Microsoft extends life of XP for "nettop" devices

It's pretty obvious given what's going down in Taipei at the moment. Nevertheless, Microsoft just went official with it's plans to extend "Windows" for the category they (and Intel) define as "nettop" devices. So in addition to "Netbooks," "ultralow-cost PCs (ULCPCs)," and all those other mini-laptops originally intended for emerging markets, Microsoft has now officially extended the life of Windows XP for ultralow-cost desktops like ASUS' Eee Box and MSI's Wind PC. While Microsoft doesn't explicitly say it's XP in the carefully worded press release, we all know what they're talking about. Microsoft claims to be working with more than 20 OEMs -- including HP, Dell, ASUS, Acer, Lenovo, and more -- to help deliver Windows-based nettop devices. And here you Linux dreamers thought this would be a cake-walk.

[Hellios @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:39AM]

support for netbooks/subnotebooks/nettops = support for my XPSP2 pr desktop.

Yay, seems Vista just became completely irrelevant to me, and I can look forward to Windows7.

[d00b @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:27AM]

Between this announcement and the starting of the drums for Win7, is Vista now officially Windows Me 2 (me-too)?

[OneLove @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:29AM]

what Microsoft needs to do is release a free VISTA theme for XP!

[batmon @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:43AM]

Is this a big deal?? We can still use XP even when MS stop supporting it, right? If not, we can always use ubuntu... It is just like XP anyway.

[giuliop @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:12AM]

It's actually much better.

[rBoLt @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:35AM]

its way!!! better... windows is nothing compared to ubuntu

[Mark Anderson @ Jun 4th 2008 6:25PM]

I use both Ubuntu and XP. XP is much easier to use and better all round.

[Ethan @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:59AM]

If XP is only going to be on these devices I wonder which one people are going to buy... it took about three years before I went to XP and ironically a big reason was I needed iTunes. I find the new interface more inconsistent and impeding, I, and I presume others, have no reason to upgrade.

I'd choose XP if I was buying a new computer, but I can't. I think the EU will do something about this... eventually.

[Luisen @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:24AM]

I don't understand your point, mate.

[Ethan @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:44AM]

All new (mid-end and up) computers will be sold with Vista, consumers will want XP and they won't be able to get it. While I don't think it's illegal to be anticompetitive with yourself, it's pretty unethical. I don't see why they don't just shift the support off to somebody else if they don't want it.

[giuliop @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:45AM]

It's not that MS want to get rid of providing support - no doubt it would be better for them, but extending support for some kind of PCs implies giving support anyway. What they really want is to get rid of those XP users and make them migrate to Vista, obviously paying an additional license fee in the process.

[absolve @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:05AM]

Microsoft is going to sell cheap computers with monthly subscriptions to access windows. Guaranteed.

[giuliop @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:17AM]

Lame, embarrassing press release. How do they think they can get away with that crappy wording? Idiots.

[Paulmichael @ Jun 3rd 2008 6:40AM]

Haha I find it rather humorous. I love it when corporations try and word how they screwed up with an extremely positive twist...

[Gabriel @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:37AM]

I think it's good that Microsoft decides to extend its support for Windows XP, seeing as it's still very mainstream out there despite the launch of Windows Vista.

Although I run Windows on all my machines, I'm considering running Linux on my netbook (which I'm yet to purchase. I'm holding out for MSI Wind, or any that will beat it). Ubuntu, most likely, since it's very user-friendly and intuitive. I had it for half a year on my other [bulky] laptop until I accidently ran "rm -r /" as super user. I wanted to erase everything in the current folder but forgot the stupid dot... -_-

[chris1983 @ Jun 3rd 2008 7:00AM]

THIS is exactly why MOST people will NEVER EVER use linux.

[huh @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:22AM]

How many people do you think are accidentally going to type the above while in a terminal as the root (admin) user? And you can just as easily screw up a Windows install.

[huh @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:22AM]

The real story to this press release is the significant threat Linux is posing to Microsoft. They even had to mention Linux in their press release. If it weren't for Linux, Microsoft would no doubt still be trying to force-feed Vista on every device out there. Maybe MS should rename Vista to Gavage. (Look it up). My Samsung Q1 Ultra had Vista and it was a dog. Hurray for innovative (and open, couldn't happen without it) competition!

