Injeun, No tray icon showing hard drive temp or as a quick link to the program. Uninstalled. Thanks anyway for the opportunity to try it.

Jim C.,
Maybe it uses a version of the Net Framework that XP and Vista can't handle?

Jim C.,
When Microsoft introduce a new OS they often bring in new functions which programmers can call on, older versions of the OS do not know how to handle these calls because the function is not available.
This means that the program will not work correctly with earlier versions of the OS.

Jim C.,

" I'm curious, could someone please explain what might be in the code that doesn't work with the old OS's? "

Microsoft updated the Windows Kernel with newer versions that have added features. It's my understanding that Microsoft's development tools by default reference those, e.g. I think commonly memory address, which just isn't there in earlier Windows versions. Visual Studio can also make use of other features that aren't available in XP & sometimes Vista.

There are ways around that so compatibility with older Windows versions is maintained, if the developer chooses to do so, but some choose not to. If a developer &/or software company offers user support, they may feel it's to their benefit or advantage for example not to have to work with issues on older OSes, since they have little or no support from Microsoft, and can more easily break.

mike,
There are ways around that so compatibility with older Windows versions is maintained, if the developer chooses to do so, but some choose not to
As a developer I do not know any method of getting round the problem of an unhandled function. To be honest the complexity of doing so could be enormous, and so it just doesn't stand to reason that it would be feasible.

Seb,

"As a developer I do not know any method of getting round the problem of an unhandled function."

Not disagreeing with that...
However, whenever I've seen someone report an error message attempting to run a GOTD in XP, Google has come up with discussions etc. on how to avoid that, e.g. by selecting different libraries & settings in Visual Studio. There are also all sorts of development tools, compilers etc. other than what Microsoft offers. And there are often different ways to achieve the same goals writing code.

It's in Microsoft's interest to both add features to new versions of Windows & do what it can to make older versions somewhere between difficult & impossible to use. Many developers, maybe more so those writing cross platform apps for Windows & Linux, feel it's in their interest to have the greatest backwards compatibility. With somewhat rare exceptions IMHO it's up to the devs to decide whether that compatibility is a concern or not.

With the exception of the latest version Direct X & the Windows Store, while I'm sure there may be some apps that need the advances in 10 for example, I'm not aware of any software providing functions &/or features that weren't available in software designed for XP [there are apps that make good use of 64 bit, but it's the 64 bit part they require, not some new Windows feature]. In fact, since XP allowed much more in the way of kernel driver support, I've actually seen the reverse, with many audio apps never being released or duplicated for Vista onward.

mike,
When companies say it is limited to a certain OS and upwards they are talking about functions within the OS.
There are not talking about external libraries or other such things.

This for once has become a technical discussion rather than a button pressing yes no exercise.
So if the person who marked my last comment down can correct where 35 years of computing, and postgraduate studies in computing have failed me ,it would be much appreciated, rather than button pressing yes or no.

Seb,

I just upvoted you for this comment, Seb.
Don't get discouraged by downvoters. It could be that some of them just are unable to follow a higher level of discussion about computing and possibly marked you down out of lack of understanding the merit of your comments.

Just my guess.

Keep posting, your comments are much appreciated.

They might vote me down for this comment, but I do not care.

Cheers,

consuella

consuella,
Thank you so much for your comment, it's lovely to see you back.

The problem is it something of a technical nature is marked down by a sufficient number of people and it is correct, they may think the voting is correct and not the answer to the question.

Must admit yesterday's comments were received in a much more positive light than they have in the past, the site is a bit like its old self and really pleasing