Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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
- Thread starter riscy
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No matter if MS want to get rid of it, if the users want it it'll stay. Just go on over to Pirate Bay and see how many XP torrents there are (I'm not condoning piracy, just pointing it out). I myself own 2 copies of XP, one home and one pro. Even if MS stop support, the community will support it: there is still people making new things for 98 to make it more "modern", even though its 10 years old.
XP aint going anywhere.
XP aint going anywhere.
You don't see the problem because of your attitude
. Maybe people don't want to have to upgrade their system just so they can run a new operating system that does the exact same thing their current system does?Overall Vista is not too bad in my opinion. I find the desktop context menu and many of the Control Panels to be poorly organized. Also the new start menu is more confusing and frustating to use, and the special "games" section is poorly done.
But in terms of compatibility and stability no real issues. No blue screens of death. I am running the 64-bit version with SP1 on modern hardware.
But in terms of compatibility and stability no real issues. No blue screens of death. I am running the 64-bit version with SP1 on modern hardware.
While everyone seems to be making a big deal out of this. It really is not much bigger than when Microsoft pulled windows 2000 and forced everyone to move to XP. People complained whinned. Saying how 2000 was better. Then MS dropped all support for 2000 in 04 /05 I believe. XP is slated to have all major support dropped summer of 2009 I believe.
Really I will say everyone here is thinking like it is such a big thing and how Vista sucks. I just point back to when windows 2000 was pulled from shelves and then all support was dropped.
Really I will say everyone here is thinking like it is such a big thing and how Vista sucks. I just point back to when windows 2000 was pulled from shelves and then all support was dropped.
You don't see the problem because of your attitude
I like being able to run previous software with a reasonable chance of success, but I also like that the underlying architecture was overhauled quite a lot to allow for future applications development. I like the new features. I can afford pretty much the best hardware for the task at hand for home and office, and worrying about the last 2% of performance difference over XP is a non-issue. I have to be careful not to fall into the driver pit, but unlike some other operating systems I could mention I'm not restricted to a much smaller scope of choice - choices that can on occasion impede the ability to do work unless you draw pretty pictures for a living. I like that neat additions weren't counted and advertised as part of the feature list, unlike some operating systems we could mention.
And unlike some users and many Vista naysayers on the blogomoronsphere, I have the requisite number of neurons to solve simple issues, I would say always caused by the addition of new hardware with bad drivers. I've never had to involve our guru in Vista problem solving, whereas he was initially brought in specially to solve debilitating issues we had when running on an Apple platform.
You see my lack of a problem as an attitude issue because, I suspect, of your comparative ignorance of what takes place outside the Apple realm
^^^So because YOU have a fast system, you don't see there being a problem at all with Vista's speed?
Sounds like you need a few more neurons to give you the ability to see that a plight may exist just because it doesn't affect you.
Sounds like you need a few more neurons to give you the ability to see that a plight may exist just because it doesn't affect you.
Not even that. I have 1.33Ghz machines and E6600's with 7000-series graphics cards, etc - not the fastest or the most current machines, which run Vista perfectly well for the task at hand. You needn't be a rocket scientist to understand that given reasonably current hardware Vista will run fine. You also don't need to be a rocket scientist to realise that new OS's with much more going on under the hood will require higher level hardware, or at least some concessions to speed with what you have. The neuron issue is with those who're trying to upgrade unsupported or crud / old machines to Vista and complaining. I see the scribblings of many like that here and on the blogomoronsphere who have moved to a current Apple machine and pronounce it an improvement. Well duh is all I can say.
XP vs Vista
Vista looks pretty and all, but has loads of issues. in the windows world, xp is way better.
Vista looks pretty and all, but has loads of issues. in the windows world, xp is way better.
You don't see the problem because of your attitude
On a relative level, I could say exactly the same for Panther > Leopard vs XP > Vista if the above is actually true - if it were not, as is actually the case, a load of cobblers.
BTW, I do for both Apple and Windows, that is replace the systems. All my Leopard machines have been purchased with Leopard. I have not upgraded a single Tiger machine. I know it's perfectly possible to do it without major issues, just like I know it's perfectly possible to upgrade properly Vista supported PC's. But I don't bother as I want a totally solid system under various conditions of use. Something I can certainly achieve in XP and to a good level in Vista, yet is puzzlingly slightly more hit & miss on Apple despite the 'one manufacturer' monopoly.
Keep XP
Bought a friend a new laptop with Vista on it. Wish I could downgrade it to XP easily. It is just rediculously hard to configure due to arbitrary changes. You have to keep hitting the Help button and searching to do easy things as you can in XP.
It's very slow to boot up. It's even slow hibernating. I'm going to have trouble convincing him that it is a better/faster laptop than his old Win98 heap.
Thanks Micro$oft.
Switching to Apple isn't the answer for this user. He just wants a faster machine than "works like his old one".