[wrabbit @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:42AM]

This is maybe a stupid question but did it not give you a confirmation dialog, something like "Are you sure you wish to erase the entire harddrive?"

[Paradox @ Jun 3rd 2008 5:33AM]

I would prefer to hear Gates saying that they are working on a service pack 2 for Vista

[Paulmichael @ Jun 3rd 2008 6:35AM]

Unless that SP2 would include getting rid of a lot of whatever it is that makes Vista run at higher CPU usage than XP, then I'm not interested. I had SP1 for a while, and though it was better than pre-SP1 Vista, gaming sucked on it. XP still rules for gaming.

[OneLove @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:33AM]

Service pack 2 for vista is called Windows 7.

[Dmitrij Ledkov @ Jun 3rd 2008 7:19AM]

If I can get any Netbook cheaper with same or better spec I will choose Linux version.

[OneLove @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:33AM]

stop saying netbook.

[Kevin @ Jun 3rd 2008 7:31AM]

And people still complain that Palm OS is Old. when XP is much older an still used by many. Go figure...

[jordan @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:33AM]

Umm...huh? Palm OS has been around much longer than XP. :/ ...and you're comparing a PDA OS to a (essentially) laptop OS? You know, while you're at it, why don't put in some mention about how people complain that the hardware on the space shuttle is near 386 performance or something.

[huh @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:27AM]

(umm, I don't know why this was posted as a reply. Sure wish I could edit my comments).

The real story to this press release is the significant threat Linux is posing to Microsoft. They even had to mention Linux in their press release. If it weren't for Linux, Microsoft would no doubt still be trying to force-feed Vista on every device out there. The niche would be stalled. Maybe MS should rename Vista to Gavage. (Look it up). My Samsung Q1 Ultra had Vista and it was a dog. Hurray for innovative (and open, couldn't happen without it) competition!

[Rudiger @ Jun 3rd 2008 8:45AM]

To the "Linux dreamers":

You didn't think it would be THAT easy, did you?

Muwahahahahaha!

[togarth @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:01AM]

I am glad MS have seen sence and will keep XP going. I was unhappy at perhaps having to move to Vista (My boss got a Vista laptop and I am always having to fix the damn things constant wireless network probs!)

So I tried Ubuntu, nice OS but support is from well meaning but often ill-informed enthusiasts (sorry) that cause more problems than they solve, so I moved to OpenSUSE this OS is in a different league with Novell engineers offering superb assistance. But what makes me laugh here are the "You can screw up a windows install just as easily" and the "Linux can do anything windows can only 10k times better" posts.

This is just nonsense, there are many things that Linux does well but there are other things it simply does not do as well as Windows,

Syncing smart phones for one thing, and an inability to sync with Plaxo using Evolution are just some of its more annoying failings in my opinion the "rm -r /" command confusion IS in my opinion far more real than some Linux fans would like you believe! and I do use both OS daily!

In fact I had to convert my Eee PC to windows XP just so I could use a 3G dongle and Plaxo!!!

XP is a good OS in my opinion and will be around for a long time I hope at least until Windows 7 is ready

[huh @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:30AM]

I agree with most of your points. However, the moment someone goes to the command line and types sudo rm -rf /, they are no longer a regular user (literally). I agree that some well intentioned but unprofessional people might suggest doing something like the above occasionally, but there are ways to foul up any OS. On Windows, some unknowing or ill advised user could try to "clean up" a directory and disable their computer. Someone runs out of disk space, read somewhere they can delete "temporary files" under c:\windows, deletes the wrong directory, boom. It's the same thing. Aside from that, there' the registry, viruses, I've had installs go south after simply running Windows Update. Linux has some ways to go before it is really perfect for the average consumer, but Windows has a lot of pitfalls as well. At the end of the day, Windows XP proprietary nature and the fact that MS badly wants it to go away makes it a choice with no future.

