Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Users petition to keep Windows XP

riscy

riscy

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 4, 2008
737
3
China
This made me chuckle, but I think they are right:

Source

Microsoft Corp.'s operating systems run most personal computers around the globe and are a cash cow for the world's largest software maker. But you'd never confuse a Windows user with the passionate fans of Mac OS X or even the free Linux operating system.

Windows XP is set to be pulled off of store shelves in June, but supporters hope their petition will prevent that.

Unless it's someone running Windows XP, a version Microsoft wants to retire.

Fans of the six-year-old operating system set to be pulled off store shelves in June have papered the Internet with blog posts, cartoons and petitions recently. They trumpet its superiority to Windows Vista, Microsoft's latest PC operating system, whose consumer launch last January was greeted with lukewarm reviews.

No matter how hard Microsoft works to persuade people to embrace Vista, some just can't be wowed. They complain about Vista's hefty hardware requirements, its less-than-peppy performance, occasional incompatibility with other programs and devices and frequent, irritating security pop-up windows.

For them, the impending disappearance of XP computers from retailers, and the phased withdrawal of technical support in coming years, is causing a minor panic.

Take, for instance, Galen Gruman. A longtime technology journalist, Gruman is more accustomed to writing about trends than starting them.
But after talking to Windows users for months, he realized his distaste for Vista and strong attachment to XP were widespread.
 
I'm a fan of XP. Vistas a load of tosh so I don't plan on going back to it anytime soon.
 
Ditto. My company isn't switching to Vista either. No compelling reason, and double the support issues and software incompatibilities as we'll suddenly be supporting two systems.
 
I don't really see the problem. Vista is better in an everyday use sense now that device drivers are finally sorted out for almost everything. Very specific actions may be worse, but not enough to outdo the pros. Perhaps it's because I'm not trying to run it on broke-ass hardware?
 
Sesshi said:
I don't really see the problem. Vista is better in an everyday use sense now that device drivers are finally sorted out for almost everything. Very specific actions may be worse, but not enough to outdo the pros. Perhaps it's because I'm not trying to run it on broke-ass hardware?
Click to expand...

I agree, IMO the main problem with Vista isn't that its bad, its just not much better than XP in general use.
 
Microsoft has such a monopoly with there different OS over the years that now the only one they are competing against is themselves, and they are beginning to loose out.
 
remmy said:
Microsoft has such a monopoly with there different OS over the years that now the only one they are competing against is themselves, and they are beginning to loose out.
Click to expand...

how is it a monopoly?? cause a large market share and a monopoly are not the same ...
 
Drumjim85 said:
how is it a monopoly?? cause a large market share and a monopoly are not the same ...
Click to expand...

Yes they are, according to OS X dictionary:

Monopoly the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service : his likely motive was to protect his regional monopoly on furs.

There is nothing wrong with having a monopoly, however abusing a monopoly is wrong. Microsoft got charged with abusing their's to promote another product, in their case Internet Explorer.
 
Eraserhead said:
Yes they are, according to OS X dictionary:

Monopoly the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service : his likely motive was to protect his regional monopoly on furs.
Click to expand...

Exclusive ... the fact that OSX is available (and linux, and others) makes window's OS not exclusive

I would consider it more a oligopoly...
 
Ahh Vista - in the spirit of mediocrity, it is the Windows ME of the common era.

I'm not complaining. It has already switched two die-hard PC users in my life over to Macs, one of which is happily using VMWare and a copy of XP to connect to her office's Windows 2003 Server machine and remote desktop from home (which is the only reason she "needs" Windows). Neither ever plan to buy a PC again.

My experience has been that there is a great perceived need for Windows, compared to an actual Need driven by companies like Blackbaud, for example. Once folks in my life have realized that their Need for Windows is only perceived, they've happily settled in to Macs and rather enjoyed them.

M$ should keep on bringing the Vista goodness, and do all it can to end support for XP sooner rather than later. The time lag between the end of XP and Windows 7 will give Apple plenty of time to keep developing market share well into the double-digits. :)
 
Apparently when MS take XP off the shelves in June, it could reach high prices on ebay. I plan to buy a copy of XP just in case. Imagine buying a £40 copy of OEM XP only to sell it for £500 a couple of months later :D
 
My husband has Vista on his laptop and I have XP on my old gateway.
I much prefer XP. Not because it is what I am used to (which I am not since I got my mac) but because it seems to work better.
Vista takes way too long to boot up. Thankfully, I got Leopard and I don't have to use either of them anymore except for at work, which thankfully is still XP. ;)
 
I, for one, completely agree with the opinion that XP should be kept. Vista is a joke on anything but new hardware, and XP doesn't look goofy with all of the eye "candy" (is it rotten candy?).

OS X can get away with eye candy because it looks decent.

Of course, this is just my opinion, but give me a nice quad P3 server running XP Pro and I'll be a happy camper. Provided I have a Mac for when I like to look like I am a human being. :D
 
I go for XP still because there's a 5-10% drop in gaming performance, plus XP just seems to be much faster at booting. If Vista was as fast as XP I might be there.
 
Counterfit said:
I thought Office was Microsoft's cash cow?
Click to expand...

Windows and Office are both Microsoft's cash cows ;), and their server stuff doesn't do badly either.

Drumjim85 said:
Exclusive ... the fact that OSX is available (and linux, and others) makes window's OS not exclusive
Click to expand...

The EU classes a monopoly as any company with over a 38% market-share in any market. Microsoft having a 95% market-share makes them a monopoly ;).
 
Microsoft were convicted in court of law of:

a) having a monopoly [not illegal] and
b) abusing it [very illegal]

So stop saying microsoft are not a monopoly. They are, and they abused it.
 
FoxyKaye said:
Ahh Vista - in the spirit of mediocrity, it is the Windows ME of the common era.

I'm not complaining. It has already switched two die-hard PC users in my life over to Macs, one of which is happily using VMWare and a copy of XP to connect to her office's Windows 2003 Server machine and remote desktop from home (which is the only reason she "needs" Windows). Neither ever plan to buy a PC again.
Click to expand...

You realize that one can RD into a Windows box without needing Windows at all. MS Remote Desktop Client for Mac works just peachy, and is free. There's CoRD as well, but I'm less impressed by it. I'm in all kinds of W2K/W2K3 servers all over the country with RDC, never boot or VM into Windows once.
 
^^I wouldn't call Windows a monopoly, either. Even by the "OS X dictionary" definition that Eraserhead pointed to, the word "exclusive" comes up several times. Windows isn't exclusive enough to be a monopoly. Home phone access in Toronto = monopoly. Bell own the lines and offer the service. That's all there is to it. I didn't have a choice, as they owned exclusive rights. People just chose Windows for some strange reason, while 2 other options are readily available to all consumers. Same reason I wouldn't call the iPod a monopoly despite having a ridiculous 75+% of the total MP3 player market at some point (when the iPod Mini was introduced).

Microsoft were convicted of being a monopoly because they were using their large marketshare like a monopoly would, and so consumers and companies shouldn't have a choice. I guess that made them a monopoly in spirit, but I don't really know if they are by definition.

Eraserhead said:
I agree, IMO the main problem with Vista isn't that its bad, its just not much better than XP in general use.
Click to expand...

Yes, Vista is not much better, but a lot slower. It's so appealing, isn't it. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back