware becomes useless. It's the price you pay for doing business.

[2N3055]

I would like to know what has actually been changed that requires the newer Win8.1+ libraries.

I read somewhere that it's only the Windows library and GUI support.  The entire core of the Python language — the same core that runs on Linux and MacOS just fine without those Windows-specific libraries — should continue to still work just fine, even if it needs to drop back to "Posix compliant" mode.

For most things I where I want to use the newer Python on my old Win7 laptop, Posix Asyncio is all it needs.  So a "Python Console Core" edition would work just fine.  Anyone know any specific reason that wouldn't have been possible?

Failing that, it really just feels like Microsoft forced the break to push their new Windows versions, counting on that the break would flow through to a LOT of other software that uses Python in one way or another.

Microsoft haters are just funny...

Old version of Python doesn't work on new OS... New version of Python doesn't work on old OS...
So new python is MADE not compatible with Windows and old python is NOT FIXED for a known problem and it is Windows fault...

Funny logic...

[bd139]

It’s probably because the compiler tool chain only targets CPUs with CMPXCHG16B now. This is required as of windows 8.1.

I doubt it’s some nefarious thing. I mean there’s plenty of nefarious shit that they are doing but this isn’t it.

[PlainName]

Sometimes software needs to use new functionality in the OS to move forward. Especially for the OS that is no longer supported by the vendor.

Yes. But W7 is not like XP and 3.x - the underlying stuff is still the same and much of the new stuff is in things like .net, which gets installed as necessary. Oh, yes, there is the stupid dark scheme and borderless stuff, but that's not something the application has to worry about.

If you need to be on the old OS, then stick with the old versions of the software too.

See that thread about BMW moving towards subscriptions? That would be your answer too I guess - if you don't want to spend your life in debt then don't get a new car. It is stupid to have your attitude when you're being potentially screwed over.

What downloads were removed? Here are all the downloads going back to 2001

Not Python, which they wouldn't be able to do since someone would just fork it and off they go again. But other applications which I have posted about previously. Here's a simple one:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/paper-defense/9wzdncrdncdl?activetab=pivot:overviewtab

On W7? Won't even let you download to try and run it. Used to be freely downloadable on all the usual suspects and ran on W7 just fine. Now try and find it. Doesn't use anything W10 specific (versions available for x86, x64, Arm).

[Karel]

Sometimes software needs to use new functionality in the OS to move forward. Especially for the OS that is no longer supported by the vendor.

Yes. But W7 is not like XP and 3.x - the underlying stuff is still the same and much of the new stuff is in things like .net, which gets installed as necessary. Oh, yes, there is the stupid dark scheme and borderless stuff, but that's not something the application has to worry about.

W7 is a relic from the past. Better to get over it sooner than later.
Complaining about it is not going to change anything anyway.

[PlainName]

W7 is a relic from the past.

That's irrelevant. Most stuff would still work perfectly well with it (and, indeed, does) if it weren't deliberately made not to work. That's the issue - stuff is being made to not work deliberately, not for any technical reason but purely as a marketing trick by Microsoft.

It is post-hoc obsolescence on the manufacturer's whim. Over in another thread TomTom get minus points (and lost sales) for lifetime updates that are some arbitrary device lifetime, and Garmin get plaudits for have actual real lifetime updates for ancient devices. Yet because y'all like to be contrary and you've succumbed to W10 anyway, somehow actively screwing up working kit is not so bad.

[Karel]

W7 is a relic from the past.

That's irrelevant. Most stuff would still work perfectly well with it (and, indeed, does) if it weren't deliberately made not to work. That's the issue - stuff is being made to not work deliberately, not for any technical reason but purely as a marketing trick by Microsoft.

It is post-hoc obsolescence on the manufacturer's whim. Over in another thread TomTom get minus points (and lost sales) for lifetime updates that are some arbitrary device lifetime, and Garmin get plaudits for have actual real lifetime updates for ancient devices. Yet because y'all like to be contrary and you've succumbed to W10 anyway, somehow actively screwing up working kit is not so bad.

