Microsoft extends Windows XP deliveries to May 30, 2009
By Nilay Patel 
posted Dec 22nd 2008 11:34AM
posted Dec 22nd 2008 11:34AM
Man, Microsoft just can't bring itself to kill Windows XP dead -- it just extended the final OEM and reseller delivery date for the venerable OS to May 30, 2009. Vendors will still have to place their orders before the official cutoff date of January 31, but they won't have to take delivery (or pay, we'd imagine) until May. All of this is supposed to alleviate the problem of vendors stockpiling copies of XP -- it wouldn't be good for Microsoft if manufacturers start charging a demand-related premium for XP licenses after Redmond goes Vista-only. Of course, Microsoft also recently extended the Vista "downgrade" deadline for OEMs to July 31 and netbooks will still be able to kick it old-school until at least June 2010, so chances are you'll be able to get XP one way or another until Windows 7 ships -- let's just hope all this waffling on XP means that 7's going to be as good as we think it is.
I just got my MacBook Pro in the mail last Friday. Thank the lord, I don't have to go through this downgrade insanity anymore.
True. But now you have to keep up with the Apple trendies.
I was set against Windows 7, but I might install the bit torrent version in boot camp just to play around with it a bit. I don't hate Microsoft, but the PC community gives them way too much slack and keeps buying their crapware, which doesn't send Microsoft the right message.
I might not have access to all the games I want in OS X, but I refuse to suffer in silence anymore. Microsoft needs an intervention. If they want my money, they're going to have to work for it. I refuse to ignore Apple products just because a bunch of my friends (and me sometimes) are jealous of Mac users.
Quote: "a bunch of my friends (and me sometimes) are jealous of Mac users"
Reply: It goes both ways. You are just the first one to admit it.
I honestly have never been jealous of mac users. (not even of their obvious wealth ;)
I also have 0 faith that windows7 isn't just a repackaged vista.
I was never jealous of Mac users either, until I started having a bunch of problems with Vista. I had a HP Pavilion notebook and couldn't get XP drivers for my Realtek network card or my Nvidia Geforce 8400M GS video card. A friend of mine had a Sony Vaio and couldn't get his sound to work when he downgraded. My best friend is actually a Mac user and he was just happily using his Mac as I experienced these problems. He gave me a bunch of apps for my MacBook Pro yesterday. I was worried that I wouldn't have all the software I needed in the OS X environment, but boy was I wrong.
If anyone here gets a new Mac this Christmas, I recommend these following programs. Final Cut Pro Express, Handbrake, Cyberduck, Keynote and EyeTV. I have a quite a few more, but these are the ones I've actually used so far. I have Call of Duty 4 on order, but don't expect to get it in until after Christmas.
You need a dongle for EyeTV, but my friend showed me how it works and it's really impressive if you want to record digital television or cable programs. You can also get a dongle that lets you pipe your console of choice directly into your Mac monitor.
What are you? An Apple employee? I find it pretty funny how you try to act like you've been unbiased and gave Microsoft some fair chances sometimes, but you act just like one of those Mac users who feel they have the best and most superior products, most likely because of the brand name.
Yeah, Microsoft has been pretty lazy for several years, but I'm glad companies like Apple have pushed some competition for MS. Maybe MS will finally remember that you should always be striving for the best, no matter how big you are. Anyway, I find some of the progress they've been doing in the past 2 years much better than some people would like to think.
Macbooks have had issues too. Go do a google/live search on this. There's plenty of forums, articles, videos, pictures, etc. on problems with Macs. I have a Sony Vaio, and it's fine. No matter what, people will always have a different opinion on how good a product is. Nice try, on 'trying' to put a "Switch to Mac" message on the last comment. How much are they paying you?
I'm sure macs are great, but they are more targeted at a different kind of person, different from me, people that don't mind not being in control (but do want things to work), I myself feel all uncomfortable on a fresh windows install for instance until I have a hexeditor and such installed, I need control, that's also one of the reason I'm not a vista type incidentally.
Note to nvidia/ATI: That I like control does NOT mean that I don't like installers and drivers to work without having to jump through hoops and using desperate tweaks I have to figure out on my own to get basic functionality, thanks.
Here comes the hyper-paranoid biaser people. The people who accuse Engadget of Apple bias at a drop of a hat and assume that every person that likes Apple products, in any way, has to be a plant or a secret Mac fanboy/employee.
