Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Does the end of free XP support help push you to Vista or 7 ... or Linux?

By Adrian Kingsley-Hughes | March 26, 2009, 5:19am PDT

Summary: We’ve all known that this time was coming, and now it’s nearly upon us. Come April 14th Microsoft will pull the plug on free support for Windows XP (and Office 2003) and the only option available to users will be paid support, which only applies to XP Professional.

We’ve all known that this time was coming, and now it’s nearly upon us. Come April 14th Microsoft will pull the plug on free support for Windows XP (and Office 2003) and the only option available to users will be paid support, which only applies to XP Professional.

Note: If you recently bought say a netbook that runs on Windows XP then you will still be entitled to support from the OEM.

Now, security patches will still be developed and released for XP until April 2014, so is the end of free support a big deal? Well, I think that it is, given that Windows XP currently commands a 63.5% market share (I don’t have breakdown data for Home vs. Professional). Being in a siltation where nearly two-thirds of all PCs out there don’t have access to free support sounds to me like it has the potential to cause a lot of folks trouble.

Over the past couple of years or so I’ve heard from a lot of people who claim that they are going to do something once Microsoft “pulls the plug” on XP. Many of these users were loyal and entrenched XP supporters who realized that XP’s reign would eventually come to an end. Some claimed that they would bite the bullet and upgrade to Vista (or maybe hold out until Windows 7). Others claimed that Mac OS X was their future, while others were tired of paying for operating systems and were going to become Linux users. Well, no matter what your plans for the future are, Microsoft is certainly in the early stages of pulling the plug on XP and if you’re an XP user then it’s time to at least start planning on your escape strategy.

Another factor that could drive users away from XP is that over time fewer apps will support the old OS. Right now XP enjoys pretty good support, but I expect that things will change as soon as Windows 7 is out. That, combined with no support, should drive all but the most loyal users away from XP.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Hardware 2.0”

Steam "makes DRM obsolete" ... with more DRM!

TechNet accidentally leaks Windows 7 Release Candidate information

Topics

Linux, Microsoft Windows Vista, Microsoft Windows XP, Operating Systems, Microsoft Windows, Software, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Full Bio
Disclosure
Contact

Vendor HotSpot

The 360° Conversation around Cloud Computing

TECH VISUALIZER brings the social conversation to life... powered by Brocade

Learn More »

356

Comments

Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Follow via:: RSS; Email Alert

Just In

XP is still fine -

netcruiser52 30th Apr 2009

XP is still fine - now that the available hardware has finally surpassed the wastefull and sloppy programming of OS developers such as MS. I find it takes about 3 generations of hardware releases past the new os release before I have a viable system I'm at all happy with. Mind you I had to learn to design and write database systems and such around systems sporting, are you ready... 64k of ram, a blazing 4 megahertz cpu speeds and 90k hard sectored floppy drives and they still had to be fast and pretty. Your programming had to be tight and right. So I think current developers are spoiled by all the hardware resources they have to waste.

View in thread

Please Select
Please Select

0 Votes

+ -

Not sure what the issue is...

Sleeper Service Updated - 26th Mar 2009

...for home use I just go with whatever OS I fancy - I have a box running Intrepid Ibex and a box running Vista Home Premium x64.

XP's just an operating system which is now past its sell by date. I don't really understand people who insist on XP as an MS OS on a new machine unless, perhaps, it's a netbook.

As for business; it'll either be Vista or W7 depending on the licencing terms offered unless Linux comes up with something spectacular and homogenous. Which it won't.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

I agree with everything you said except

Michael Kelly 26th Mar 2009

that the licensing terms will dictate whether Vista of Win7 is chosen. I think the reputations of each OS will be the deciding factor. And let's face it, Win 7 has a squeaky clean reputation and apparently it is well deserved. If it keeps its clean reputation three months after its gold release then I see a quick death for both Vista and XP.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Re:

Cyrorm Updated - 26th Mar 2009

you also have to factor in that many businesses have programs that are OS specific to Windows XP, either by company design or Client design, this limits them to staying with XP until a large amount of time and money is spent on porting these applications to another OS, and larger businesses with these issues will be paying for support beyond the shut off date of free updates so not everyone that isn't a diehard XP fan will not be switching. And take into consideration that this is the user stations, which can easily have all their traffic flow through a server with an OS that is still supported and updated for free as well as firewalls and bluecoat servers. I think most businesses will be sticking with Xp for quite some time, or atleast until it becomes to costly to keep paying for XP support, which could be very soon at the way things are going economically. But as a for instance, where I work, I support 900+ machines all running XP with 5-8 year old hardware, over half still with SDRAM and moving to a new OS will be a huge expense and our client deliverd applications are XP only(they only work with IE6) so we have no option but to pay for support of XP. But of course a large portion of that cost will be billed to the clients as we have to pay for the support beause they won't update their applicaions to even work in IE7.

0 Votes

+ -

I agree...

Sleeper Service 26th Mar 2009

...we didn't move from NT to XP until 2006.

0 Votes

+ -

You and most other companies

notsofast 26th Mar 2009

Less than 40% of corporate desktops used XP in 2005.

Companies may skip Vista (so long as it's no harder than transitioning to Vista), like XP before it, they will eventually make the change.

There's no way that they're going to move the masses to Linux. Maybe 10 years from now, we'll get a desktop Linux for the masses, but for better or worse, we're not there yet.

For developers, i don't think it matters that much...especially not if the company uses Eclipse.

For me personally, I use Vista, and I will probably move to 7 after RTM.

0 Votes

+ -

Extending the life of custom XP applications

mylinuxsupport Updated - 27th Mar 2009

There is a good chance that custom Visual Basic, VC++, Foxpro, or Access Programs that IT departments have created that run on Windows 98, 2000, NT, XP can be run on Linux using the WINE Translation Layer. This allows you the benefit of a modern supported OS with-out the requirement of porting your in house developed application.

- MyLinuxSupport

0 Votes

+ -

Commerical WINE

Bj Raz 28th Mar 2009

There are also some commercial off shoots of the WINE project CrossOver, by CodeWeavers a direct contributor and supporter of the WINE project and Transgaming's Cedega both are made for using Windows applications on Linux and CrossOver also supports MacOS.

0 Votes

+ -

Quick Death? Really?

ccrashh2@... 26th Mar 2009

What if a person is a regular home user? With just a simple PC that connects to the internet so you can surf, answer emails, etc. Do you think that, short of buying a new PC and getting an OS, that a person like that will bother with "upgrading" at all? Short of webpages that won't load because his browser is woefully out-of-date and he can't use a newer version because his OS isn't supported, what would force his hand?

I don't think it will be Windows 7's reputation, it will boil down to cost. Plain and simple. With the US economy in the toilet, people won't buy a shiny new PC because they need an upgrade to their OS. Nor will they spend $300+ for just the OS (or whatevever the upgrade cost will be). They will sit on their old one.

0 Votes

+ -

Amen

jdieter@... 26th Mar 2009

It is absolutely retarded to think a plain ole home user that gets everything they need out of what they have now, will shell out $1400 for a new pc - just because Microsoft breaks XP. It is much more likely, that they will stick a free ubuntu CD into their old pc (once XP breaks) than buy another time bombed Microsoft product. MS knows this, and would rather have XP remain on grandmoms PC than force her to switch to Linux. XP isn't going away without Microsoft going away also. (btw, my grandmaw already uses Linux)

0 Votes

+ -

Nope...

Sleeper Service 26th Mar 2009

...it's much more likely they'll stick with XP even if it's unsupported.

Then they'll buy a new PC when the economy improves.

So it goes.

0 Votes

+ -

Stick with XP?

ricemark20-20681816699547236215965074268522 27th Mar 2009

...and outdated OS. I'll take a shiny new Ubuntu install with Compiz 3D, thank you!

0 Votes

+ -

Good for you...

Sleeper Service 27th Mar 2009

...corporations and the vast majority of consumers will not.

0 Votes

+ -

Glad you've got the hardware to do it!