Wayne
PS. We are still running Office 97 on our work PCs. It just works well enough. No more bugs than the newer versions and the performance lose on installing new versions means we're quite happy with 97. When it does come time to upgrade, we'll be going to OpenOffice. See ya M$ cash cow...
Bought a friend a new laptop with Vista on it. Wish I could downgrade it to XP easily. It is just rediculously hard to configure due to arbitrary changes. You have to keep hitting the Help button and searching to do easy things as you can in XP.
It's very slow to boot up. It's even slow hibernating. I'm going to have trouble convincing him that it is a better/faster laptop than his old Win98 heap.
Thanks Micro$oft.
Switching to Apple isn't the answer for this user. He just wants a faster machine than "works like his old one".
Wayne
PS. We are still running Office 97 on our work PCs. It just works well enough. No more bugs than the newer versions and the performance lose on installing new versions means we're quite happy with 97. When it does come time to upgrade, we'll be going to OpenOffice. See ya M$ cash cow...
Switching to Apple isn't the answer for this user. He just wants a faster machine than "works like his old one".
Well he'll have to jump ship sometime...if MS keeps with the Vista upgrades, why not drive in head first?
Bought a friend a new laptop with Vista on it. Wish I could downgrade it to XP easily. It is just rediculously hard to configure due to arbitrary changes. You have to keep hitting the Help button and searching to do easy things as you can in XP.
It's very slow to boot up. It's even slow hibernating. I'm going to have trouble convincing him that it is a better/faster laptop than his old Win98 heap.
Thanks Micro$oft.
Switching to Apple isn't the answer for this user. He just wants a faster machine than "works like his old one".
Wayne
PS. We are still running Office 97 on our work PCs. It just works well enough. No more bugs than the newer versions and the performance lose on installing new versions means we're quite happy with 97. When it does come time to upgrade, we'll be going to OpenOffice. See ya M$ cash cow...
We have a bunch of benchmarks on Vista run by some associates of ours using machines we provided, in order to help us plan the move to Vista.
It so turns out one of the things that came up in 'ready-to-work' was the reliability of hibernation, which all three platforms passed as far as being usable, with XP rated behind Vista / OS X. With one of the reference machines for example (E6600 / 2Gb / 8600GTS) Vista was indeed two seconds slower in hibernating. But it was two seconds faster in resuming from hibernation. Nothing has got drastically slower. Compare that with a far more powerful Pro (in all respects - disc subsystem too) running in Safe Sleep: 1.5 seconds faster to hibernate, 7 seconds slower than Vista in resume.
I understand that OS X empowers non-nerds, but at the same time I question the mentality that equates dumbed down as better, because that is what's happening here.
Update on this story
I saw this update to this story on CNN:
source
Microsoft CEO hints at XP stay of execution
The operating system is set to be pulled off shelves this year but Steve Ballmer says that could change with 'customer feedback.'
But Ballmer was adamant that "most people who buy PCs today buy them with Vista."
"That's the statistical truth," he told reporters at a news conference at Louvain-La-Neuve University. "If customer feedback varies, we can always wake up smarter."
Fans of the six-year-old operating system set to be pulled off store shelves by June 30 have plastered 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 in January was greeted with lukewarm reviews.
I saw this update to this story on CNN:
source
Microsoft CEO hints at XP stay of execution
The operating system is set to be pulled off shelves this year but Steve Ballmer says that could change with 'customer feedback.'
LOUVAIN-LA-NEUVE, Belgium (AP) -- Microsoft Corp. CEO Steve Ballmer offered a glimmer of hope on Thursday to fans of the company's XP operating system, saying the company may reconsider its decision to stop selling XP soon.
But Ballmer was adamant that "most people who buy PCs today buy them with Vista."
"That's the statistical truth," he told reporters at a news conference at Louvain-La-Neuve University. "If customer feedback varies, we can always wake up smarter."
Fans of the six-year-old operating system set to be pulled off store shelves by June 30 have plastered 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 in January was greeted with lukewarm reviews.
But Ballmer was adamant that "most people who buy PCs today buy them with Vista."
Maybe it is because some people do not know that they can buy it with XP and not Vista. If I did not ask questions I wouldn't have known that either.
Maybe it is because some people do not know that they can buy it with XP and not Vista. If I did not ask questions I wouldn't have known that either.
Some retailers don't even offer an XP option anymore.
But it doesn't matter folks, as soon as Vista was released MS came out saying (I'm paraphrasing) "Don't worry. We understand Vista was a horrible failure, and we're working on the next generation OS and it is going to KICK ASS. Look for it in 2010 (but not really, more like 2015. Oh, and don't get your hopes up for it to be any good.) P.S. in the meantime, don't switch to Mac or Linux. They suck. A lot."
So XP just has to last for another two (to seven) years.