Well, I agree with you on some points, Quikboy, as I haven't gotten used to the new MacBook pad button thingy yet, but it's only been a few days. And I've heard about some problems with RAM, but since I don't have quite 4 gigs, I can't verify that. I'm not blind to the possibility that a corporation like Apple might suck at some things, but that attitude is exactly what made me want to get away from Microsoft. I will continue to use XP on my desktop and OS X on my laptop.
I've had the luxury of having a friend that exposed me to a lot of stuff before I ordered my Macbook Pro, so I've actually cheated on my experience thus far.
So you bought a PC, installed an OS on it for which compatible drivers weren't available, ran into trouble and got so ticked off with HP/Microsoft that you had to abandon all the existing software and hardware you own and buy a Mac. Yeah right, that makes sense.
Had it occurred to you that Vista is fine and that you should have just left that on your laptop and saved a great deal of money.
Wait 2 years when you want to upgrade iLife and it doesn't work with the current OS. Meanwhile Office 2007 works with Windows 2000. I learned this the hard way with Apple: they will do everything in their power to leech as much cash out of you as possible. Which includes charging you for the updated version of the OS for your touch and 802.11N drivers for Tiger, and pushing developers as hard as possible to make their wares use the latest and greatest OS so people have to upgrade to use newer software. Apple can take their wares and go to hell with their clueless iTard fanbase who is still suck on the notion that Windows is Win 9x.
@jakem
Actually, I used Vista and it sucked so bad that I used XP again, which sucked since it didn't have the proper driver support for my new laptop. Therefore, I had to sale a perfectly good laptop because of a horrible OS that took six years to develop. Therefore, Microsoft wasted about a month out of my hectic life.
@John Doe
Dude, I got iLife and iWork for free. iLife comes with Macs; my friend gave me iWork. In fact, I haven't had to pay for any software yet. Not that I'm advocating pirating, but Mac programs are just as available as Windows programs on sites like Demonoid.
And I'm not worrying about support. iWork comes with full Office support. I've been able to open all my Word documents into Pages with zero problems. And really, how often do you need to read a file from the year 2000. That's kind of a silly argument.
In a similar move, Apple has offered to all customers purchasing new Macs the option to downgrade their operating system to Mac OS 9.
(Just kidding of course, but the idea of downgrading to an older operating system is just ridiculous ;-)
@wWhat, who said "I myself feel all uncomfortable on a fresh windows install for instance until I have a hexeditor and such".
Me too. If you feel more comfortable on Windows, that's fine. It's a personal choice. I'm a programmer, and I don't care for Windows at all, for precisely the lack of control you refer to. I ran Linux for years to work (and play) in an environment I could see, and tweak, any part of.
These days I do everything on my mac. Sure, there's a gui layer on top that attempts to hide "details" from users, and does a pretty good job of it. But there's really nothing that you can't tweak on your own. I like to dig in and mess around with things - mostly I work in a shell terminal anyway. I've never run up against anything I wanted to do, and couldn't, on the mac. And compared to my experiences with Windows, it's like night and day in terms of "just working".
Downgrade to XP?
In God's name why?
Good news. I still run XP and its great. I have another computer running Vista that runs just fine, but I tend to prefer XP. On higher spec machines its really fast and I know where everything is so why upgrade?
Because of the 64 bit REVOLUTION!
This just in!
"Bittorrent extends Windows XP deliveries indefinitely"
I use XP64, yeah it does exists, and MS tried everybody to move to it at one point by offering a free online update to it, with a provision that you could not go back to 32bit though.
And XP64 is mostly OK I can report with the occasional manufacturer stupidly not releasing drivers for it though, and with some issues related to having to make a choice if a multimedia application/player is 64 or 32bit because the substructures like codecs can't be used in a mixed fashion, for example a 64bit player most always needs 64bit codecs, it's the nature of the beast.
Most all games work on it too, although most just run as 32bit apps with only 3 or 4 around that actually offer native 64bit versions.
I'm not sure how come so many people actually don't even seem aware that XP64 exists, it's most peculiar.
Vista is actually not that bad once you get you use it. It should be fine for regular users. As for extreme gamers and hackers, I don't know.
