| Monday, October 6 2008 |
Windows XP, the OS that is still widely available although its Vista successor is trying to get the upper hand for more than a year, has just received another six months before going down forever. Earlier this summer, Microsoft instructed retailers to stop selling copies of Windows XP to consumers. Regardless of that customers were still able to use their lovely XP OS through a loophole that allowed them to purchase a new computer running certain version of Windows Vista and still downgrade to Windows XP for free. Originally, that option was set to expire on January 31st, 2009. Now Microsoft has extended that date by another six months, through July 31st, 2009. Recent market research shows that one third of the customers that can take advantage of the downgrade program, return to Windows XP without thinking twice. Recently Microsoft also made Windows XP licenses and support available for netbooks until 2010. With little help Windows XP could be still alive when Vista's deputy Windows 7 becomes available.
Source: The Register
Source: The Register
User comments
I don't understand Microsoft's logic
They want to promote Windows Vista, and stop XP sales, but then again, they keep extending XP's support and DOWNGRADE program.
They want to promote Windows Vista, and stop XP sales, but then again, they keep extending XP's support and DOWNGRADE program.
I think this is why Vista is not so popular. Microsoft kept promoting exp for what 3-4 yrs which gave everybody a chance to upgrade from 2000 to xp including all the government, schools, and other enterprises and have good amount of bugs gone. Now they screwed themselves with that and now they are just throwing vista down our throats and trying to get everybody to upgrade when there is a huge amount of bugs still there, and thats why schools, government, enterprises will not upgrade just yet.
maybe because they know that Vista is Whack. :toast:
considering the major backlash when M$ annouced they were stopping the production of XP I think they have partially learnt their lesson which is to listen to the consumers a little more.
im not going to go into the 'XP Vs. Vista' debate - each to their own theres a lotta people that say Vista is good then theres a lotta people saying Vista is crap. its just an endless circle.
So 'Forcing' users to use Vista with a new system isnt good either. people have their own personnal preferances - Personally I still like XP. DX10 might sound good on paper but in reality its not good enough to force me to go Vista.
implementing a system like this where users can choose which O/S they want to run with other then just vista vista & vista saves Consumers money as they DONT have to pay an extra £60-70 to have the machine come with XP.
considering the major backlash when M$ annouced they were stopping the production of XP I think they have partially learnt their lesson which is to listen to the consumers a little more.
im not going to go into the 'XP Vs. Vista' debate - each to their own theres a lotta people that say Vista is good then theres a lotta people saying Vista is crap. its just an endless circle.
So 'Forcing' users to use Vista with a new system isnt good either. people have their own personnal preferances - Personally I still like XP. DX10 might sound good on paper but in reality its not good enough to force me to go Vista.
implementing a system like this where users can choose which O/S they want to run with other then just vista vista & vista saves Consumers money as they DONT have to pay an extra £60-70 to have the machine come with XP.
by: SimFreak47;1005394At least it shuts the people up who keep complaining about Microsoft shoving things down everybody's throat.
I don't understand Microsoft's logic
They want to promote Windows Vista, and stop XP sales, but then again, they keep extending XP's support and DOWNGRADE program.
There really is no good reason not to move to Vista these days. I wouldn't upgrade a machine from XP to Vista, but on new machines I say just stick with Vista. Vista isn't buggy anymore, at this point people are just complaining because they are comfortable with XP and fear change.
by: watts289;1005413
they are just throwing vista down our throats
by: DanTheBanjoman;1005420Does it?
At least it shuts the people up who keep complaining about Microsoft shoving things down everybody's throat.
I think the popularity of small laptops (like the Asus eee) is increasing the usefullness of XP. The defualt OS for these new laptops is Linux... or Windows XP. Vista is just to beefy and demanding to run efficiently on those little things. As the demand for the eee and its competition increases, then so will XP's cutoff date. :toast:
that an xp users signing petitions to have it extended.
by: jydie;1005453I disagree, my Eee runs Vista just fine. In fact many report that Vista actually runs better than XP Home does on their Netbooks. In this article particularly, installing Vista on the MSI Wind actually made it faster at benchmarks.