MWRadio@... 2nd Apr 2009

I get tired of all the "Its Sooo easy just switch to Linux," BS. Unless they've made some HUGE changes in self installing Linux distros in the last two years I don't see it happening. I have a 300MHz PII with 256Mb of RAM here that runs XP Quickly! And yes, it runs fine with SP3, has all the patches, NEVER has had a virus problem, EVER! (Of course I don't download porn either.)
I tried several different Linux distros, Ubuntu Edgy Eft 6.10 included. None of them worked for Cr@p! I finally got Edgy Eft to load by hacking at the command line, after six days of learning Linux commands! Even after getting a procedure down that works for loading it, it takes SIX HOURS to install! After that I still had to find out how to make a quarter of the hardware work! And this was my BEST experience with Linux!
It still runs like dog, takes six minutes to boot, is about 20% slower than running XP and I can't run my ISPs software unless I install wine or something. Linux? Forget it! Do you think the average PC User could even have done what I had to do to make mine work? I doubt it!
I thought, "Well maybe it is just the old hardware is too slow," (Even though it runs XP fine!). So It tried again a year later with a 1.8GHz machine no better luck! If you do the install from the Live CD, which is what most people have to do, it takes three hours just to BOOT the machine to the CD and then the install is iffy about completing! Use my hacked way of loading it and you can complete an install in about three hours! Ahh the joys of Linux!
Now add in the incompatability of most of the software I already own and you can see why the average user is NOT going to Linux! Yes, yes wine etc. Ok maybe its possible! But I don't have the time for it! And why, even if I did would I want a machine that runs slower!
I have a UBCD4win CD here with XP on it. I can boot to a live XP CD in just two to three minutes on any machine I have in the house. Yes even the 166 with 64Mb of RAM sitting in the closet in the basement! I tried just for grins! Wow Linux is so wonderful compared to XP! WRONG!

0 Votes

+ -

1400 for a PC? WHO?

notlehs 26th Mar 2009

Normal home user will be SOOO happy with a $500 Desktop PC with Vista as an upgrade. PCs are inexpensive... Macs cost $1400.

0 Votes

+ -

More like $400... At Most

reziol 26th Mar 2009

And even then, the discontinuation of XP doesn't mean that their monitors, keyboards, mice, and other peripherals will stop working. So in truth all they'll really need is a new box, which could be built for even cheaper. And depending on when they bought the one they have now, the hardware may be enough to run Vista. I had an eight-year old (home-built) computer that with a small addition of RAM could have been enough to run Vista.

0 Votes

+ -

Most people don't even have the $400 right now . . .

JLHenry 26th Mar 2009

So moving to a new one isn't an option at all.

0 Votes

+ -

The end user doesn't think or work that way

rdhalsteatzd 26th Mar 2009

Although they could do it much cheaper, the average end user who is completely clueless about computers and apps will go to the local big box store and take a low end machine with what ever comes on it. That is the only way Vista made as much progress as it has. Were these stores to have offered XP, LINUX, or Vista at no change in price, had some one knowledgeable to explain the differences, how to use them, and set up the machine Vista would have no where near the number of users it has now.

My wife's machine is an old, single core machine running XP pro. That one won't get changed until we can no longer keep it running.

In the long run, it doesn't matter how much it costs in hardware and soft ware, if what you have does what you want, then why change. There are no few machines out there still running Win 95, let alone XP and some of them are in businesses no less.

AND...it gets more complicated than that. I had a call from an outfit the other day that had a program problem. They are running an "Expensive" custom C and C machine for making precision parts. The program is a compact "DOS" program that stores the data in a proprietary format. Their backup is on 5 1/4 floppies. With the economy in it's present state they are not going to upgrade that system as it'd probably run $30,000 to $40,000 dollars that they don't have. They are trying to avoid paying about $5,000 for a replacement program IF the manufacturer will sell them one...if they can find it. I doubt I can disassemble the program and fix it for that.

BTW I hear people singing the praises of Win 7. I found it to be a royal pain in the back side to run on my network. It wanted me to completely reconfigure the network and use DHCP. I'd bet there's a way around that, but in both XP and Vista it's almost intuitive and didn't even require instructions.