I use Vista SP1 on a daily basis at home. I transferred all my old programs (some of them as old as 10 years), and they work fine, no problem. The games I run (including BioShock, C&C) work fine. Of course I upgraded the hardware before installing Vista. No problems with drivers.
On the other hand, there are problems with XP drivers on my laptop. I had to downgrade to XP on my new laptop because our vendor's software (DB2-related) does hang on Vista. I installed XP SP2 Professional, and I had a problem locating drivers for audio card and SATA controller. The laptop is brand new Toshiba Satellite.
So ironically - it's time to abandon XP because of driver problems on the new hardware.
Ummmm Vista is that bad. Im using it on a uber comp and i still get lockups/freezes
@Fred: I have seen Vista SP1 running in the EeePC 1000H and it goes perfectly smooth, even with Aero activated. The hiccups yo get would probably happen in XP too.
The only criticism I find acceptable for Vista are:
- It may be quite stubborn when asking for confirmation for most tasks, but being a Linux user myself, I gladly welcome the clear normal/dangerous action separation.
- People are still used to XP stuff and can find things easier. That's, actually, the biggest problem with Vista. It is half-way between old school management and a decent, soft link based personal folder, but hasn't got the mix right. If we are lucky, in Windows 7 we will be able to move complete personal folders to a drive other than Windows's to prevent data loss due to unexpected formating.
- It is ugly. Well, yeah. But XP is too.
@Fred, I believe your computer is to blame (or the loose nut behind the wheel), not Vista. Vista has been extremely stable on my older 939 X2 workstation, and 939 X2 HTPC. However my Dell at work has been a little flaky, but I have found that the integrated Intel graphics chip to be the cause.
Vista isn't bad for your normal wear-and-tear computer using... as long as your computer can handle it. It's got it's neat little widgets and looks pretty... but the only reason anyone still bothers to use it is 'cause they're too lazy to backup their crap and reinstall XP... and by "they" i mean "me"
I've been using Vista since the public beta, and I've had zero problems with it. It does everything that XP does, but with a much nicer UI (which means more efficient and better thought out, not just pretty animations).
Sure, it might be an underwhelming update after it was in development for so long, but it's at least as good as XP and in my opinion better in quite a few ways. These people going crazy claiming that XP is actually superior to Vista are overreacting. Maybe the new features aren't worth shelling out $200 to upgrade, but jumping through hoops to DOWNGRADE once you already have it? That's just silly.
Anecdotal evidence that Vista was a turn for the worse this morning...
Someone in my office walked over to the Vista machine our employer is testing apps on and opened IE7 to find he had no clue where his bookmarks are. Why the HELL does IE7 on Vista hide the menu bar?
To call the GUI of vista 'more thought out' is an outrageous travesty, I'm sure you have a right to be a vista fanboy but there are limit and that is just a too big a lie.
@Wwhat ^^
So you'd rather search through 4 columns of a start menu to find your newly installed program that hasn't been automatically sorted alphabetically, instead of merely pressing the Start button and typing the first few letters of it? This 'Start menu search' feature is the best thing about Vista, and it has literally slashed the time it takes for me to get anything done.
its not that vista is all that bad
but can you remember another time in os history MS tried to endate an OS to the point where they had to dictate an endate to the market?
3.1 to 95 was no cotest
same with 95 to 98
ME sucked so it didnt need one
98 to 2k
2k to xp people resisted but there was no corporate effort to kick people off it
also the directx updates were cross compatible cross 2k/xp there was less segmentation
it ahas less to do with vista being bad as it does with MS activley rejecting xp and crying for attention for vista
I'm not an extreme gamer or hacker, but my Vista 64 SP1 (specs below) is far more responsive and significantly more *enjoyable* to use than my Mac Pro, even though the Mac Pro has twice the CPU cores and RAM and costs almost twenty times as much.
Strange how that works, eh?
Intel Q6600 3.0GHz | Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme/1 Scythe S-FLEX SFF21F
Abit IP35 Pro | 2GB x 4 G.Skill DDR2 800 | EVGA 9800GX2 | BFG 8800GTOC
E-MU 1616M | 1 x 400GB Hitachi | 2 x 250GB Western Digital
1 x 500GB Western Digital | 1 x 640GB Western Digital | 2 x 250 Seagate
Thermaltake Armor+ | Zalman 850W | Lite-On Combo IDE | Dell 2005FPW
Logitech G11 | Logitech G9 | 2 x KRK RP-5 | Vista Ultimate x64
So I wait to buy my next laptop. I was trying to hold off closer to the Diablo III release anyhoo.
