Filed under: OS Updates, Windows, Microsoft
Microsoft will support Windows XP until 2010 -- on low power laptops only
by Brad Linder Apr 3rd 2008
Last week we were speculating that Microsoft could issue a stay of execution for Windows XP. Computer makers are supposed to stop loading the OS on new PCs at the end of June. But here's the thing, some of the most popular laptops on the market this year are pretty much incapable of running Windows Vista. That's because low power ultraportable devices like the Eee PC and the Everex Cloudbook are hot this year. But these low cost devices also have low powered processors, not much storage space, and even less RAM. So if Microsoft were to kill off Windows XP entirely, the company would be giving Linux an awful big push, because various Linux distributions run beautifully on these tiny computers.
So what's a software company to do if it wants to promote its new OS while making sure that as many computers as possible have Windows on them? Easy. Microsoft is going ahead and telling most computer manufacturers to stop installing Windows XP. But companies that are putting out Vista incapable devices can continue to install the operating system until 2010 and possibly longer.
The move makes a lot of sense. But you know what would make even more sense? Letting computer makers install XP on any machine. While Windows Vista SP1 has brought some reliability and stability improvements, there are still a lot of people out there who prefer Windows XP. By discontinuing the operating system, Microsoft is essentially telling them to hold off on buying a new computer unless they've got a spare XP install disc lying around.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Hany Hanna said 8:13PM on 4-03-2008
Vista. Why's it so hard to understand many people don't want to use up their cpu and ram on stupid "pretty" effects? Most people I know feel the same way. Forcing Vista on their customers is going to hurt them in the long run. I predict that the open source community will keep XP goin with their own updates. I HATE Vista and I resent Microsoft deeply for wanting to take away that choice.
Reply
Jon Rick said 2:38PM on 4-04-2008
You don't want to spend RAM and CPU resources on "pretty effects"? Then turn them off! It's not hard. I'm really tired of the "I hate Vista" crowed going around rehashing the same lame excuse over and over again. If you don't like the way Vista looks, then take two seconds, flip over to themes and change to the Windows classic theme.
Hany Hanna said 8:13PM on 4-03-2008
Microsoft is idiotic.....I'm sticking with XP and I'm motivated to check out other OSes because of Vista. Why's it so hard to understand many people don't want to use up their cpu and ram on stupid "pretty" effects? Most people I know feel the same way. Forcing Vista on their customers is going to hurt them in the long run. I predict that the open source community will keep XP goin with their own updates. I HATE Vista and I resent Microsoft deeply for wanting to take away that choice.
Reply
archpope said 3:38AM on 4-04-2008
@draku: I bought a new computer, it came with Vista Ultimate. I'm not going to complain about that, especially if it works flawlessly. Again, it's called progress. Why would I want a 7-year-old OS on a brand new computer?
Also, you're just re-hashing excuse #1. I had to upgrade my Bluetooth adapter because it was PCMCIA and my new computer has an ExpressCard slot. It's not M$'s fault, but should I complain to HP because in their windmill-charging to make a better computer, they obsoleted one of my peripherals?
As far as Compiz goes, I've tried 8 different flavors of Linux on 4 different systems, and never got Compiz to work. Vista Aero has worked on 11 out of 12 systems I've installed it on. You get what you pay for.
It probably doesn't sound like it from the above, but I'm NOT a M$ fanboy. I'm a technology fanboy. I am, however, tired of the repetition of unsubstantiated rhetoric which, if allowed to continue unanswered, could become interpreted as fact.
Reply
Draku said 10:57AM on 4-07-2008
About re-hashing excuse #1 my 1994 computer has an AMD x2 6400+ with 2GB RAM :) so no excuse for Vista here to run like crap.
hazard said 8:13AM on 4-04-2008
I can understand stopping the retail sale of WinXP but stopping OEM distribution when it's still in demand is only going to lose revenue for MS and fuel priacy. MS has to support updates for WinXp for many years to come anyway so why not keep getting revenue for it in the meantime? .. Crazy ..
As I see it WinXp isn't going suffer from technological obsolescence anytime soon so if you've got a WinXP setup that meets all your needs why the hell would you like to have it run faster, cleaner or whatever benefits new hardware provides?
Reply
archpope said 8:17AM on 4-04-2008
It's called progress, people. It's the reason we don't have to store our MP3's on a series of punch cards. Microsoft has a vested interest in making progressively more powerful operating systems, especially when their competitors are starting to chisel slowly away at their market share. I have noticed a few ironies that I have yet to get answered:
1. Why do people who "hate" Vista not give concrete reasons why? The closest thing to a concrete answer I've read is something like "It doesn't work with my [piece of hardware] I've been using since 1994."
2. Why do people who complain about Vista's 'eye candy' not also fault Apple for adding 'eye candy' to OSX?
3. Why do people not remember 2001, when people made the exact same vague complaints about XP?
I have been using Vista for over a year. x64 Vista at that. So far the only problem I've encountered was with the Griffin Powermate, which is an x64 issue. Despite the fact that XP was quite stable, Vista is moreso. Also, video wallpaper rocks!
Reply
Draku said 8:17AM on 4-04-2008
You couldn't get your money back you spend on your Vista ? :)
We don't hate Vista, we just hate to pay for crap wich require buying more crap just to make it work.