0 Votes

+ -

More like $240 without monitor

mylinuxsupport Updated - 27th Mar 2009

For our office we install:

Dual core AMD or Intel Processors
4 Gigs Ram
250 Gig HD

with open source replacement software for MS Office, MS SQL Server Seats and Sharepoint Seats for approximately $240 total.

We use the same system for both desktops and servers.

0 Votes

+ -

Um My PC casts upwards of $2,500

Ez_Customs 28th Mar 2009

To spend 1,400 on a MAC sounds real nice to me. If you buy a PC that is less then 900 then your bound to have a Piece of junk. Anyone who actually buys a fully loaded PC for 500 is ether incapable of buying more, or falls victom to the retail market. Yeah I mean Slaves to the retail market. You know it was those poor system configurations that made the reputation of Vista the way it is today. Vista basically requires you to have a PC costing new of the times now, of about 2,000 to run flawless. Now with 7 on around the corner, sure it has similar requirements, yes but it is a bit slimmer but not by much, what are you going to do with a cheap $500 PC? Your Just gonna Cry, thats what!!

0 Votes

+ -

Ummm, good for you...$2,500, really?

cyberlion 4th Apr 2009

It's nice that you are one of the early adopters, the rest of us appreciate all the hard work and money you spend to help balance the economic issue of supply and demand. Just as there are those that prefer driving a Jaguar, or a Hummer, there are those the do fine with a Saturn or a Kia. They all get you from point A to point B. Difference is, we can actually afford to buy our lunch when we get there...

As to being a "slave" to anything, needing bigger and better is just as slave-ish. Also, saying a system is "fully loaded" and then saying "incapable of buying more" is contradictory. If a system is fully loaded, then you could not buy any more if you wanted to, so which is it?

As for specifics, if you are talking about custom built, instead of "off-the-rack" components, then yeah the type of system you're talking about is going to cost you a chunk of change. Here's a little hint for you, The reason Mac's are not the top segment getter for the personal computer market is price. There are a lot more Saturn and Kia cars driving around then Hummers. That means there are a lot more service stations, parts houses, dealerships, etc., that cater to Kia and Saturns then there are Hummers. It economics pure and simple.

You can feel all high and mighty about your $2,500 computer. Just make sure you've got good speakers and music to drown out all the laughter. Not that you would understand what we are laughing about...

0 Votes

+ -

MacMini?

yschoo1@... 29th Mar 2009

cost less than $700. Ubuntu costs you nothing. You can always use the hardware you have had and way you go. Don't need window 7 for general home users, period.

0 Votes

+ -

Most won't even notice

LiquidLearner 26th Mar 2009

You do realize that most of the world won't even notice that XP support has ended right? It has Live Wave 3, it has IE 8, it will continue to get security updates. Software companies will continue to support their installs on XP, just like they often do on 2k.

That said I think you will see a higher percentage of upgrades on existing hardware than we've seen in a very long time by home users. Also consider $1400 buys a very nice PC, monitor and Office 07. Most people don't need all that. And we'll probably see upgrades in lower price ranges than you think. I'm guessing $100 for Home Premium upgrade. MS knows times are hard, they know new PC sales are down. They're going to cater to XP and Vista users moving to 7.

The security improvements vs malware in 7 is worth the cost of admission. So if you upgrade your support costs go down. Instant ROI for most users. I know we're prepping for a high demand of people wanting XP to 7 upgrades done by our in-house staff.

0 Votes

+ -

The big question is . . .

JLHenry 26th Mar 2009

What is Apple going to do? A large number of these people probably have iPods of some kinds (I'm still using a 4 gig mini . . .), and won't want to lose whatever music they've purchased.

Will Apple come out with a Linux version of iTunes, or will they continue to make sure that iTunes works with XP as they upgrade it?

And if they do make a Linux version (doubtful, but it would be fun to see how many people stick with MS if they did . . . wink

), Will they be essentially Crowning an "Official" Linux distro and only supoort that one distro?

Apple has a lot of say in where people move to just through their consumer products.

0 Votes

+ -

There's more than iPod

Rob Oakes 26th Mar 2009

You make it sound like iPods are the only reason that people stick with
Windows over Linux or Mac OS X. While it may be a factor, it is hardly
a major or important one. Rather, I think most people stick with
WIndows due to their existing investment in software.

