..."The OS That Just Won't Die"

I found this at betanews.com and thought it was an interesting article.

http://www.betanews.com/article/Windows-XP-forever-The-OS-that-just-wont-die/1249582039

 

Why wont people just move on....
Vista is a decent OS and windows 7 is even better. windows 7 is roughly the speed as xp but has the security features and tons of other great features.

xp has the die. most new computers come with at least 3gb of ram. xp is 32bit so people will need to move on to windows vista 64bit or windows 7 64bit. hopfully the latter.

tbh these days i hate XP. im so used to vista now. being able to run as standard user all the time is great. as well as lots of other small things.(expect maybe a few programs that make me install using the admin account...)

 

XP will die off in time.... When they stop putting it on new PCs, that's the beginning of the end....

 

A lot of folks don't run high end computers and have no desire to spend more money for a new system that is basically limited by their internet connection (yes, a lot of people are still on dial-up...if I was a mile further out of town than I am I would still be on dial-up). XP works great with every application that I have. Generally Windows 7 does too but it is slower than XP (no doubt about it). Windows 7 takes up over twice the hard drive space of XP. Windows 7 has tons of extra stuff in it that I'll never use (Bitlocker for instance). I hope that XP is around for a long, long time for I agree with everything stated in that article. But, I've got my copy of Windows 7 already on order, too, so I like it as well. Love the new wallpaper/theme changer in Win 7.

Later...

 

XP will never die. XP will be a pallbearer when they take Vista to the cemetery to bury it. XP will still be around when Windows 7 turns out to be a dud, just like we knew it was.
My computer will be used until it stops working, I don't upgrade just for the software. I consider my computer like a "toaster" why get rid of it, if it still works.
XP gets the job done for me a countless millions of computer users, even most businesses still use it. XP still has many good years left, it hasn't even reached it's prime.

 

I hope XP will be around for a very long time also, i've never been fond of Vista other than some of the cleaner graphics such as the icons which i've put in to XP anyhow. Neither Vista or Win7 have any functionality i need/want and porting all my stuff over to another OS would just be a huge pain.

Really 99% of what i do doesn't even involve Windows features, it's done in third party programs such as Firefox, Notepad++, PHP IDE's, Photoshop, Visual Studio etc and i use Directory Opus as a file manager so i don't even see Windows Explorer.

Actually i'm struggling to think of a single Windows feature i use day to day, task manager, defrag, system clock, add remove programs all replaced and even logoff is a Dopus button.

I dunno, looking at that i guess if Microsoft could "persuade" third party developers of popular applications to phase out XP support i'd have no choice.

 

You're forgetting a lot of security programs don't have 64bit versions because someone *coughMicrosoftcough* doesn't like folks messing around with the kernel. We can argue all day about security improvements in Vista/7, but there is still a place for 3rd party software. Also, as many have mentioned, XP may be as old as dirt now, but that's only given it time to stabilize, have every kind of program under the sun run on it with no problem, and for the really serious security issues to be worked out (yes, I'm aware of "patch Tuesdays", but honestly, imho the truly dangerous holes have been filled up, and you can't blame the OS for issues that occur on un-patched systems).

Also, yes, "lower end" systems are still out there and going strong. People shouldn't have to upgrade perfectly working systems just because people on a forum think so or because Microsoft thinks so. I run a 5 year old system with 1Gb of RAM. It's secure (enough for me), it boots up when I ask it too, and it handles quite a bit of multiple tasks before I start noticing a slowdown. I have no intent to run out and get some new OS that I KNOW is going to have security issues start piling up the day of release (always happens) or uses more resources because it's new and looks shiny.

Why REALLY should XP die? Because it's old or because Vista/7 is slightly more secure are unacceptable answers to me. You can't just cite security as a reason to make such an investment in money and time for your everyday user. They also want things to "just work", and XP is at this point exceptional at that. XP is just as secure if you only take a half hour out of your time to make it so, and contrary to some opinions, you don't need to know the ins and outs of Windows to lock it down tight either. So, again, why REALLY should it just be tossed out?

 

It's not a matter of should or not. It's just an inevitability. Every new PC sold from now on will have something other than XP on it, either Vista or 7. It's a numbers game. Sooner or later, XP will die, simply because 99% of the PCs out there will have a newer OS running on newer hardware.

 

Yeah, I know Kerodo, that's true. It's really the only reasonable answer to the question. Even though it's reached old age in the software world, XP is still doing its thing perfectly.

 

Yeah, I hated to see Win2k go too. There was nothing wrong with 2k either. Was my favorite for years....

 

Maybe by then I'll be ready to change.
I'm sure that XP's end is inevitable. Progress etc... And maybe Windows 7 (or whatever OS Microsoft has at that time) will be great.
I'm just so comfortable with XP, and somewhat resistant to change.

 

That isn't my experience at all, after using w7 for a while I went back to XP and the responsiveness is shocking.
Why is it okay for business to MAKE consumers spend without free choice, is that free market?

 

I think I will be running XP on a whole lot of low end PC's.
IMO and experience, Win7 isn't even nearly as fast as XP is.