You are barking at the wrong tree. Here, at work, I use Linux and once in a while windows in virtualbox.
My point was, if you need/want windows (for whatever reason), then you need to swallow Redmonds decisions.

Techgiants don't have any moral or ethics, except if it can make them look better AND (as a result) it generates more profit.
So, personally, I try to avoid them like the plague. However, I don't blame people for using (a recent version of) windows because many times it can be a justified business decision.
As long as they don't start whining that they got bitten...

[tszaboo]

Sometimes software needs to use new functionality in the OS to move forward. Especially for the OS that is no longer supported by the vendor.

Yes. But W7 is not like XP and 3.x - the underlying stuff is still the same and much of the new stuff is in things like .net, which gets installed as necessary. Oh, yes, there is the stupid dark scheme and borderless stuff, but that's not something the application has to worry about.

W7 is a relic from the past. Better to get over it sooner than later.
Complaining about it is not going to change anything anyway.

I still run W7 on my desktop at home. It works, and I cannot be bothered to update it.
Some stuff always breaks when I update an OS, some hardware is not supported anymore.
I have W10 on my work PC. It came with that, and everything works.

I used to like doing OS updates when I was 16 years old. Now the computer is just a tool.

[Karel]

Sometimes software needs to use new functionality in the OS to move forward. Especially for the OS that is no longer supported by the vendor.

Yes. But W7 is not like XP and 3.x - the underlying stuff is still the same and much of the new stuff is in things like .net, which gets installed as necessary. Oh, yes, there is the stupid dark scheme and borderless stuff, but that's not something the application has to worry about.

W7 is a relic from the past. Better to get over it sooner than later.
Complaining about it is not going to change anything anyway.

I still run W7 on my desktop at home. It works, and I cannot be bothered to update it.
Some stuff always breaks when I update an OS, some hardware is not supported anymore.
I have W10 on my work PC. It came with that, and everything works.

I liked doing OS updates when I was 16 years old. Now the computer is just a tool.

Good for you (and I really mean that).
The "problem" is that some people continue to use an unsupported OS and start to complain when their favorite
application doesn't support their beloved old OS anymore.

[free_electron]

Well, that's the fault of the manufacturer of  that machine. The machine vendor should make clear for how long
the hardware is supported. Also, the buyer of that machine should have a plan about what to do when the machine is EOL.

i don't agree.
Today you buy a logic analyser and spend 100K+. it runs windows 10. That machine serves you well.
The manufacturer supports the software for 20 years. win 10 will be long gone by then but the machine will go on running happily.
You deploy the viper programming language version 2 and script some things. no need for gui. it does its thing.
15 years from now a serious bug/security vulnerability is discovered in version 2 and version 3 comes along, but doesn't run on win10 anymore...

what do you do ?

I have absolutely no pittty for companies and engineers that use certain software on their hardware without a plan about
what to do when the software supplier declares it EOL.

So you suggest we all ditch python and ban it . We can also ban all other things. i think pencil and paper will probably be supported the longest. maybe a slide rule as well, but the manufacturers of those are slim pickins.

You want to stick with an OS from Redmond? Then stick with their forced updates and programmed EOL's and don't whine
if your precious hardware becomes useless. It's the price you pay for doing business.

you have no choice. machine X comes with Y. the OS/Software is part of the package.

look at the misery currently going on with part shortages. this kind of misery is coming with software.

on the other hand : you should treat these machines as black boxes and not install anything on them. air gap them from the internet. This has been stated many times by the likes of tektronix and HPAK. don't install virus scanners or office on the scope.
it is not a general purpose pc. it is a piece of machinery that happens to run an OS as part of its package.

but there are areas where the computer does not come as part of the package. the computer/os is user supplied. and those are the hard cases where you need to spend a lot of effort to keep em going

[artag]

Python is a pet hate of mine.

Any time I get some python utility off the web, it doesn't work. It's not that it's useless, it's that it always seems to be written for very specific version numbers. Not major ones like 2.7 but some intermediate 3.something that you then have to install.

Isn't there any sort of concept of writing good, portable code in pythonland that will run on some major release instead of a nightly build ?