[Tomahawk @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:26AM]

What about Windows XP embedded? Last I checked there is no Vista embedded. Surely those that live the thin client life will still XP at their disposal.

[charliex @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:13PM]

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/products/whichproduct/default.mspx

[Tomahawk @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:27AM]

What about Windows XP embedded? Last I checked there is no Vista embedded. Surely those that live the thin client life will still XP at their disposal.

[Backwards People @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:16AM]

Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 is great and I was able to record American Gladiators.

Vista users were not able to record it. Sucks to be them.

[Magallanes @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:03AM]

I Agreed but ... American Gladiators?.

[retro77 @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:12AM]

Still gonna use Linux as XP is too bloated for these slower machines.

[Good_Bytes @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:00PM]

E.U can't do anything. If I had a software company (oh wait, I have!), and I make Software v1, and decide to release v2 of my software. Then E.U can't go and say "No, this is a doctrine, I prefer v1, so that is it you shut down go bankrupt because I block you from selling v2".
You might say "Yes, but MS decide were their old software goes and sell it", Same for me. The EULA that people accept is per computer basis, I decide where my software will go (however in reality I am not cheap that way). If v2 takes more power to run, and my customers still uses old computer that are not capable to run v2, it is my right to sell and support v1. The buyer knows they are getting v1 for their old computer and know that their is a better version called v2 already out. So, I am not hidden anything, so it's totally legal, and nobody can do anything about it.


@Paulmichael, sorry, gaming is the same under Vista. If it is not then hit on your hardware manufacture to make better well optimized drivers.
Windows XP uses the same core as NT back in the days (1993)... yes THAT IS OLD. Nothing was majorly changed, and is the reason of all the viruses and malware that we have today under XP. Specially that Microsoft back in 1993, software security was not their priority.

Vista is finally a new core, so old drivers does not work the same. Some major changes needed to be done. Yes WinXP drivers does work under Vista, because Vista has a system to make WinXP driver run on it, however not any descent performance. The reason they added such system is because Microsoft knew they were not taking seriously when they said to companies that Vista is a new core and XP drivers won't work. And to top thing off, Vista 32-bit is a last minute decision, so itself is not optimized for any performance and buggy (well before SP1, however performance still stand). Vista 64-bit is the ONLY options for Vista and WIndows 7 I say.

Moreover, Vista has a bunch of process that kept your computer at the same speed all the time, and does not slow down over time, as XP does. And such thing is visible under gaming. Over a year you loose 5-10fps in games for XP. People said that Vista just defrag your HDD and explain the reason, why in XP it does not which leads XP slow down, and a simple defragmentation will speed stuff up. However, what they fail to see, is that I already did, and tried over 10 (thank you trial version) recommended defragmentation tools under XP and all fails to put it back as a fresh start. If you are interested can explain in details how I perform these test to make sure it is not crapware, and use the same software and driver downloaded on both scenario. I did this test, because I wanted to see that when I re-install XP is my mind playing tricks on me thinking it is faster or is it actually faster.

Also, if you based your opinion on performance XP VS Vista test on the internet. I can say they all fail to perform the test. Not only they use any hardware configuration, despite having some hardware from manufacture that provides bad drivers under Vista, but also they cripple it, by disable many essential features like SuperFetch. It doesn't take a genius to see that Vista runs your application (about) 3 to 6 times faster (try Photosop CS3 and Trillian 3)

Also now I can enjoy having a wallpaper, and Windows UI as it doesn't use the CPU to draw but rather (as it should) the GPU (unless you set Vista to Aero Basic (XP engine), or Classic)

The day you will get a new computer and put XP, prepare to suffer.
As XP will be like an very old person complaining non stop on your new technology that you use, and how the old days it was better. Vista and Windows 7 is the opposite, it's a young kid that doesn't care about your old stuff. It's like you, if I bring you a huge television however the screen size is 10inch with what they laughing call Mono sound and B/W, I don't think you will enjoy watching TV or your favorite HD movies, or even any movie at all on it.

[Backwards People @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:24PM]

Have you actually done that? Bought a new PC with Vista and benchmarked it, then format the HDD, install XP, update it and re-benchmark it?

