XYplorer Beta Club

I have meanwhile grown used to the 32-bitness.
However, one thing I want to point out about the XY Website: Right at the top oft the first page it says:
"XYplorer
18.10.0100, released 17-Jul-2017
Windows 10, 10 Server, 8.1, 8, Server 2012, 7, Server 2008, Vista, XP, Server 2003; 32-bit and 64-bit versions."
If I was a potentially new costomer, at least I would be confused, wondering if the 64-bit info belongs to the OSs or to the application. I might also assume the latter since this way of layout for the info is not that common (IMO). Today it threw me off, despite me knowing. So if I was a customer I would be upset to find out the truth later because I would feel as if the developer tried to mislead me. Just a brainstorming thought.

It's like this for years now. Never had a single complaint.

XYplorer's 32-bitness is clearly stated in many places, e.g. here:
https://www.xyplorer.com/download.php

Maybe a 16 bits version will satisfied anybody ?

admin wrote:It's like this for years now. Never had a single complaint.

XYplorer's 32-bitness is clearly stated in many places, e.g. here:
https://www.xyplorer.com/download.php

You've got many complaints from paying customers in threads such as this one and "many others" as you put it before. However you prefer not to prioritize this issue in comparison with "more important" stuff you've been releasing lately (e.g. Age Circles, Size Graphics). Your product, your choices, and that's fair enough.

aferrazlr wrote:However you prefer not to prioritize this issue in comparison with "more important" stuff you've been releasing lately (e.g. Age Circles, Size Graphics). Your product, your choices, and that's fair enough.

i'd hope that wouldn't sound too rude, but actually i don't care in this case.. soo.. if you actually could Read(you know, stuff with understanding letters) and checked link provided each time when similar "i need 64x!" happens, maybe, just maybe, you'd understand that its not about dev doesn't want/lazy to do 64x, but because there is no 64x VisualBasic compiler, only 86x(XY is written on it).
nevertheless you have a wonderful solution = you go to Microsoft, give them money(probably a Lot) so they provide 64x compiler, and here you go, profit = XY will become 64x probably less then in month.

1) I'd prefer consistent new features and being remarkably bug-free over 64-bit.

2) Make yourself an AHK shortcut for the 64-bit context menu - can even put it on a right mouse click with additional key. *shrug*

3) On a development level, it seems like his best route would be porting the whole thing to C#. He's one guy who knows this program in an incredible way. If he went and ported the whole thing to C# (or whatever), we'd be without any new features for a very long time, not to mention the debugging process and his learning curve. He's a master at VB. I'm very happy letting him do what he does so well.

4) He's got a competitor who's 64-bit. After giving them a good try and doing thorough research, I have to say I'm extremely happy here, both with the product and with his development cycle (and the exceedingly modest price for what we're getting). Regardless of the price, I simply like XY better.

5) I'd really hate to see him outsource it. We've got a good thing here. Let's stay with it. It's rare that one gets one super-developer continually enhancing - very intelligently - one's favorite program. When that works, it's really ideal. Plus paying attention to us. Plus keeping up with his documentation.

6) When it turned out that the compiler he'd been hoping for wouldn't happen (back when), it seemed like this was a done issue. It is for me.