?The_root_of_all_evil said:Unfortunately, what he said. They've continuously refused to provide backwards compatability for DOS, 95, 98, CE, ME, NT, 2K, XP, Vista: so the chance of anything that you don't have to pay a whole load for is next to nothing.
The near-psychotic need to provide backwards compatibility at least as far as XP, and further in many cases, is one of the things that cripples Windows. Even the supposed clean break when they switched home OSes over to the NT kernel was hamstrung with security problems inherited from the older architectures.
I mean for fuck's sake, even something as simple as the kernel version number is bodgy and hacky to keep backwards compatibility (Windows 7 has the kernel version number 6.7600, because some programs just check the kernel version number and cry if it isn't 5 or 6)