Over the fifteen plus years I've been using Windows, I've accumulated
quite a bit of software for it. This includes the obligatory Office, but
also financial software, photography software, the Adobe Creative
Sutie, MS Visual Studio, and a host of other programs related to
engineering and Mathematics (plus a healthy collection of games).
When I move to a new computer, I first install the operating system,
and then I install the relevant bits of this vast collection.

I haven't had to buy new applications for several years for either my
personal or professional use. What I have works great and runs well,
even on Windows Vista. To move to a new platform means that I leave
that whole investment behind. In many cases there isn't a good Mac
or Linux equivalent. And in other cases, moving means that I
repurchase all of the software a second time.

When I consider the thousands of dollars spent on software, my iPod
is hardly the most important factor in changing operating systems.
______________________________________

Oak-Tree.us/Blog

0 Votes

+ -

That wasn't my point.

JLHenry 26th Mar 2009

My point is pretty much what you pointed out. They don't want to lose the use of what they have, and most people have and use MP3 players and actually buy music. The majority of players sold are iPods. Therefore Apple is a driving force in the market via iTunes. When you add in the iPhone/iPod touch, that market gets even bigger.

The simple fact of the matter is that Apple CAN and WILL have influence over what people do when their OS isn't supported and their PC doesn't work right anymore. In this market, if you have a choice between keeping your hardware and having to get new hardware simply to keep using your consumer appliances, keeping your current hardware will win every time.

If Apple were to suddenly support Linux (VERY doubtful) and tell their customers "Don't worry about your current computer. You can switch to this version of Linux, and you don't have to get a new computer", people will take that to heart.

If they're told "Sorry, but you'll have to buy a new system or even a new Mac at only $900" (I'll leave the mini out of this for now), Apple could lose THEIR base as well. Remember that the iPod didn't really take off until they came out with iTunes for Windows . . .

Simply put, MOST people's "thousands of dollars" (or equivalent) spent IS on iPods and their ilk, not Professional software like you have. You are the minority player in this game, not the main target, my friend.

0 Votes

+ -

Use Songbird

Mach5RR 27th Mar 2009

It's the open-source equivalent of iTunes and can manage an iPod from Linux

0 Votes

+ -

Correction

daengbo 28th Mar 2009

I'm a long-time 100% Linux user on the desktop. Newer iPods (Touch +) and the iPhones aren't supported because Apple has CnDed attempts to reverse engineer the database hash. Songbird can read but not write. Every other application -- no matter the platform -- is in the same boat.

Apple has tied the iPod to iTunes. That's OK. There are many other great portable music players on the market which don't seek to tie the user down to the company's software. There's also Amazon instead of the iTunes store.

Apple isn't losing any market share, though, so I guess that "the more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" wasn't applicable to real-world situations. Meh.

0 Votes

+ -

Let's Go Living In the Past

DannyO_0x98 26th Mar 2009

I think it's likely they'll just keep on with XP. Has the Win98 install base
dropped below measurable yet? Win2000?

Is there a date when Microsoft will discontinue the XP Activation service?
There's the real day of XP's death.

0 Votes

+ -

Right you are!

MWRadio@... 2nd Apr 2009

I'm still running 98SE on my home system. My shop systems have XP on them. My brother, who works as a system admin still ran 95B on his home system as late as 2 years ago! Why? Why change if it does what you need! I have several customers in this area (quite depressed job opertuninties, losing manufacturing base almost daily) who are running dial up on machines less than 1GHz! Most of them are still running 98SE!
I just landed an account caring for a small business in the area with about 60 networked machines. About twenty of them are 850 AMDs running 98SE, the rest are in the 1 to 3 GHz range with XP. Imagine my horror when I found that nearly all of them had Sp1 or earlier, most had the Administrator account unprotected, None had been patched in years! Most were running as admin and better than a third had access to the web! Of all the machines inventoried to date only ONE had up-to-date subscriptions on the AV let alone definitions!
This is what you will see on a LARGE scale when XP support is dropped. Most home users will simply reload thier machines when they get too fouled up. Meaning they won't have ANY patches or service packs. I'm seeing it already daily!