Others have! And they say you are wrong. Vista is not a Green OS. It takes longer to boot, it's crippled (DRM), it's *no better* than using XP with a Vista-style theme, in fact, Vista is much worse. The benchmarks prove it. The user's experience prove it. Gamers push the envelope of their PCs, most other users do not, and gamers are saying loud and clear "Vista is a joke".

When XP came out, it was known as "Windows 2000 with a nice user interface". People took awhile to get it on their system. I recently upgraded a few Win98 boxes to XP... These same systems would choke on Vista. New systems run better with XP. etc, etc, ad nauseam.

[what? @ Jun 4th 2008 1:20AM]

Someone needs Ccleaner

[Mateusz @ Jun 4th 2008 8:12AM]

@Backwards People

Completely agreed. It's surely well know by now that Vista is a much more demanding OS than XP ever was. Running it on a machine that ran XP well doesn't necessarily mean Vista will be fine, too.

I've got a tablet running on Vista, and think that the tradeoff between system speed and the new tablet functions are worthwhile. However, 2 other computers in my house also running Vista would be better off running XP (I just ain't gonna fork out for a license)


It is great to hear MS is extending the life of XP .. I've got an OQO 01 as well, and I'd hate to think it was running an obsolute OS just so MS could try and shift a few copies of Vista

[Mark Anderson @ Jun 4th 2008 6:32PM]

Vista runs fine on my Quad Core MESH. I don't try to run it on my old advent laptop (XP) or Desktop (Ubuntu) because that would be gobsmackingly stupid.

Given that any decent desktop is going to be sporting at least a Core 2 Duo and 2Gb of RAM, Vista will run absolutely fine on most of them and gives more than XP in terms of usability. Plus, any real gamer knows that Direct X 10.1 is where it's at for games. XP doesn't support this.

This is a shrewd move by MS because it heads Linux off at the pass and generates revenue from a new niche of machines that haven't got a hope in hell of running Vista.

[Joermungand @ Jun 5th 2008 6:16AM]

LOL
"I've got a tablet running on Vista, and think that the tradeoff between system speed and the new tablet functions are worthwhile."
LOL
Linux adds new functions without serious speed issues.
It is absolutely ridiculous how you windows fanboys think.

You're completely depending on M$, justifying every screw up they throw at you.

Anyway, I hope it stays that way. I hope M$ will always stay at top of the OS game for consumers. I would hate seeing those windows users migrating to Linux. Linux is no OS for you, it's free, it's open and it requires you to think for yourself. Stay away from things you don't understand.
That "rm -r /" thing can happen if you carelessly work as root in a shell. But then again, when was the last time you could do some serious work on a windows shell?
Apart from that, you can't really compare two OS's from the Software that's available for them. It's the choice of the software developers which OS they're going to support. And they don't chose Windows because it is so good, they chose it because M$ has proper marketing, resulting in Windows being installed on almost every machine.
Linux sometimes can't offer you good drivers for some hardware, because the hardware developers simply didn't make them. Meaning the Linux developers have to HACK some drivers together, since the hardware developers barely release any specs on their devices for free.
So comparing Windows and Linux with software that's only available on one system isn't really fair.

The opposite example is Nvidia, offering Linux drivers for their hardware, resulting in pretty good 3D performance under Linux for games that natively support it( ID Software games for example). Although the best example for 3D performance might be the 3D desktop environment Beryl on Linux. Compared to Vista Aero it doesn't only look much better, but has a much better performance also. I can run Beryl on an old machine (Athlon 2600+, 512MB RAM, GeForce4MX) without any problems. Try to even run the basic Vista on that machine.

The only problem with Linux (well actually I like that point the most about Linux) is that it requires you to know a bit more about its possibilities. If you don't know where to look for solutions you might very well take a configuration problem as an incapability of the OS itself.
Programming skills are also a good thing when working with Linux, if you can't wait for a particular piece of software to come out, then just write it yourself. That's part of the philosophy behind Linux.
And if you think you know Linux once you've used some of the major distributions, you're ridiculously wrong.