The recommendation is usually to run it in a python virtual environment.

For development, that's maybe acceptable.

As a solution, it sucks.

As a philosophy of running python tools generally, it double sucks. If it'a an essential of running any python anywhere, then put it in the runtime so any arbitrary script pulls in the right interpreter and runs it in a VE transparently.

What I do not want is a version of the arduino IDE that will only work if I first fire up a virtual python environment to run it in, so the embedded scripts have the right environment. That sucks almost as bad as web programmers.

Every time this happens I get closer to ripping up the python utility and reimplementing in a proper, well-maintained language like C. Then pushing that code as a bug fix to the python repo.


Pythonistas used to like denigrating perl as a write-only language.  I've got news for you : Pythgon is much, much worse. It's write-only not because it's obscure, but because the only place it will run is on a development machine. That is not production-quality programming.

[Karel]

Well, that's the fault of the manufacturer of  that machine. The machine vendor should make clear for how long
the hardware is supported. Also, the buyer of that machine should have a plan about what to do when the machine is EOL.

i don't agree.
Today you buy a logic analyser and spend 100K+. it runs windows 10. That machine serves you well.
The manufacturer supports the software for 20 years. win 10 will be long gone by then but the machine will go on running happily.
You deploy the viper programming language version 2 and script some things. no need for gui. it does its thing.
15 years from now a serious bug/security vulnerability is discovered in version 2 and version 3 comes along, but doesn't run on win10 anymore...

what do you do ?

Blame the person who thought it was a good idea to make your business dependent on some piece of software that is not
backwards supported for the time you intend to use it.
Or accept the risk and buy a new analyzer if necessary and consider it the price you pay for doing business.

I have absolutely no pittty for companies and engineers that use certain software on their hardware without a plan about
what to do when the software supplier declares it EOL.

So you suggest we all ditch python and ban it . We can also ban all other things. i think pencil and paper will probably be supported the longest. maybe a slide rule as well, but the manufacturers of those are slim pickins.

Or you can accept the risk and buy a new analyzer if necessary and consider it the price you pay for doing business.

You want to stick with an OS from Redmond? Then stick with their forced updates and programmed EOL's and don't whine
if your precious hardware becomes useless. It's the price you pay for doing business.

you have no choice. machine X comes with Y. the OS/Software is part of the package.

I was referring to pc's where you do have a choice. If your applications needed for your business require the use of a certain OS,
then check how many years the whole setup is supported and be prepared to replace it when the time comes.

on the other hand : you should treat these machines as black boxes and not install anything on them. air gap them from the internet. This has been stated many times by the likes of tektronix and HPAK. don't install virus scanners or office on the scope.
it is not a general purpose pc. it is a piece of machinery that happens to run an OS as part of its package.

Here I agree.

but there are areas where the computer does not come as part of the package. the computer/os is user supplied. and those are the hard cases where you need to spend a lot of effort to keep em going

I don't agree. Check how many years the whole setup is supported and be prepared to replace it when the time comes.

In other words, think about the future, when and how to replace your machines, instruments, etc. before buying equipment.

[tszaboo]

Python is a pet hate of mine.

Any time I get some python utility off the web, it doesn't work. It's not that it's useless, it's that it always seems to be written for very specific version numbers. Not major ones like 2.7 but some intermediate 3.something that you then have to install.

Isn't there any sort of concept of writing good, portable code in pythonland that will run on some major release instead of a nightly build ?

The recommendation is usually to run it in a python virtual environment.

For development, that's maybe acceptable.

As a solution, it sucks.

As a philosophy of running python tools generally, it double sucks. If it'a an essential of running any python anywhere, then put it in the runtime so any arbitrary script pulls in the right interpreter and runs it in a VE transparently.

What I do not want is a version of the arduino IDE that will only work if I first fire up a virtual python environment to run it in, so the embedded scripts have the right environment. That sucks almost as bad as web programmers.

Every time this happens I get closer to ripping up the python utility and reimplementing in a proper, well-maintained language like C. Then pushing that code as a bug fix to the python repo.