 

Why does the author care about XP so much anyway?
If you despise it so much, then dont use it!
Are people forgetting that its just an Operating System?
And as an OS, it just works.
The smaller footprint it has, the less memory it uses, the better it is for the other applications that actually run on the OS.
The OS is never the focal point of the majority of users of computers in my opinion, its the smooth running of applications that run on it that matters to them.

 

Why ? I would like that Microsoft said to me which are the reasons for I should spend money to change XP Pro for Win 7. Security ? I'm able to ensure the security in my system by myself, and probably better. Technical changes really revolutionary ? I don't see. I don't see actual reasons to change. If Redmond would give Win 7 to me as a gift...

 

MS wanting people to open their wallets is not a valid reason to update. Neither are the "gotta have the latest and greatest" fanboys.

XP users are going through the same thing 98 users did a few years back. Now you know how we felt. MS dropped support, then reinstated it before eventually dropping it again. MS can stop supporting an OS. They can stop patching vulnerabilities. They can force hardware vendors to make their stuff incompatible with an OS, but they can't kill it. The only thing that can force you to update is the failure of your hardware, and then only if you can't replace it. As long as an operating system serves your needs, it's not dead. Microsoft support for an OS near the end of its "official life" isn't that important. Most of the serious vulnerabilities in it were patched long ago. The rest can be mitigated with properly configured security software.

If you plan on staying with an OS after official support for it ends, get offline copies of the updates and patches. Keep copies of your drivers and the software you use. Adopt a security policy that doesn't rely on updates being always available. Check out sites that work on unofficial updates and support. You'd be amazed at some of what they do. Then use that OS for as long as you want. I still run 2K on this multiboot system. It works just fine and will continue to, with or without MS support. I use it whenever I'm not running my first choice, 98FE, which also works very well, thanks in part to unofficial support. Use what you like and ignore the fanboys and critics.

 

most of you dont relise how many changes there was in vista.
do some of you still belive vista is just prettier?
it has alot of under the hood changes and windows 7 is a smaller upgrade just like windows 2k > XP
then again windows 7 did offer some very nice overall tweaks so maybe if people stay on xp again MS will be forced to listen to their customers again which IMO is an execellent thing.

with vista and 7 i can finaly use an OS like its meant to be used. aka run as standard user all the time and only give admin rights for admin programs and updates.
I cannot do that with XP or lower. programs like Surun as hacks IMO and wont always work.

Give credit where its due. windows 7 is a very good OS.
IM not saying upgrade to windows 7 if you already have xp. but if you purchase a new machine get windows 7.

unless you have got alot of ram vista is slow. file copyin is slow even with a hi end system.
MS should of fixed it but they never did...
of course file copying works at the right speed on 7 but it should of on 7 to...

Overall i find vista more stable than XP.

 

Ya, I know. But you think with a Linux mind. A Windows user uses an HIPS to control all his system. Because a good, classical HIPS makes much more than UAC, in security and in checking. I use Vista too - it's not my main OS - and at the first I disable the UAC and I use an HIPS

 

I don't know anybody outside a few of us here on the forum who can stand a classical HIPS for more than about 10 minutes frankly..... It's just not a practical solution for most people.

 

No, not practical at all. I see HIPS as a tool for those who just want to have that kind of control or are curious/learning. And it is great for those types.

You know, having been a die hard XP fan for some time, I still remember when it was the devil incarnate and I clung to 98SE for some time. However, eventually I purchased a laptop with XP on it, and after using it for some time, bought it for my desktops. It took some time, but I readily admit that XP is much better than 98 ever was.

The same thing will happen with 7. Some will hold out, but eventually in time they will adopt. Odds are if 7 keeps fine tuning it's performance, realizing that we are in an economy that does not bode well for constant upgrades, it should gain popularity in a couple years.

Vista on the other hand I have not much good to say about except I sort of enjoy the visuals. It is on every machine I have tried it on, much slower than XP. I could care less about the enhancements Vista brings if it causes a negative effect on performance. But that is just me.

I will run XP myself primarily until I find a way to get a cheap copy of 7 ultimate. Then we shall see if day to day use of 7 is any better than the beta is. While I don't mind 7 beta, I still find myself gravitating back to XP because it seems simpler and faster. But then I have never bought something because it looks or feels cool, only if it is very good and to the point (read, not bloated ).

Sul.

 

Running an unsupported OS isn't practical for most people either. Doing so for any length of time requires the user gets to know their system really well on a level the average user wouldn't consider doing. For those users, classic HIPS can be the core of an almost impregnable defense. The older the OS, the easier it is to configure HIPS to defend it.

The biggest issue facing users who want to stay with an OS after support is dropped is coming to grips with the fact that they have to provide the support themselves. In order to keep it secure, you have to address any vulnerabilities that are found. Sometimes you can adapt a patch or update for a newer OS. At other times, 3rd parties release patches that fix the problem. For others, specific HIPS settings eliminate the threat. You have to determine what method will work for your system. It takes a little time, but not as much as you might think. Quite often an older OS isn't vulnerable to the new exploit at which time you can sit back and laugh at all those who chose to "get with the times."

With the right security setup, you can run any internet-able OS that you want to with little or no risk. Just be aware that there is a cost. Instead of money, that cost is time. Look at the time cost as an investment that pays in knowledge, which can be applied to all operating systems. In this economy, money is scarce but time is available.