Its gunna be a mighty 2009 i can feel it,
screw XP disks, ive begun stockpiling microwave popcorn and iron brew ready for the Diablo playing season to begin!
Why the hell do they even bother with extensions. Just let the public have what they want. SO STUPID!!!
Microsoft realizes that there is still a lot of profit to be had from the older OS.
I think they will keep pushing XP out the door until windows 7.
I Just dont understand. I am forced every day to work on windows XP since its mandatory in our office.
I feel sorry for all you poor suckers who use it willingly.
Im not a steve jobs lover and nore am I Linux geek. I just want something that works.
I will out of my pocket pay for my work computer if they let me use a Mac at work..
This would be a good poll. Woul you pay for your own office computer if it were a Mac.
Dont give me no cheesy remarks about ohh mac gay and so on. Cause every one I know who tried mac for over 2 weeks says just like me.
Windows is time wasting and idiotic. Just like driving a petrol guzzling Hummer on flat tyres in the middle of a 3 hour long Cue to work and home again. While any other system compared is teleportation
There's 6 billion people, and are one of you. Why, you are not even a majority.
>rolls eyes<
Yeah, that's what it's like.
i've used a mac before... its so damn computer illiterate friendly i hated it.
*there are one of you... proofreading holds great power.
Yeah! Windows is like a huge slow and tractor that keeps breaking donw and a mac is like a space rocket! Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... BEEP BEEP... Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...
i'm not sure if low ranking was called for here, its a fair question.
I would pay for SOME of my work computer if it was a mac, but just because i am lazy and ignorant and i dont like change.
XPs ok, i have no qualms with it particularly, MS must have been doing something right if it ran for the majority of a decade.
Reasons why I will never pay for a Mac:
1. I can build a comperable windows based PC for a fraction of the cost of a Mac.
2. I want to be able to decide what hardware goes into my computer.
3. I want to be able to update the hardware rather than buying a whole new computer, and on most Mac models this is not possible (or SEVERELY restricted).
4. I want to be able to run the majority of software out there without having to intall another OS to do so (Boot Camp for XP).
5. I don't care about how a computer looks, and I'm not willing to pay more as a result.
What I'm looking for is function over form. Macs are good for some people, but the restrictive nature of the platform runs contrary to my needs. Heck, in my lab there are no Mac options for half the software that we use (some students ask). From our sequencer, to the RT-PCR the software is Windows only. This doesn't even get into the gaming aspect of things. Macs still suck at gaming, period. For less money than any Mac currently in production, I could build a Windows-based rig that would run circles around it's Mac counterpart.
I sounds like you're being honest, guy, but that doesn't really matter on Engadget forums anymore. As a PC user (maybe former now that I have a Macbook Pro) I'm disturbed at the behavior of a lot of other PC users. They're hyper-defensive about Microsoft. They're almost as bad, if not worse than a lot of the Apple fanboys.
So I suggest you follow the underwritten laws about comments if you desire to keep a high rank on Engadget.
The Official Guide to Avoiding Low Rankings on Engadget
1) Don't talk about Apple in any way positive, even if the praise is warranted and based on statistics, popular opinion, and actual sales.
2) Don't mention the iPhone in any Engadget post about a touchscreen phone, because as everyone knows, it is absolutely positively impossible that another company could be making a touchscreen phone because of Apple.
3) Don't suggest that Apple has innovated anything, because someone can always find an obscure company in Romania that did it first.
4) Don't suggest that a person might be a Microsoft Fanboy, because this is impossible, even if the aforementioned person has an Xbox, Zune, PC with Vista and every version of Windows minted in gold and platinum and a Bill Gates poster above the bed.
5) Don't say "First" under any circumstances.
Hope this helps! (before it gets faded :)
well actually, given Apple's ads, i say mac users are hyper offensive.
But they still compare mac to PCs in the commercials, and PCs commercials don't need to do that.
Dude, I really doubt that Mac users have input on what commercials that Apple decides to put on the air. So your anger against Mac people seems to be misplaced.
that was to respond the user above me. Of course you seem to nice guy lol. but it wasn't anger anyways, just an observation.
