|
|
|
|
|
by jodrellblank
5935 days ago
|
|
Why would they? Windows 2000 is ten years old, that's longer than the security patch support period of RedHat/CentOS, Ubuntu LTS, Debian, Solaris (and Windows 2000). Why would or should they go back to developing a free browser for an out of support system which will mess up the user's system as a deliberate side effect, for the benefit of some arbitrary web developers? |
|
To put it another way—if there was an update they could release to Windows 2000, at this point, that people would install voluntarily, but would make more people buy Windows 7 as an effect, don't you think Microsoft would be all over that?