I think the popularity of small laptops (like the Asus eee) is increasing the usefullness of XP. The defualt OS for these new laptops is Linux... or Windows XP. Vista is just to beefy and demanding to run efficiently on those little things. As the demand for the eee and its competition increases, then so will XP's cutoff date. :toast:
by: SimFreak47;1005394Oh, they'll keep extending the downgrade program forever, if they'd like -- it still requires useres to buy a copy of Vista first (even if they never use it), so Microsoft can still make their shareholders happy, even if everyone doesn't like the new OS. :laugh:
I don't understand Microsoft's logic
They want to promote Windows Vista, and stop XP sales, but then again, they keep extending XP's support and DOWNGRADE program.
Soon companies (and already) will stop making drivers for XP and will thru that force people to "upgrade" to vista.
by: newtekie1;1005451Fear change,? I think not, and I think you should really stop thinking like that. I like change, but not if it comprimises my productivity. Example, a quickly optimised XP install (i.e. disabled services, etc) takes around 20~30 seconds on my system to boot up, and less than 10 seconds on the eeepc. With Vista, even when optimised through the same means, I found that the system took more than one minute to boot. That isnt all, the EEEPC's 20GB SDD means that the Vista OS, will take up a large portion of the drive, making it extremely undesirable, and would moreover run at a sluggish pace.
There really is no good reason not to move to Vista these days. I wouldn't upgrade a machine from XP to Vista, but on new machines I say just stick with Vista. Vista isn't buggy anymore, at this point people are just complaining because they are comfortable with XP and fear change.
Does it?
Another argument against upgrading to vista, is the fact that some hardware, such as my Webcam, graphics tablet, etcetera will not work anymore. You may say that "why not get better hardware (and say the same about my EEEPC), but realise the quickly deteriorating economic conditions ahead-you may find that the most you can afford in the future is a Nettop. I'm personally considering one to use mainly instead of my main PC for space saving, and the fact that the nettop will use far less power than the PC (power bills have been going up since I upgraded hardware).
I strongly support this decision that Microsoft has made.
by: tkpenalty;1005485Boot time is pretty meaningless to me. I only rarely actually boot any of my Vista machines, most of the time they are put to sleep, including my EeePC. Resuming from sleep is nearly instant, the longest time is spent typing in my password.
Fear change,? I think not, and I think you should really stop thinking like that. I like change, but not if it comprimises my productivity. Example, a quickly optimised XP install (i.e. disabled services, etc) takes around 20~30 seconds on my system to boot up, and less than 10 seconds on the eeepc. With Vista, even when optimised through the same means, I found that the system took more than one minute to boot. That isnt all, the EEEPC's 20GB SDD means that the Vista OS, will take up a large portion of the drive, making it extremely undesirable, and would moreover run at a sluggish pace.
Another argument against upgrading to vista, is the fact that some hardware, such as my Webcam, graphics tablet, etcetera will not work anymore. You may say that "why not get better hardware (and say the same about my EEEPC), but realise the quickly deteriorating economic conditions ahead-you may find that the most you can afford in the future is a Nettop. I'm personally considering one to use mainly instead of my main PC for space saving, and the fact that the nettop will use far less power than the PC (power bills have been going up since I upgraded hardware).
I strongly support this decision that Microsoft has made.
Your harddrive space argument might work for the older EeePC's but the newer ones with 40GB SSDs and 80-160GB HDDs negates it. And the lowest for any of the Nettops will be the 40GB SDD, with the 80GB HDD being standard.
The few incompatible pieces of hardware are really the only reason not to use Vista, but that is only the fault of the hardware manufacturer for not releasing propper drivers. I have only run into a single piece of hardware that didn't work with Vista, an old 3Com PCI network card. The rare hardware incompatibility is far from a good reason to stick with XP.
On the consumer level that makes sense. On the business level there is no reason to buy Vista. Everything is already setup and running on XP. Some things are even designed to run on XP. Companies may not want the bill of the new computers for Vista as well as the configuration costs of the those companies that their hardware and software was purchased from.
I'm sure much of this decision had to do with the industry side. Primarily they are the ones even purchasing the downgrades not the average consumer.