It's not like i don't use any Apple products. just not their computers.
RE: Paul Chapel
The attitude thing cuts both ways I'm affraid. Many of the Apple proponents here seem to think that Steve Jobs walks on water and, as in the case of Dave, that no one could possibly not want to use a Mac once they've experience the glory that is Apple. Well I have used a Mac (in school school from 2001-2003) and I prefer a PC; not Windows or Microsoft, but a PC. Why did Dave even post in this thread, heck why did you make the first post about your new MacBook when the article had nothing to do with Apple.
Attitude is not restricted to MS fanboys.
Well, I don't see what my first comment didn't have to do with Microsoft. They're extending XP and I expressed my frustration with Vista and the downgrade back to XP and decided to give something else a try. That's all I was saying.
People need to admit that they are alternatives. Some PC people act like everyone wants to build their own computer and save a bunch of money, even if they're dissatisfied with Microsoft. These people believe that saving a buck should be your only consideration when buying a computer. Some of us actually believe that you get what you pay for.
If I have to pay more for a better experience with Apple, then I'm willing to do that, and what's more, I feel it's time for a change. I've been using XP since I was in Junior High. I'm bored with it.
@Greg:
1. I'll give you that.
2. Ok, with you here...
3. You do know that Microsoft Windows will de-activate itself if you change too much of that hardware, right? Causing a re-activation headache. (It's headache if you have to do it at all...)
4. Can't really blame Apple for this... in fact, there's really only one company you can blame.
5. Agree
"to the RT-PCR the software is Windows only. This doesn't even get into the gaming aspect of things." -- Again, not really Apple's fault except for the point about putting in whatever hardware you want.
As a savvy consumer, you should be asking those people that make your programs if they run on more than one OS. If not, ask why. You should promote competition and avoid lock-in (from Mac and Windows.) It's for your benefit to use programs that you can move to another system if you see fit. Buying a windows only application is like buying a TV that only works with your home theater. It may "just work" but when your receiver is replaced, you'll need to find one that works with your TV and hope the manufacturer of your TV didn't decide to change the plugs. Of course, that analogy doesn't work in today's world because the home AV market is standardized for the most part and anyone cam make a stereo or a TV that work with another brand. Not being able to replace your OS with one that will run all your crap isn't the fault of the competition. There's only one company keeping that from happening by abusing patent and "IP" laws.
That's the first original mac comment I've ever heard.
Oh wait, it's not. Find something original to say, goon.
@Andir
Come on, the reactivation takes all of 2 seconds. Click the little icon, it connect's to MS's server, and boom you're done. I've never had to call due to a hardware change-- only (on rare occasion) on initial installation. Then you just read the numbers off to the machine, and it reads a set back to you. 5-10 minutes at the most, and it's damn rare at that. The fact that you *can* upgrade to Tri-SLI, add a Bluray drive, or add in a RAID card definitely outweighs the cons of having to re-activate should your system think it changed too much.
@Andir3.0
First to address your points
1 and 2. No issues here.
3. I've made major system modifications and never had to contact Microsoft, but this may be because I'm using an institutionally licenced copy of XP (and now Vista). I don't know if the hardware locks are disabled in this configuration.
4. I view it as market pressure. Is it worth the time and money to adapt a program for a Mac OS, when it represents only a fraction of the PC market? It all comes down to money.
On the specific topic of there being no Mac software, it's a bit more complicated than that. I'm in a very specalized field (Molecular Biology) and all the equipment is low volume, and in fact is normally sold with the computer as part of the package (Windows or rarely Linux). Part of the reason for this is that many of the devices need specalized boards, or hardware elements that are simply not supported by Apple. On the business side of things, there is the simple fact that the VAST majority of University computers are Windows based, and the cost to provide a Mac-based alternative is not financially viable. Keep in mind that these are high cost/low volume products here. We might spend $750,000+ on a DNA sequencer and gripe about it all the time, but the company is going to sell
@Andir3.0
The reply got cut off, here's the rest:
We might spend $750,000+ on a DNA sequencer and gripe about it all the time, but the company is going to sell
@Andir3.0
The reply got cut off, here's the rest:
We might spend $750,000+ on a DNA sequencer and gripe about it all the time, but the company is going to sell less than 1000 of these units in total...worldwide. The company would have to provide hardware and software support for two versions of the product, it simply doesn't make sense. The numbers (and demand) for a Mac variant simply isn't there.
