Why does Windows XP refuse to die? - Page 8

[Florian_1]

NOone has mentioned Windows 8? what percentage of people are using the latest and greatest (so ms says) os?

[Reverend Jim]

Not gonna until I get a new laptop and, if after I install Start8 and ModernMix, it still sucks I'll throw Windows 7 on it.

[Palebushman]

From most of the 'Google' researching I have done lately, it looks like our beloved XP is definitely on death row and will be exposed to all sorts of 'online (or should that be mainline) nasties' after April 2014.
Shame really, as XP has proven to be one of Microsoft's most favoured OS's.
Mind you, Win 7 is promising to be a very suitable replacement for XP, especially when one removes all of that 'Aero' muck, and use OO.org, Mozilla FF-TB, VLC as brilliant alternatives to Office, Internet Explorer, Live Mail and Ms Media Player!

[AKsarben]

Microsoft should come out with XP4, and improved XP operating system that incorporates new security fixes, new browser ability, KEEP the original Outlook Express for those that liked it. You can always add in some other email client if you wish. Sell it as an updated SAFE alternaive to XP w/SP3 as it's own system, but kept with the same familiar way you can browse into folders, delete files, move folders to other drives, ALL of it. Just make one flavor that would include everything that "Home" and "Professional" had and woudl work with ALL of the old XP software still begin used AND work with the existing softare for Windows 8. PLUS change the main kenel, tweak it if you will, so it can recognize higher ram and multiple core processors and utilize them. Now THAT would be a well sought out OS!! By the way, did you all know that I run XP Pro AND enabled 2 of my cores (of a 4 core processor) and XP Pro recognizes and uses those 2 cores? XP can recognize one or two cores, and that's it. Well for the miniscule use I have of most software I use, XP Pro with dual core works beautifully, day in and day out.

XP Pro with dual core works beautifully, day in and day out.<

I fully agree, I totally have 5 XP Pro - PC's in daily use, I also got a brandnew Win8-PC from a friend for free, but after a couple of days of testing, it's not even hooked to the Powerline anymore for the past months...

I already obtained a Win-7 OEM Pack, but I'll wait 'til coming spring, then I decide, if and what to do...

[ggeoff]

@Everyauction I note you mention a Win-7 OEM pack. My understanding is that you are not allowed to install that.

@ggeoff: According to a decision of the European Supreme Court, MS was forced to 'legalise' the Sale and 'Installations' of such 'Versions' a few Years ago troughout Europe. Do not ask me datails, I would not know them.

[ggeoff]

@Everyauction thaks for that info. anone else anything to add?

[JenniferArden]

Now that would be excellent to have a new version of Windows XP released. I also still use Windows XP, about a year ago I "upgraded" to Windows XP Pro x64 and love it. All of our desktop and laptops use Windows XP Pro. They vary from P4 3GHz HT, celeron, Core2Quad to core i3. XP is so stable on different configurations, we never have any problem and I mean never, XP just works. We used to have a peer-peer/ad-hoc network which worked fine, however I installed a new network card with soft AP in order to get the network speed higher and this network also works great. Our server also have XP Pro x64 on and provide file sharing, printing services, internet sharing and fax server services flawlessly. I think people who do have stability issues with XP might have a custom oem version, an incompatible / inferior hardware combination, problem software installed, bad power supply or maybe malware. I have been using XP for 11 years and its always performed admirably.

[AKsarben]

What MS needs to do is come out with XP-4 a new secure version of XP, and sell it to upgrade your XP to. All new drivers, all new security updates and tweak the kerne to get to recognize more than 2 core processors. All the rest, the style, the registry, the folder layout EVERYTHING stays pretty much the same. More functional IE browser and keep Outlok Express as well.

[JenniferArden]

Agreed

[MidiMagic]

I am sticking with XP because I would have to replace all of my equipment if I changed.

7 is harder to use, and it gets in the way.

Upgrades should be banned. The Robots film was right.

[Reverend Jim]

Nobody is saying that you have to stop using XP. I have an old IBM Thinkpad that is still running XP because I still have a functioning printer and TV tuner which won't run under Winidows 7 because of driver issues. When the printer and tuner die then XP goes away, probably to be replaced with Ubuntu or SUSE linux.

Microsoft's latest announcement to continue Updating XP on a commercial bases after next Spring may bring some hope, it may be possible to somewhere and somehow 'obtain' such Update-Packs for personal use.

[JorgeM]

Microsoft's latest announcement to continue Updating XP on a commercial bases

This is generally a standard offering, at least seen by Enterprise customers, but the cost of support is not feesible.

it may be possible to somewhere and somehow 'obtain' such Update-Packs for personal use.

possibly, but unfortunately, for those of us who love XP, if we continue to run on that version of OS, we will continue taking risks with regards to being infected with malware because you can expect that other vulnerabilities will be discovered and no one is going to be developing patches or fixes, at least not by anyone that isnt going to profit from that venture.

What I have seen some do, is on Windows 7, configure the system for best performance (in the system properties) and "style" Win 7 to look as close to classic XP as possible.

Not sure there is anthing else that can be done. I recall the same sentiments when Windows 2000 was retired. People loved it over 9x/Milenium. That love didnt last too long because XP was a hit.

[JenniferArden]

Its all about first impressions and I think XP was the first OS that really made a great first impression on PC and laptop users and no OS before or after could match the impression XP made

[AKsarben]

I say, let the 7 and 8 folks continue on with it. But, for those that do not need the fluff and graphcial interface/use/expansions, let XP stay as a solid, get me my email and internet OS. So many uses it does, and there is STILL many software packages and hardware systems that are Window 8,7 Vista XP (SP3) compatible.