We all build our own PCs we don't count.
I'm sure much of this decision had to do with the industry side. Primarily they are the ones even purchasing the downgrades not the average consumer.
We all build our own PCs we don't count.
Everyone is waiting for Windows 7, why not.
by: newtekie1;1005463Some of the eee's only have a 2 or 4 GB SSD drive. I am not sure if Vista could fit on those.
I disagree, my Eee runs Vista just fine. In fact many report that Vista actually runs better than XP Home does on their Netbooks. In this article particularly, installing Vista on the MSI Wind actually made it faster at benchmarks.
But, dang... that surprises me. Vista beating XP with only 1 GB of memory. :o
Thanks for the information and the link!! :)
why won't xp just die.
by: DrPepper;1005583Because if M$ can't sell vista to the masses, they can still make a profit with XP. Let's not forget that microsoft loves our money.
why won't xp just die.
"
im not going to go into the 'XP Vs. Vista' debate - each to their own theres a lotta people that say Vista is good then theres a lotta people saying Vista is crap. its just an endless circle."
But it doesn't have to be an endless circle.
People who like Vista obviously have figured it out. People who don't are just ignorant bandwagon morons.
im not going to go into the 'XP Vs. Vista' debate - each to their own theres a lotta people that say Vista is good then theres a lotta people saying Vista is crap. its just an endless circle."
But it doesn't have to be an endless circle.
People who like Vista obviously have figured it out. People who don't are just ignorant bandwagon morons.
by: newtekie1;1005526
The few incompatible pieces of hardware are really the only reason not to use Vista, but that is only the fault of the hardware manufacturer for not releasing propper drivers.
...or the fact that the manufacturer has drivers that work perfectly well with Windows XP and sees no need to write any more? :rolleyes: This is especially true in the business world, where upgrades usually occur once a decade, if not slower.
by: watts289;1005413
I think this is why Vista is not so popular. Microsoft kept promoting exp for what 3-4 yrs which gave everybody a chance to upgrade from 2000 to xp including all the government, schools, and other enterprises and have good amount of bugs gone. Now they screwed themselves with that and now they are just throwing vista down our throats and trying to get everybody to upgrade when there is a huge amount of bugs still there, and thats why schools, government, enterprises will not upgrade just yet.
Dude, shut up with the rhetoric.
What bugs?
How are they shoving Vista down our throats when they are extending downgrade and support?
Shools gov, ent. will not upgrade just yet because there isn't a need to spend millions of $ when XP is still compatible with everything. Businesses don't need DirectX 10 to run spreadsheet. (btw, University in my town is 100% Vista (besides their Macs)
It's necessary for Video game players to upgrade if they want to stay current with the top-notch graphical tech.
Vista is more stable for me than XP ever was, now that the OS dedicates some resources to the OS itself to prevent total PC lock.
by: Darkrealms;1005568I already said, there is no reason to buy Vista by itself. However, currently, even on the business level, there is no reason to avoid Vista when purchasing new machine. You are actually already purchasing Vista to be eligible for the downgrade anyway, so you might as well use it.
On the consumer level that makes sense. On the business level there is no reason to buy Vista. Everything is already setup and running on XP. Some things are even designed to run on XP. Companies may not want the bill of the new computers for Vista as well as the configuration costs of the those companies that their hardware and software was purchased from.
I'm sure much of this decision had to do with the industry side. Primarily they are the ones even purchasing the downgrades not the average consumer.
We all build our own PCs we don't count.
And if you are a Business running software that isn't compatible with Vista, that is a different story. However, I wouldn't recommend any Business run outdates software, and anything that doesn't run on Vista is too outdated for me. I know business don't follow that logic because it usually means they have to take some money out of their pockets, which most don't like to do in this day an age. But really, I haven't come across much software that won't work with Vista actually, most people just assume that whatever they are using won't work, and never actually try it.
by: mdm-adph;1005689I will not buy hardware from manufacturers that refuse to support it with proper driver updates, and anyone that does is an idiot. "My hardware manufacturer is to lazy to provide up to date drivers" is not a valid argument against Vista. Besides most XP drivers work just fine in the 32-bit version of Vista.
