Which application do you choose to use an older version of?

Question

Other than for testing purposes or plain inertia: Sometimes it's the older version of some program that is more suitable for what you need. Perhaps it's because of feature-creep in the later versions or because of some compatibility which the newer one doesn't support, or just because there isn't enough of a difference to upgrade for, etc.

As an example, I saw somewhere on SO (but can't find where) that Visual C++ 2005 supports code written for GCC better than Visual C++ 2008 does. For some this could be a good reason for staying with the 2005 version.

Is there a program (not OS) which you find you prefer or have to, use a previous version of even if you were offered the latest? What makes the older version preferable, what would need changing for you to upgrade?

Answer 1

CodeSmith 2.6 is better than subsequent versions. It's also free.

Answer 2

I'd have to go for the following:

• DJ Java Decompiler - the older version is freeware. Plus, the newer version doesn't bring any improvements (I mean it's just a decompiler I don't need bling).
• Pidgin - I use an older version. Search as you type doesn't work on the new versions and I don't want to downgrade GTK.
• Magic Draw - I'm using version 5 so i'm 11 releases behind. It does what I need, no comments there.

Answer 3

Outlook 2003 over Outlook 2007 -:)

Why? Speed!

Answer 4

Windows XP rather than Vista.

Answer 5

PaintShopPro - after V7 that got steadily worse until it was so bad that Jasc ran out of ways to ruin it and had to be bought-out by Corel. There are no bounds to Corel's ability to ruin something, so it's carried on down since.

Answer 6

I used Winamp 2.98 for years after 5.0 was out. I only recently upgraded to get Shoutcasts. I still haven't tried the newest version, 5.54? My main hesitation is feature creep; I just want to hear my music!

To that end, here is a great site for older versions of software! http://www.oldversion.com/

Answer 7

Microsoft Office 2003 instead of Microsoft Office 2007. I don't like the "ribbon" instead of the toolbar. I also don't like that the default mode for creating documents or spreadsheets is not compatible with Office 2003.

Answer 8

Intuit Quicken or Microsoft Money - Do you really need to upgrade every year? They force you to upgrade every 3 years by disabling online support for versions older than three years.

Answer 9

I'll avoid any "latest version" that's:

• incompatible with the version in use by the majority of my coworkers or users,

• less functional (removed features, added bugs) than the previous version, or

• not offering enough marginal utility to justify the time, expense, or frustration associated with upgrading.

Answer 10

My days as hunter and gatherer are long gone. I need to have reliable software, rather than the latest eye candy with broken functionality. (I still remember when Vista came out, and neither VS nor SqlServer ran without patches or service packs or preliminary upgrade service pack special edition preview betas)

As technological innovation cycles get shorter and shorter, I don't find the time to follow every latest trend, and catch up only if I see that it survived the first buzzword wave of attack.

At some point software simply has become "good enough" and has little room for improvement in the area the application covers.

That said, my personal PC runs Office 2000, Delphi 6 (if needed) and VC#05, but my development PCs are more up-to-date with Win03 and O2k3 and VS05, but still not "latest version".

Answer 11

I tried KDE 4.1 a few months ago, and was horrified on how simplified and "candied" they made it. So where I use KDE, I use earlier versions.

Answer 12

I am surprised nobody has said it yet: Acrobat Reader.

Answer 13

I find that quite a few of the programmes which I use are older versions. Usually because the newer ones have become ugly or slower with added features that I have no use for, while the older ones if still compatible, not crippled by the producer somehow (e.g. Yahoo IM) might be still more efficient in use.

Sometimes when it's the UI that has been given a new look to keep up with some currently in vogue style I'll try to find a way to turn this off to get back the OS default look.

Unfortunately in a couple of cases it means losing out on some newer features I'd like to make use of, amongst all the unwanted bloat.

Answer 14

I'd have to use the word choose loosely, but one would be VB 6. I have to use VB 6 to maintain some legacy stuff. Sometimes when I need to do something and I already have VB 6 code lying around, I'll fire it up to get it done.

When I have to create a program right now that is flexible and fast I use PowerBasic 8. All the other tools that I have tried in the last 10 years just aren't as productive when you have to get things done right now. It compiles into a small fast exe that doesn't have any runtime dependencies. I have the complete development environment on my USB thumb drive.

At some point I expect C# to take over that spot in my toolbox. Visual Studio 2008 went a long way towards getting me there. It is so much faster to startup and use than any of the previous .NET versions of Visual Studio.

Answer 15

Visio Technical 4.0, draws boxes circles, lines, and text. It's wonderful. Absolutely no "Office" required. Pre-Microsoft.

Answer 16

Right now, the only application that I am consciously trying to stay with a lower version is Amarok 2, in favour of Amarok 1.4. Until 2.0 supports all the things 1.4 supports, I don't think I will be using it.

Answer 17

Now seriously. many of the older versions (especially Adobe Reader) contains critical security vulnerabilities that would make anyone's grandma shiver and go get her shotgun to obliterate the application as soon as possible.

Defending old versions because of bloat might be "defendable" but most of the time, a switch to something leaner (say Adobe Reader to the latest Foxit reader or Live Messenger to Miranda IM) would be a more secure way of doing it.

Let's keep patching and upgrading those applications out there. As soon as something ends up outside its supported life cycle - please for the love of =preferred deity= upgrade it. A good example is Windows 2000. Even the latest Winamp is easy to have "old school style" without much work - hence enjoying the freedom of actually playing media files with less fear of having your workstation turned into a zombie without your knowledge.

Oh yeah, no - I don't have an application I prefer an older version of. I really tried thinking of one though ^^

Answer 18

Nero Burning ROM 6.