[khakilang]

What Window 7 can do Window XP cannot do? Surf the internet, word processing, spreadsheet, presentation, video streaming etc... If you want a touchpad with XP, than the manufacture may create the driver for it. A lot of people I know do not see the need to upgrade as long as they can do their job. Not even with the fancy grphic interface. As for Window 8, they find it is a waste of time to start another learning curve. Bottomline, productivity with the least of cost and time.

[Ancient Dragon]

What Window 7 can do Window XP cannot do?

More memory, larger hard drives, larger files on the hard drive, faster processing, work well with multi-core processors. Windows 8 isn't really all that much of a learning curve -- just have to figure out where things have been moved to. For older people I can see many of them having some difficulty adjusting to Windows 8, but young people can probably learn it in an hour or two. If you can figure out how to text on a cellphone learning Windows 8 should be a breeze.

[MidiMagic]

I can now tell you why XP refuses to die.

With XP, you can get your work done. XP does not get in your way.

With Vista, 7, and 8, the operating system gets in your way, hindering your ability to do your work. This text box editor on this page also hinders you, by not obeying the standard keypad meanings.

With XP, I can have several applications open and switch to the one I want instantly using the taskbar. With Vista or 7, I have to wait for the stupid menu to pop up before I can switch. And on 8, I still have not figured out how to GET to the taskbar (if it exists).

Many times when I use Vista or 7, something I didn't want pops up and covers the thing I wanted to use. Then I waste time mousing around to get rid of the thing I didn't want so I can use what I wanted. I HATE MOUSEOVER POP UPS! They are the chief timewasters in computing. That's why I don't come here as often as I used to.

The MSpaint program supplied with Vista and later was designed for fancy art, not for the techincal drawings I need to use it for. I can't use it. I have been pirating copies of the XP MSpaint onto flash drives so I can get work done on newer computers I am forced to use.

8 seems to be designed by a crybaby with a cell phone who wants to make everyone else do what he has to do to use his phone computer. I have never seen such a big timewaster in my life. Every copy of 8 should be loaded into a cell phone, and then the cell phone should be smashed with a sledgehammer.

8 looks like it was designed to cause auto accidents when people use a computer while driving. We had a cop trying to use his police computer crash into the car ahead the other day. He had just been upgraded to 8. Policemen should not be computing while driving either.

[MidiMagic]

A postscript:

Windows 2.0 and Windows 8 are the only operating systems I have ever seen that are less useful than MS-Dos.

[JenniferArden]

Dont know Windows 8 but it seems with every version of Windows the life cycle becomes shorter, don't make them like they used to

[Ancient Dragon]

I still have not figured out how to GET to the taskbar (if it exists).

In the Start screen (the one with all the icons) the icon in the lower-left corner is named "Desktop". when you click that your computer will look just like Windows 7, but without the Start menu in the taskbar. In that window you can easily switch between applications just like you do now with XP, and you can do the same thing with windows 7.

In that window you can easily switch between applications just like you do now with XP, and you can do the same thing with windows 7.<

It may be so, but this is not the problem, for Billions of 'commercial' Users, is not to 'work' with it, it's to 'handle' it.

If I bought a new Car, but I forgot how to unlock and open the Door, I cannot drive the Car to work. If Billions of commercial Users have to be 'retrained' in order to keep on doing today what they have been doing 'til yesterday, all Those Employers have a great big problem, a time problem as well as a huge financial problem.

This is what leaves the bad 'first' impression on Windows8, not the System itself. Everything else is unimportant, at least for joung kids, they get used to it on their handie's already...

[ggeoff]

It seems that Bob Rankin has been following this discussion :)

[MidiMagic]

I used the desktop. No taskbar.

No tasklbar when an application is open.

Waste of time using start, desktop, then selecting an ap to switch.

Cell phones are timewasters, and so is 8.

[Palebushman]

@ggeoff.

I take it that by Bob Rankin, you mean this gentleman:-

http://askbobrankin.com/sick_and_tired_of_windows.html

[Ancient Dragon]

No tasklbar when an application is open

Some yes, others no. I miss the taskbar sometimes too. Just Alt+Tab get you to the desktop window with the taskbar.

If I bought a new Car, but I forgot how to unlock and open the Door

I bought a new car and when I went to the gas station I didn't know how to open the lid to the gas tank so that I could put gas in it. I had to get another customer show me how it is done -- no big deal, just a little training solved the problem. If you are not willing to learn new things then you might as well live in a cave all by yourself. Same with Windows 8 -- the additional training isn't all that difficult for most people, even an old geeser like me learned it in just a few hours. I'll bet a 10-year-old could learn it in less than an hour.

[Reverend Jim]

I don't mind change. I'm just opposed to change just for the sake of change (or for the sake of justifying the cost of an upgrade). Granted, there are a lot of "under the hood" changes to Windows which I am told improve its functionality. But of the changes to the UI, how many of those changes actually improve the interface? If the change does not improve the interface then what is the justification for it? I hate to harp (again) on the lack of the Start Button, but how, exactly, does eliminating the start button make using Windows 8 better than Windows 7? How does continually popping me back into Metro improve my workflow? Once I have "mastered" the new interface, will I be able to develop applications or produce content any faster than under Windows 7 (due to the UI changes)? If the answer is no then what exactly was the point of changing everything?

[Ancient Dragon]

This sort of reminds me of the day many years ago (1985) when Coke company decided to change the fomula, there were so many demonstrations that Coke had the bring back the original formula and call it Coke Classic. I don't think they even sell that new coke any more, at least I don't see it in the stores around where I live. Microsoft better watch out or they will be in a similar situation.