We puzzled over Microsoft's cryptic statements at CeBIT that the Eee's "
other requirements" would lead to an adjustment of the Windows 7 timeline, and it looks like our first guess was spot-on: Microsoft will be making Windows XP available for Eee-class ultraportables until 2010, and possibly later. Demand for XP on devices like the Eee and Intel's Classmate machines has prompted MS to reconsider
axing XP entirely this June: the company will now sell XP Home through at least June 2010, and for one year after the
release of Windows 7 -- which means sales of XP could stretch into 2012. There's no word on if the build of XP Home targeted at the ultraportable laptop set will be different from regular XP builds, but we doubt there'll be many changes -- it'll be awfully sad if people are still clamoring for XP more than a decade after its initial release, though.
[Thanks, JP]
posted April 3rd 2008 4:52PM
It's 2008, and I still have a PC with windows.
It's not crashing and still working. So why update it to XP?
"As long as it isn't broke, don't fix it."
Doh
*Windows 98
you should update for compatibility purposes.
Why would it be sad for an operating system to be useful enough to be relevant for a decade? I'm on a top of the line Mac Pro now and still find XP to be indispensable.
While it is a testament to a great OS in Windows XP, it is also saddening that we have not only failed to move forward in this area of computing, but that it seems we have moved backwards.
Here's my prediction: Windows XP will continue to be loved while Vista is treated like a bastard stepchild. Windows 7 will solve all the Vista horrors and Vista will go down in history as the most hated OS since Me.
For the time being, the SP1 Patch works for me... For now.
Vista doesn't come close to deserving its bad rap. I quite like it, aside from a number of bugs and the resource drain. But it's Microsoft, so it's just too much fun to bash.
reply = FAIL
anyway, besides being a resource hog, that's why in large part vista = FAIL and people are still using XP, because of compatibility issues. not trying to hate on vista, because i think in a couple of years when things start catching up to it, it's going to be a good os.
"reply = FAIL"
What are you talking about?
ag, are you going to be replying to "i can't reply" posts all day? I'd just like to know.
Seriously.
If anything, an OS being in demand for so long is a testament to its greatness. At least in-part if not holistically. But of course, we have to have trolls who refuse to entertain that thought.
broken reply system = gizmodo.
@penguinn: literal use of bastard FTW
"broken reply system = gizmodo."
But... I just did!?
Why would anyone want to put Windows on such an awesome machine..
Because they can't figure out linux... They used Windows for a good time and they just got used to it. I mean, take a hardcore Linux user and give him Vista. Ohh! The horror!
Take a hardcore Linux user and give him a hot girl. Oh the horror!
XP FTW.
Well, Asus did say that they expect XP to outsell Linux by 6 to 4.
By 2010 I'd hope these cheap portables would at least run Vista in some usable fashion. Its amazing how we're all getting pumped for Windows 7 and Vista has barely even had its chance to really live yet.
Thank you Captain Obvious for that prediction.
Looooooooooooong live XP! This is great news for all us Eee-lovers. Vista is far to hardware demanding for cheap computers today.
Engadget.....fix your damn comments! I click on Reply and end up starting a new comment.
Works for me. :-/
all you windows haters are oh so cool.
engadget - for this, you die in your sleep. no one makes me look like a fool except for my overstuffed diaper and sony clie that i try to pair with my jabra bluetooth headset.
wait, what? i still can't reply. i was trying to reply to that aguiluz guy. methinks he's a commie. or maaaaybe, he's Steve JOBS! FOR STEVE CAN DO NO WRONG!
Me? A Commie!? No! :D
apparently engadget has appointed Aguiluz president of the Comments System. my reply still =/= funkshun
And... I noticed I'm the only one who can reply. :(
No, others of us can, we just don't have anything cool to say :/
Yay! Someone can reply too! I'm not alone!
http://digg.com/microsoft/Microsoft_to_sell_XP_intill_on_2010_on_the_EEEPC
Digg it !
Buried.
I'll show you what you can dig.
digg this, Grant.
it'll be awfully sad if people are still clamoring for XP more than a decade after its initial release, though.
I won't care, I've moved to Mac OSX 10.5 and beyond
Makes you wonder if HP is going to go forward with Vista on their upcoming 2133 mini-note UMPC given its "leaked" specs.
Would you stop the relentless Vista bashing already? Fcuking Apple Bottom feeders !!
My Vista laptop works flawlessly and I wouldn't revert back to an XP rig for my life. What's the point of having RAM in the system if the OS could not use it? Vista uses the RAM to speed up application access - something RAM is supposed to do !! How dare it? It is obvious that this site is servicing Jobs' knob ! Sellout whores.
No, I've seen Vista in action and the RAM usage is abnormally high. Application access increase? Thats called "not freeing up unused memory" a job that the NT kernel has been getting worse at with each iteration. With microsoft continuing this trend of bulking their OS every release, I don't think we'll ever see a $400 PC that runs decently hit the light of day.
Theres a damned good reason why its hated. There are better alternatives, but the PC manufacturers don't install it on their machines by default. You can thank microsoft for keeping us running 32 bit OSes when we've have 64 bit CPUs for over a decade, too.
@phan
it's that sp1 patch. i knew i shouldn't have upgraded from vista to xp.
Sometimes there's no reason to upgrade. You can still write a resume in Microsoft Office 2000. You can still clean up photos in Photoshop 6. Old software is still perfectly functional for most people's needs. In fact, a lot of old software works even better now because some of it is blazingly fast on even low-end new hardware!
With XP, we seem to have reached a plateau where the average user's needs are satisfied. And if it satisfies people's needs, and enables more affordable hardware, why not keep it?
no, what's sad is that people WANT to clamor for XP, and have to due to activation. people still want win98 and 2kpro as well, but since there are no activation issues there, they just use it.
I actually think it would be refreshing for an OS to last 10 years or more. That's a testament to the fact that many of us really don't need all the flash that is in Vista. The fact is, XP works great for most of us. Sure, new computer buyers mostly end up with Vista, but only because it was pushed on them. Honestly, I think I could use XP pretty much forever, though I wouldn't mind an update to the visuals (maybe some new colors, new icons--yes I know you can get this through windowblinds, etc), but it would be nice if Microsoft just did a big visual overhaul and left the rest alone. Just my take, and I'm really not hating on Vista or anything else, I just think that after a couple of service packs, XP holds up extremely well.
I consider Vista a stillborn, much like Windows ME.
right on, srw!
crap, i meant that as a reply
"there not wrong nobody can reply!"
Nobody can reply? Oh, I just did.
DISCLAIMER: I DID NOT BREAK THE COMMENT SYSTEM!
***WARNING!***
That link has something NASTY! I seen it!
ARGAGAGAGAGAAA!
*banned on router*
..and that is what WINE is for. When we have 100% binary compatibility, we'll see who's using what.
...Even if it's only to avoid paying money for windows licenses without getting on the wrong side of the law.