"This would be a good poll. Woul you pay for your own office computer if it were a Mac."
Actually, I use a $16,000 Mac Pro at work every day and I would pay out of pocket for them to let me build my own Vista 64 machine.
Just so I'm clear here... I'm not a Mac proponent in any way. I'd much rather see people move to Linux, but my point was that as a consumer (maybe not of million dollar software...) we are all responsible for the lock-in to the Windows platform. If the world had adopted an open (not open source necessarily, but open spec) and standard platform that anyone could build their OS off of, you'd see much better desktop environments with full compatibility and better competition for your money. As it is right now, the reason Microsoft has a hold on you is that they manipulated OEMs into signing exclusivity deals, patent abuse, and licensing restrictions when the computer industry was booming. Hell, I even remember back in 96 when I was in college reading a document from the school stating that they were removing all Macromedia products from the PCs as part of an agreement with Microsoft in order to provide the school with cheap Visual Studio licenses. Shrewd (immoral?) business. Microsoft's bottom line. Selling virtual bits and bytes for premium prices. Planned obsolescence. et al.
This is kinda like how 2PAC keeps making albums. BAllmer must be a fan of his work
Microsoft fanboys please insert an excuse here.
Stop the flame-baiting... You know where you can insert it.
According to you, I'm just a stereotype...so what does it matter to you? :P
in your ass.
Man, that's the faintest comment I've ever seen.
In other news: Christmas has been extended until May.
As gamer myself Vista with DX10 is the way to go. After SP1 I've never had problem with Vista, very stable. People complain it's slow. well ya if your old xp machine wants to run a new OS then it's slow alright.
+1
That's why I downgraded to XP on my laptop - not enough ram or graphics horsepower on my laptop to really get things going.
well ya, you run what you can. If you insist on running some high end stuff with low end system, then you are asking for it. but with enough horse power Vista beats XP hands down. But you can also try Ubuntu 8.10, Linux will blow the crap out of a mac which you'll pay so much money for.
I got Vista for free at a M$ seminar and after SP1 was released, I tried it. It was pretty but too slow so I went back to XP.
I have a couple of Macs in the house too (from school), and they're nice, but to be honest, I've been hosed by Apple just as much as Dell and M$, so I'm not a 'fan' of any of them. In fact a version of Ubuntu's on my G4 iBook right now. :p
Ya, what's to blame is that they put Vista on machines that aren't truely ready for it.
This is sad, vista is good but if your going to buy a mac and run bootcamp thats dum. I blam the pc makers not the soft ware. MS just need to make there own pc that don't need drivers.
you do what?
Blam?
Educate me more of your language young scribe!
Wow, using your age as your username is paticuarly unimaginative.
I am laffing ut da abuv replys beecauz it muk fun of hiz spalling
I think at this point what they need to do is put a true "classic" UI option(w/simplified icons, naming, up arrow in explorer, etc.) in Vista and Office 07(old-school menus), and make it dead easy to toggle between. The problem is the UI folks, the stability issues have for the most part, been taken care of(the godawful bloat is still there).
They're not fixing the UI in Windows 7 either...
Hooray for everyone!
Brick, where did you get that hand grenade?
LOUD NOISES!!!!!
I dont know but XP is for me forever now ! I work on music and have all the apps that are Windows compatible it means I cant move to Mac and then Vista is NOT compatible to apps made for XP ! So Im sticking with XP from now on or I have to ! But I dont think I'll lose something by this. XP is pretty stable, less on ur resources and most of all Vista apps are XP compatible !
Vista apps are XP compatible because Vista apps must be written properly. XP apps that aren't compatible with Vista are apps that weren't written to proper software standards. There are lots of things to rant about with Vista, but don't go around blaming it for coders who are too incompetent and/or lazy to write to standards.
Have you tried installing those music apps. Everything that I had on xp installed on vista. I got a little message saying there were known problems but I never encountered any. There must have been updates from the developer to make it work.
thats like 10 years ago saying that you will never make the jump from 95 to 98. You will eventually have to do it because MS will no longer support it and as soon a that happens you are going to find that software manufacturers will no longer put out software for a dead OS. Weather you do eventually upgrade to Vista or wait until Windows 7 (at this point i would wait for 7 unless your machine comes with vista, then just keep that and skip the downgrade and then upgrade to 7), you are going to have to do it, just like everyone else.
where's "good grief" when you need him...