...or the fact that the manufacturer has drivers that work perfectly well with Windows XP and sees no need to write any more? :rolleyes: This is especially true in the business world, where upgrades usually occur once a decade, if not slower.
by: newtekie1;1006072
I already said, there is no reason to buy Vista by itself. However, currently, even on the business level, there is no reason to avoid Vista when purchasing new machine. You are actually already purchasing Vista to be eligible for the downgrade anyway, so you might as well use it.
And if you are a Business running software that isn't compatible with Vista, that is a different story. However, I wouldn't recommend any Business run outdates software, and anything that doesn't run on Vista is too outdated for me. I know business don't follow that logic because it usually means they have to take some money out of their pockets, which most don't like to do in this day an age. But really, I haven't come across much software that won't work with Vista actually, most people just assume that whatever they are using won't work, and never actually try it.
GE has informed us that using Vista for our software that is considered current by them is a "at your own risk" and will not be supported by them ; )
by: paybackdaman;1005602Fixed that for you. All businesses do what they do ultimately to make money.
Because if M$ can't sell vista to the masses, they can still make a profit with XP. Let's not forget that all businesses love our money.
by: Darkrealms;1006078Current by them, isn't current if it doesn't work properly on Vista, I don't care what GE says. I'm sure their is an alternative that you can switch to, and if you are paying for continued support by them, they have to support it regardless of platform.
GE has informed us that using Vista for our software that is considered current by them is a "at your own risk" and will not be supported by them ; )
by: DonInKansas;1006082Perhaps one day UNICEF will get into the OS business.
Fixed that for you. All businesses do what they do ultimately to make money.
Sorry, I should have said for-profit business.:rolleyes:
by: DonInKansas;1006092:) Just giving you crap. Even the not for profits are in it for the money, they just give all the top execs huge bonusses at the end of the year to make their profits equal 0.
Sorry, I should have said for-profit business.:rolleyes:
Lol good to see another xp v vista debate suprisingly this one is somewhat civil. That bad part is that most xp users are convinced that 7 will be the greatest os ever wich is a dangerous thought when its ms were talking about here. Kinda reminds me of duke hanging out for ever until the enevitable letdown oh we i suppose ya can have another petition as ull probably end up with vista anyways lol.
Not entirely, many people don't want to upgrade twice within a short period of time, they don't want to spend money on Vista when they know Windows 7 is going to be out soon as well.
If the O/S came with a new fast desktop computer then I don't see why not, the problem is many laptops comes shipped with Vista with a rather slow CPU and only 1-2GB of ram, give many people an extremely and unfairly poor taste of Vista!
If the O/S came with a new fast desktop computer then I don't see why not, the problem is many laptops comes shipped with Vista with a rather slow CPU and only 1-2GB of ram, give many people an extremely and unfairly poor taste of Vista!
Yeah the eee pc and the equivalents yes but most ppl in here have puters that can run Vista no probs yet stick by xp then go on about the hardware requirements that makes me laugh.
by: newtekie1;1006157Not a problem; I'm glad you see that little piece of info as well:toast:
:) Just giving you crap. Even the not for profits are in it for the money, they just give all the top execs huge bonusses at the end of the year to make their profits equal 0.
Alot of company still happy with their old computers with XP on it. They saw no reasons to upgrade to Vista. Upgrading their system to Vista mean new hardwares or even branch new computers for a whole company, but what will Vista gives them? XP already have everything they need.
Vista is just a stepping stone for Windows 7, just like Windows Me was a stepping stone for Windows XP.
I'm not dislike Vista, I would stick with XP, but I want to learn new things about new OS. It's time to move on, and adopt new things.
Vista is just a stepping stone for Windows 7, just like Windows Me was a stepping stone for Windows XP.
I'm not dislike Vista, I would stick with XP, but I want to learn new things about new OS. It's time to move on, and adopt new things.
You mean Windows 2000 not ME, XP is 2K upgraded, Windows ME is just a pile of crap worse O/S ever made :roll:
If they keep extending it and if the road map for Windows 7 stays the course, XP will still be supported when Windows 7 comes out which seems to be June or July of 09. I cant remember which.
by: newtekie1;1006088
Current by them, isn't current if it doesn't work properly on Vista, I don't care what GE says. I'm sure their is an alternative that you can switch to, and if you are paying for continued support by them, they have to support it regardless of platform.