Pythonistas used to like denigrating perl as a write-only language.  I've got news for you : Pythgon is much, much worse. It's write-only not because it's obscure, but because the only place it will run is on a development machine. That is not production-quality programming.

Code: [Select]

pip install pyinstaller

[free_electron]

The "problem" is that some people continue to use an unsupported OS and start to complain when their favorite
application doesn't support their beloved old OS anymore.

That scenario is ok with me. If the application is ported to a newer os ,  i have no problem upgrading the OS.
The reverse is the problem. The os gets updated but the application (or hardware) can no longer run.
The really hard problem is when you have two applications.

problem 1:

X runs on os9 but not on os10
Y runs on os10 but not on os9

problem 2: (happening simultaneously)

The base computer (processor/memory) can run both 9 and 10....
but I/O hardware A is only supported on os9
and I/O hardware B is only supported on OS10

I'm starting to understand why things like IBM Z systems are around and are still sold : long term support. They can run all the way back to ibm360 software. totally different hardware , os , but still fully compatible.

case in point : i'm staring again at my dataman programmer.
i take a modern computer. install windows XP or windows 7 , application runs fine . hardware access works fine on the built-in printer port
i take a slightly more modern machine . But this computer does not come with a printerport anymore. everything else works, but the program cannot find the programmer. Any pci/pcix card i tried so far works as a printer , but not for the programmer. Why ? Because these newer printerport no longer sits at 378 / 278 / 3bc. the PCI devices get remapped to other addresses. There is NO need to do that ! i can take the entire environment ( same OS/application) , drop it on slightly older hardware and it runs. The funny bit is that, if you take that hardware and drop DOS on it the port DOES end up at 378 and works. But run something else on it and the port magically reallocates.  It has something to do with switching between real and protected mode. port works in dos/win98/2000 but not in xp and later. Details are very fuzzy and i have not found a complete answer. The same problem exists on linux. Many people want to run linuxCNC and they hit the same problem. They need to find an older machine with a real printerport (one that sits on the ISA bus now masqueraded as LPC). try anything pci and it's off.

The only solution may be to treat the thing as another black box and make the computer/os part of the system. So i'll end up with one more computer on my shelf to keep around just for when i need the programmer. And no , a new programmer doesn't work. The newer machines do not support the very old devices ( unless you buy a 1000$+ one... but i paid already 1000$+ for the current one. This one replaced another very expensive one DataIO ChipLab, which suffered from the same problem. The control program was DOS only and would not run under windows. But back then windows was started from the DOS prompt so you could switch... they later came with a win98 version but the software was never ported to NT, so as of windows 2000 the programmer was a brick). fortunately somebody wrote a kernel driver to give applications access to the I/O so you could actually run the software on windows XP

[langwadt]

W7 is a relic from the past.

That's irrelevant. Most stuff would still work perfectly well with it (and, indeed, does) if it weren't deliberately made not to work. That's the issue - stuff is being made to not work deliberately, not for any technical reason but purely as a marketing trick by Microsoft.

It is post-hoc obsolescence on the manufacturer's whim. Over in another thread TomTom get minus points (and lost sales) for lifetime updates that are some arbitrary device lifetime, and Garmin get plaudits for have actual real lifetime updates for ancient devices. Yet because y'all like to be contrary and you've succumbed to W10 anyway, somehow actively screwing up working kit is not so bad.

how does it screw up working kit?  if you don't update it works just like it did when you bought it ...

[nctnico]

Think about tons of test equipment and factory floor.

Use a version appropriate to the age of equipment. If you are actively updating the software on that equipment, why not update the OS?

From which world are you? If you have hands on experience with updating an OS you would know that the driver model of Windows has changed a couple of times which makes it impossible to update the OS in many case because there simply isn't a driver for the hardware.

The same goes the other way around. There is quite a bit of software out there that won't run on newer WIndows versions without problems. Windows 10 has some major changes under the hood.

All in all, it is stupid not to support older versions of hardware and OS if you can. Python is actually pretty bad where it comes to any form of compatibility; Python is better to be avoided for any software that needs to be distributed. The KiCad developers have painted themselves into an ugly corner by choosing Python.