Why don't they just sell XP forever?
If there's a market to profit from a product then it can't be all that bad.
Coca cola still sell coke and you can till get the plain hamburger and small fries.....
Of course if you have a better product that people like and are willing to pay for it then that's good for business as well.
a better question, why don't they sell 386 machines forever?
you ever heard of innovation ?
Since windows is and always will be buggy and constant new technological invention needs support they would have to keep an entire staff going to support XP AND vista AND windows7 (if that's different from vista and not just mojava experiment #2), and they don't like to spend the money on such staff I gather.
if it weren't for innovation and new technology we would all still be using a machine with a 200 mhz processor, 16 MB of ram and a 4 gig HD. Your precious XP will only support new hardware for so long. try installing windows 95 on a current machine. It wont work, just like what will eventually happen to XP
I love XP, no reason to move to Vista. A whole new Windows version will be out in a year
Less then a year microsft should have windows 7 finalized by april and sofar windows 7 by all acounts from user who have used the current build have noticed and stated by default windows 7 on cold boot evan with akll its new graphics glory and functional new features related to the Ui it uses no more then 18 to 25% ram
This XP extension upon extension fiasco reminds me of the scene in Robocop when the Detroit police are trying to kill Robocop after his ED-209 encounter. Go Robo.......and XP!
It's really a good analogy. Both Microsoft and OCP are "forcing" people to upgrade to the latest and "greatest" OS because they have discontinued the old model. People don't like the new ED-209. Sure, it can put a million holes in a criminal's car and render them dead, but the old Robocop model was far nicer, it fit in the old cars and still did the job that was intended while doin the least amount of damage to the neighborhood.
But no. We all need bigger cars now that the new law enforcement droid is out. We wouldn't want our small cars slowing it down and getting in it's way. We need to upgrade to bigger computers with bigger energy footprints and demands with massive video cards, bigger power supplies and bigger heat sinks.
Loading COMMAND.COM
At this point, Microsoft should just promise people that anyone who buys Vista will get a free upgrade to Windows 7 when it comes out.
im on my 3rd PC with Vista now, ofc all custom built myself for vista rather than off the shelve junk.
Im still yet to have any major problems, i admit awhile ago i downloaded a vista update that just caused bluescreen whenever rebooted (Grrr!) but after uninstalling that update ive had no problems (ive even installed that update now)
So vista to me is and 7.5/10 room for improvement, but it spanks XP in my experience.
That said, after looking around PC World earlier i can see why MS are still sending out XP to manufacturers, 90% of them are still using High-end XP systems to run a low-end XP system.
Also MS made the major mistake of using 32bit & 64bit versions, they should of just bit the bullet & gone all 64bit.
that stupid 3.2gb limit on 32bit (all 4+gb 32bit systems are only using 3.2gb, despite what it says on screen.) is so hard to explain to people & just generally makes things a headache.
Apple however, bad prices, bad specs, bad quality, good barebones software.
Id rather spend an extra £100 & get the software for the PC.
I seriously think that people that like vista should consider going apple, it's the vista philosophy done right instead of half-baked.
I hope I didn't offend any apple users, I didn't mean it that way, and as for vista users: I don't mind if I offend them a bit :)
i'm still running an xp machine and got a macbook, ill prolly just skip to windows 7. vista doesn't suck per se, it's just not that great, but hey wateva floats ur boat. and ya i agree with above, windows 7 should be in 64 bit and 2 versions, business and home.
Windows 2007 launch date: May 30, 2009. Vista bloat, and trying to run it on anything other then modern systems are the ONLY reasons XP is still around.
Sadly windows 7 is more bloated than vista, at least the current beta around here.
@ Magallanes
http://blog.laptopmag.com/windows-7-on-netbooks
this is nonsense. as much as I don't like vista (hate is too strong, because I can't say I hate vista - and please don't flame me for voicing my opinion), and as much as I love XP, this option will keep xp alive for a while. Even I sacrificed my love for XP by making Vista my main OS despite its problem. Vista is definitely getting better after SP1. I hope windows 7 will solve the schism between XP lover and vista.