Perhaps one day UNICEF will get into the OS business.
That just shows you do not understand the medical industry or the cost of changing systems. Yes it is possible to change but for a under 50 employee business it would cost hundreds of thousands to change systems. That is in no way cost effective, especially when the GE products are still in the top grouping.
by: Triprift;1006160
Lol good to see another xp v vista debate suprisingly this one is somewhat civil. That bad part is that most xp users are convinced that 7 will be the greatest os ever wich is a dangerous thought when its ms were talking about here. Kinda reminds me of duke hanging out for ever until the enevitable letdown oh we i suppose ya can have another petition as ull probably end up with vista anyways lol.
I'm just trying to present different sides of the arguement and have agreed on the vista side in several cases, just not all : )
I also agree about it not being worth it for many to upgrade to vista IF windows7 is supposed to be more compact and "modular" as is claimed.
I have also owned one of those "Vista Compatable" laptops that was mentioned but was tasked by vista.
windows xp is only perfect program release by Microsoft
Lol yep it was perfect alright when it was released :rolleyes: and had no sp funny enuff thats not what i remember :p
XP Wasnt too bad on release. My system at the time was a Celern300a @490, faster and more compatable then win2k was, although I Dual booted win98 and Xp for a while while until the games were better supported on xp. Vista seems to be red herring in the sense it seems to be more of a stepping stone for Windows 7. From a business perspective, I guess it doesnt make any sense to invest in vista when 7 is less then a year away. even then, they have to ask them selves if productivity will improve after the huge cost. In an office just using sage/office, upgrading the os isnt gonna make a single difference.
by: insider;1006177Slow CPU's with only 1-2GB of RAM actually isn't that bad with Vista, my EeePC is pretty much exactly that, and Vista runs more than comfortably with it. I think the real problem has two sides to it.
If the O/S came with a new fast desktop computer then I don't see why not, the problem is many laptops comes shipped with Vista with a rather slow CPU and only 1-2GB of ram, give many people an extremely and unfairly poor taste of Vista!
On one side, you have all the computer manufacturers that in the beginning of Vista's life were putting out machines that barely match the Vista requirements(Slow Processor and only 512MB of RAM with a shit graphics card) and installing Vista on them. Hell, XP doesn't even run that well on 512MB. They tried to get away with what they were used to doing, and that is putting out completely crap machines that barely ran the OS and charging huge markups on them. This just put a bad tast in peoples mouths, and it has stuck.
On the other side, you have all the poeple that have never tried Vista that just constantly get told by the Internet and other sources that Vista is a resource hog, and it runs like shit, and it is buggy as all hell, and they decide, without ever actually using the OS, that they don't like it. And a lot of the time they spread the same misinformation themselves, which continues to make the problem worse.
by: Darkrealms;1006442I understand the medical industry greatly, besides supporting several medial offices myself, I have a very good friend that works for a large ~20 Doctor Practice as their head of IT. When Vista came out, it was one of his main projects to test Vista with every single IT product in the building, including all their GE equipment. All if it worked, and furthermore, GE supports everthing despite their use of Vista. If you buy multi-million dollar machines from a company, they are going to support it.
That just shows you do not understand the medical industry or the cost of changing systems. Yes it is possible to change but for a under 50 employee business it would cost hundreds of thousands to change systems. That is in no way cost effective, especially when the GE products are still in the top grouping.
by: insider;1006177
If the O/S came with a new fast desktop computer then I don't see why not, the problem is many laptops comes shipped with Vista with a rather slow CPU and only 1-2GB of ram, give many people an extremely and unfairly poor taste of Vista!
2GB is more than enough for the avarage user, the same goes for the CPU. Heck, I just had 1GB when I had the RC's, and I was totally fine.
Now, when Vista just arrived these systems with 512MB ram were sold everywhere, but everything has changed now. Memory is alot cheaper and there are no "bad" cpu's anymore really.