0 Votes

+ -

A am a Grandpa

elderlybloke 26th Mar 2009

and I went over to Linux (Ubuntu) a year ago.

I have not regretted it yet.

I see from the voting results that linux outdoes Apple, and has about one third of the XP number.
That rather puts a bomb under the idea that Linux is still in single % number of users.

0 Votes

+ -

Not really...

Sleeper Service 27th Mar 2009

...since this is a technical journal and hardly representative of the general population.

0 Votes

+ -

You are incorrect

GuidingLight 27th Mar 2009

you base your argument on the poll numbers above. Look around and see where you are: A technical site, with tech minded people, not the general population.

My mother, and my brothers have not taken that poll, my fellow coworkers never come to this site, so they have not taken that poll, the average person has not seen that poll, et cetera.

Linux is actaully where it is said to be: A single digit number. I'm not putting Linux down, just pointing out the error in your thinking.

0 Votes

+ -

Exactly

cwallen19803@... 26th Mar 2009

Perhaps this article is centered around business
users who can pass the cost off to consumers of
their product as "cost of doing business", but
around my house we don't have the spare bucks to
spend on replacing an OS that just isn't broken.

New machine, sure. Maybe even Linux but don't
hold your breath. Old, working machines doing
whatever it is I do using whatever software I
use, why bother?

0 Votes

+ -

Home user...

Phantom.si 26th Mar 2009

I think if a home user only needs to browse the web and read email, the best for
him would be to download a free version of CentOS, or Fedora, and have a great
system for free.

0 Votes

+ -

Quick Death? Really?

windozefreak 26th Mar 2009

Speak for your self. I suspect you have no idea what other people will do. For instant, I have a five year old system that runs pretty good. However, I recently puchased a new 64 bit system anticipating release of Windows 7, wanting to reap the benefits of the new system. so, people will do whatever they desire and that's the way it should be. Agree?

0 Votes

+ -

I believe he meant that in terms of market share.

xXSpeedzXx 27th Mar 2009

Does that mean that consumers are going to go out an buy an upgrade disk? Not likely. But as it was said with XP holding the 60% of share, that means that many businesses are likely holding off to see what happens with W7. Thats what my organization is doing. And before I transferred to this campus, my previous campus was explorering the possiblity of going completely opensource, Especially since a sister campus went completely opensource.

So in terms of that linux/unix is in a position to gain more market share. I don't think it will be that Windows users will go to it in droves, but I find it completely plausible that *nix will pick a a couple % of share, and even a couple more % to Apple. Not enough to take the giant down. But those few percentage points do represent a large # of users.

Personally I use all 3 OS's and platforms. There are things that each of them do really well. I am not particulary impressed with Vista, but W7 looks promising, but I am not holding my breath either. After all OS is a tool to help get work done, and I like to use the right tool for the job. I don't necessary think that Windows is the one size fits all tool.

0 Votes

+ -

No - it's pre-installs...

waltmaine 26th Mar 2009

Win7 will be chosen because it will be pre-installed on new machines. Most Consumers however are not going to pay to upgrade - they are going to just run unpatched systems (like so many already do.)

The bottom line reality here is that the majority of (home) users just don't NEED new features! They surf the web, send emails, maybe write a document now and then. Most BUSINESS users don't need the new features either for the same reasons! The ONLY reason to change is due to lack of support.

This is all due to Microsoft's business model which REQUIRES them to force updates every few years or the won't have enough revenue to continue (since the only money making products MS sells are the OS and Office. All the others lose or barely break even.)

0 Votes

+ -

That is too bad

mjolnar@... 27th Mar 2009

I have a dual boot box. Vista 64 and Ubuntu 8.10. I like Vista more than XP, but it does have some limitations. I currently have an AMD Athlon 4000 CPU, Vista is a little sluggish with 2GB ram. The only real problem I have with it is that it doesn't use its ram very efficiently. I have heard all kinds of horror stories about Vista, I don't have any trouble with it. When someone else uses my machine, they ask what chip I'm running and claim that it is fast considering that limitation. When use Vista, I think to myself that it is running so slow.

