- 1.) The Advanced Search on this board BITES. This criterion spews out 6 pages of mostly unrelated results to sift through: +"Windows 2000"
- Is there a better way to phrase the search?
- 2.) This user had the same question LAST YEAR.
- No one bothered to answer him: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19137&p=74640&hilit=+Windows+2000+#p74640
- 3.) I have the same question: Which is the latest version of ImageMagick compatible with Windows 2000?
I find that programs are compiled for XP, for NO GOOD (FUNCTIONALITY OF XP-OR-HIGHER REQUIRED) REASON, and that breaks WIndows 2000 compatibility. Microsoft deliberately set XP as the baseline in default compiler templates, to break compatibility and compel upgrades to its Activation-ridden, Windows-2000-warmed-over XP product. Lazy developers miss this, and the result has been broken Windows 2000 compatibility and arrogant Microsoft fanboys disparaging Windows 2000 users.