EDIT: I just saw newtekie said pretty much the exact same thing.
by: newtekie1;1006731
I understand the medical industry greatly, besides supporting several medial offices myself, I have a very good friend that works for a large ~20 Doctor Practice as their head of IT. When Vista came out, it was one of his main projects to test Vista with every single IT product in the building, including all their GE equipment. All if it worked, and furthermore, GE supports everthing despite their use of Vista. If you buy multi-million dollar machines from a company, they are going to support it.
Please see the below. I have listed both the IE7 (which has been resolved) and the Vista portion of the email GE sent out and they have still not resolved the Vista portion as "Compatable" as of yet. I deal with multiple clients as well and thus far Vista has not been the best option for them. I'm not trying to say Vista will not work in the industry but I am saying there are many companies out there that will not support their products on a Vista platform.
For the consumer sector pretty much ANYTHING but Vista basic is alright (sorry XP Home/Vista Basic, might as well not exist).
by: EMR, ListServeSupport (GE Healthcare)newtekie1, I also completely agree with you that part of Vistas failure to begin with was the lack of hardware implemented with Vista. I have seen many systems "running" with 512mb prebundled. I've made it a general practice to install the ~$35 1gb dimm of ram on them. I've noticed after the install and reboot that vist generally takes up between 690-850mb right off the bat anyway.
Centricity EMR and Windows Vista
On January 30, 2007, Microsoft® Corporation released its new Windows Operating Systems "Vista". Compatibility checks between Vista and our Centricity Electronic Medical Records product will commence in spring of 2007.
Customers should refrain from changing their current Windows operating systems to Vista for our Centricity EMR product until certification of compatibility are completed in 2008. Until compatibility testing is complete, this is a not a supported platform.
Centricity EMR and Internet Explorer 7.0
Microsoft Corporation has released its latest Internet Explorer (IE), version 7.0. Compatibility checks between IE 7.0 and our Centricity Electronic Medical Records product are currently underway. Any necessary updates for the Centricity EMR application s compatibility with IE 7.0 will be provided in a future Service Pack release.
Thank you,
The Centricity Services Team
by: Darkrealms;1006840He got petty much the same form email. His responce went something like "You will continue to support your products regardless of the OS or I will refuse shipment on our brand new MRI machine we just ordered from you, stop payment on it, and buy an MRI machine and all the rest of our new equipment from your competitors." To which GE responded with "OK".
Please see the below. I have listed both the IE7 (which has been resolved) and the Vista portion of the email GE sent out and they have still not resolved the Vista portion as "Compatable" as of yet. I deal with multiple clients as well and thus far Vista has not been the best option for them. I'm not trying to say Vista will not work in the industry but I am saying there are many companies out there that will not support their products on a Vista platform.
For the consumer sector pretty much ANYTHING but Vista basic is alright (sorry XP Home/Vista Basic, might as well not exist).
newtekie1, I also completely agree with you that part of Vistas failure to begin with was the lack of hardware implemented with Vista. I have seen many systems "running" with 512mb prebundled. I've made it a general practice to install the ~$35 1gb dimm of ram on them. I've noticed after the install and reboot that vist generally takes up between 690-850mb right off the bat anyway.
Now of course, he didn't change anything existing over to Vista, but everything that is bought new is running Vista, and that is how it should be IMO. The existing equipment staying XP isn't an issue, and isn't even what this topic is about. It is about new hardware purchased.
by: newtekie1;1008221
He got petty much the same form email. His responce went something like "You will continue to support your products regardless of the OS or I will refuse shipment on our brand new MRI machine we just ordered from you, stop payment on it, and buy an MRI machine and all the rest of our new equipment from your competitors." To which GE responded with "OK".
Now of course, he didn't change anything existing over to Vista, but everything that is bought new is running Vista, and that is how it should be IMO. The existing equipment staying XP isn't an issue, and isn't even what this topic is about. It is about new hardware purchased.
Fortunately for your client he had not purchased the hardware yet and it was a hardware compatability.
Ours is 100% software, it would cost more to change the systems at this point than it did to get everything setup. Ohwell : (
I also have other venders fighting with Vista.