If you have a newer machine it should be just fine. I will probably load my Vista on my new build, but I will probably still use Ubuntu most of the time. I just can't justify buying a new O/S every 2 or 3 years. Linux is free and works very well, that is the price I can live with.

0 Votes

+ -

XP is still fine

webmessia 20th Apr 2009

Why support no longer being available is a problem I don't understand. Mainly because techically savvy people like on this site, probably won't have basic problems. Microsoft are useless for support and always will be, so this is no problem. As for Windows 7, it's still a deliberatly chunked up OS, and comes with all more than you need. I personally can't work with the Aero GUI (I hate the default XP style too, but thats easily changed), The disk is still on a DVD for an OS with enough usefull features to fit on a CD. And the use of Libraries is nifty for a while until you have to quickly access files with a separate window for separate folders. Windows XP is still going to be around for a while, because it's simple. Microsoft were fine selling XP for 6 years. Sure I'd like some improvments, but most of those are basic flaws of Windows, which will never change ever. So if you want an upgrade for the sake of it go for 7. Otherwise XP will be easily usable for the next 5 years.

0 Votes

+ -

XP is still fine -

netcruiser52 30th Apr 2009

0 Votes

+ -

I Totally Agree, HEY Remember Windows ME?

BobinAtlanta 28th Apr 2009

For those too young to remember, Windows ME totally sucked. Really.

0 Votes

+ -

no free XP support

mithraigor@... 26th Mar 2009

Hardly matters... calling M$ gets you "john" in Bangalore after 3 hours on hold, you can't understand him, he can't understand you, so you call your friend the Linux jock who fixes the problem while bitching at the lousy windoze hack the entire time.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Support? What support?

rdhalsteatzd 26th Mar 2009

With this topic coming up, I realized I've never used MS support even once in all these years unless activating windows is called support.

0 Votes

+ -

Isn't that a truth..

yschoo1@... 29th Mar 2009

I have just re-installed Window XP on my XP machine. That was the 3rd time since the HP machine my son gave me several years back. It took me a solid 3 hours plus until Service Pack 2 was installed. If I did it with Ubuntu 8.10, it shouldn't take more than an hour. Support? What support from MS?

0 Votes

+ -

Whether you consider it support or not...

MWRadio@... 2nd Apr 2009

Never had to call M$ myself, either but we DO use Windows support daily.
Whether you consider it support or not, Windows Update is a form of support. Or is that not what we are talking about here? Are they talking about shutting that off? That is what some posts seem to indicate.

0 Votes

+ -

Adrian, do the FOSS community a favor and quit trolling .

Duke E. Love 27th Mar 2009

No really.
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12554-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=62521&messageID=1154860

0 Votes

+ -

Let Me Tell You The Issue!

BobinAtlanta Updated - 28th Apr 2009

Microsoft Vista is incompatible with several of our vendors and I hope Windows 7 will be better. We CAN NOT use it. Clear enough? As for support, I'll take XP with no support versus VISTA with unlimited 24x7 support. (Never needed it anyway, I know how to download drivers for a mature, stable OS)

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Time to move to "7" heaven

Mike Cox 26th Mar 2009

My rep and I had a very formal toast the other night to the demise of XP. Although the economy has cratered and my company has had to lay off hundreds of people, I still maintain a $750 glass of cognac is necessary every week. After the toast, my rep and I turned to the status of my Windows 7 deployment. I reported "all systems go" and claimed that the ROI is way over %762. My rep and I then laughed out loud regarding people still using XP and their lack of vision. Any CIO worth his weight in rocks should understand that XP was legacy 5 years ago. As my rep says, Microsoft will serve no OS before its time, and Windows 7's time is now!!!

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

MIKEY......you're BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT_Guy_z 26th Mar 2009

Gee Mike...we have truly missed your insightful pearls of wisdom.

You can't stay away for such extended periods of time.

Many of us in the IT industry hang on your every word...and without them appearing here at ZDNet...our lives seem so hollow.

PLEASE Mike...get back to your regular contributions to the discussion.