Christian Schenk

What about Windows 2000? I am still using it ...

Windows 2000 is OK. Here is the list of the supported platforms:

• Windows Vista
• Windows Server 2003
• Windows XP
• Windows 2000

What about using Code::Blocks as the MikTeX build system? That way it can support MinGW, MSVC 2003 (which supports legacy build targets), etc.

What about using C::B as the MikTeX build system? That way it can support MinGW, MSVC 2003 (which supports legacy build targets), etc.

MiKTeX already uses the best build system in the world: CMake.
Don't confuse build system (CMake, autotools, Visual Studio, ...) with compiler (Visual C++, G++, ...). Switching the build system gains nothing, because I am tied to the latest incarnation of Visual C++ at the moment.

Just curious. Since there are multiple decent C/C++ command-line compilers available for free for Windows (including Visual C++ v14!), what is it that has you tied to a specific version of a specific vendor's compiler?

Seems ironic to have a large body of software ported all the way from *nix to Windows, only to end up highly non-portable within the Windows platform :-).

The MiKTeX GUI applications depend on the Microsoft Foundation Classes (MFC) and MFC requires Microsoft Visual C++. You can remove these applications from the distribution and compile the rest for Linux. But who needs yet another TeX distribution for Linux?

Well, if the MFC is what is required, then couldn't it be built in MinGW? AFAIK, MinGW does support building MFC binaries. Also, I think it is possible to nearly painlessly port MFC sources to wxWidgets. wx and MFC do share a similar design system after all....

Thank you for the advice. But:

I doubt that MinGW includes MFS libraries/headers.

The Visual C++ compiler is free (in the sense of "for nothing"), i.e., MinGW currently offers no adantage.

We all know know that it is possible to port the GUI applications to another toolkit (wxWidgets, Qt).

MikTeX isn't the only great software to fall into the pit of relying upon core components of an OS. Sooner or later it dooms the software or causes the loss of its users. I have enjoyed the use of MikTeX and TeXnicCenter for years. But, I will not buy a new operating system just to continue using it.

Want to state my support for the opinion of LongTermUser....
Its a shame that such great software will drop support because of the installer only!
Because TeXnicCenter and the installed MikTex components itself are running well under win9x systems... :(

So, please change this this Visual Studio 2008 build environment back to VC6!

There is no way back. Say good bye to Windows 9x/Me/NT or install one of: MiKTeX 2.6, TeX Live 200x, teTeX (for Cygwin). Good luck!

I do not blame you(Christian.).
 But, this is a sad state of affairs.
New OS most probably means a new computer.
Therefore, you have to junk your old computer.
I guess this is how a lot of electronic waste is
generated.

How old and poor are you guys? Do you really still need to run Win 9x and NT? Please don't bother people with those last century problems. Win XP runs perfectly on the cheapest computers on the market. Go get it as long as it is still available... And if money really is the problem, then Linux might be the alternative.

Texnocrate, you couldn't miss the point more.

I am using a PC which I bought used in 2004, it's probably from around 2001 or so. (Pentium III, 730 MHz.) It's way more than adequate for running LaTeX on it, and most other things that I might want to do. I am running XP on it, but presumably in a few years' time, Visual C++ will stop supporting XP as well. I will probably have gotten a new computer by then for other reasons, but buying a new computer just so that I can do things which I was able to do perfectly adequately on my previous one doesn't seem very sensible.

There is a trend for software to have ever higher hardware requirements, without actually accomplishing significantly more computation-intensive tasks than previous versions. (Of course there are notable exceptions, e.g. games, graphics etc.)

It is one reason why it isn't a good decision to go with software - particularly if it's proprietary - such as Visual C++ which relies on the specific operating system used. MiKTeX is a lot of work anyway, and I am sure no-one expects things to be turned back now.

I just wanted to say that this is very much a valid point to make.

avery lee, the programmer of the (very well) known video-edit&capture program virtualDub decided AGAINST switching VS2008 for that reason...
so, there is always an option and an alternative, it's to easy to say 'there is a trend set by the majority, so no one can resist' ... if that would be true opensource and linux would be already dead. :/

http://www.virtualdub.org/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=185#body

A short reminder: MiKTeX 2.6 is still available. This version runs on legacy Windows systems. So please stop moaning. Take it as it is.