For the "eye candy" i prefer Compiz on my Ubuntu system
TempusFugit said 8:19AM on 4-04-2008
I think one of the main problems is that for most people, Vista offers nothing more that anyone wants than XP. We're talking an operating system, and XP is a great operating system, and its main purpose is for running applications, and XP does that just fine.
Most people dont want an OS as a bundle of applications. Give us the OS, then let us choose what we want and put it on - like we do with XP.
People that upgrade from Vista to XP realise they lose nothing, and if there's anything in particular they really wanted, there's third party software that does it a lot better than Vista. However, what they gain is dramatic. Much faster response times, less demand on the CPU, so much less RAM usage, less DRM restrictions, less bloat and more features for cheaper to boot.
Is there really anything particularly worthwhile moving to Vista for? Usually the answer is no - and with that answer being no, might as well enjoy the benefits of a much faster and efficient, much more stable, much better supported, much more familiar and much more flexible operating system - hence why people want XP.
TempusFugit said 8:19AM on 4-04-2008
As for your third point, when XP was coming up to release and was released, although there was some resistance against change, there was also a lot of excitement. Great and excited magazine reviews and articles, lots of positive experiences and information hitting the web, people that had gone to XP saying how great it was, and it didn't take long until people realised XP was a good OS and moved to it.
It's not the same this time. There's not really been any excitement, people that have gone to Vista seem to be upgrading back to XP, there's an awful lot of negative comments and press, and there's not really any reason to go to Vista - people just dont want it.
While there are always people resistant to change, Vista has much more than that - its not that people dont want change, its that people dont want Vista!
James said 9:35AM on 4-04-2008
Seriously, don't compare the Vista launch to XP, compare it to ME. People saw it coming that ME was nothing more than a feature pack MS thought they could charge money for. The market roundly rejected it, and people flocked back to 98, or "sideways" to W2K. The problem with Vista is that all the extra CPU and RAM requirements don't *buy* you anything.
I will admit: as a security professional, I like the fact that they try to make you run without constantly having elevated privs, and the way they separate service processes from the desktop user is much better architecture than the model they use in XP. But try to explain that to Joe Sixpack, and he'll just give you a blank stare in return. Let any user dual-boot XP and Vista, and they'll tell you XP "feels" faster, AND they'll be hard-pressed to come up with anything Vista actually does better.
All that said, I may have the CPU cycles to burn, so I may go the Vista route at home one of these days. But I'm going to take my time about it, because frankly there's no rush.
hazard said 10:14AM on 4-04-2008
@archpope .. you talk about progress but neglect to mention what that entails .. the best way to get more power out of an OS is to buy new hardware ;) .. Indeed Vista has a tighter security model, UI enhancements and other miscellany but you know what, plenty of are quite happy with how WinXP works for them and like the idea a getting a new PC that is more "powerful" or alternatively hugely less "powerful" with WinXP (shock horror) .. Vista does not provide a more stable, productive OS over WinXP .. so maybe take a deep breath, ignore all the cheapshots at Vista and just try and appreciate why a lot of people are quite happy with WinXP.
@TempusFugit .. I disagree and think that actually most people (not you and me) DO want an OS with a bundle of applications and is a compeling reason to choose an Apple because they have put particular effort into this, unlike MS which relies on third party support (which I generally prefer).
astalavista said 11:47AM on 4-04-2008
archpope:
Why do people who "hate" Vista not give concrete reasons why?
Are you serious? Just look this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_Vista
steve said 2:57PM on 4-04-2008
vista progress... lol
if you call slower file transfer times, an os architecture that is an absolute pita to create drivers for, a graphical ui that hogs system resources, a fully drm integrated media player, and a security system that only provides security for users to stupid to take even small steps to protect themselves progress...
then yes vista is progress.
hazard said 8:40PM on 4-04-2008
@Steve .. you're a fine example of the hysterical reaction against Vista that have one single valid criticism and then throw in a lot of codswallop on top.
Do you write device drivers? If so then tell us why Vista is so difficult to develop for. The Aero GUI being a entire 3D surface absolutely rocks and if you don't have hardware to handle it then boo hoo to you. As for your criticism of the Vista's security, well that just speaks for itself about how naive you are.
VTFootball said 10:38AM on 4-04-2008
It's simple business. Microsoft would rather loose business to itself then another company, but thats a long time to keep one operating system.
Reply
VTFootball said 11:09AM on 4-04-2008
It's simple business. Microsoft would rather loose business to itself then another company, but thats a long time to keep one operating system.
Reply
Noshi said 7:53PM on 4-04-2008
Everyone forgets history
just for effect I can post a link to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Windows_XP
Did you know that when Windows XP was released it had fewer sales and roughly 10times the request for support on installation and bugs.
To say you don't want to purchase hardware to use a new OS is exactly opposite of the purpose of a new OS. Vista is designed to take advantage of new technologies, just like any other OS. Just as new Kernel's of linux end of making older drivers no longer work and Mac OS stops support on older computers Windows will have the same effect. If you aren't upgrading your PC's hardware, yes it makes sense not to upgrade your OS.
As for Microsoft stopping XP sales, it makes sense, they support there operating systems a long time past the last day of sales, they don't want to be making more and more updates for an OS already so old.
I've been using Vista since RC1 and RC2, Also been using Ubuntu for quite some time. Compiz is not equal to Aero simply because its driver support is extremely limited(and for those who say hardware support is all) and it really doesn't work on that many systems(out of 3 of my new machines it works on 0).
XP offers stability and speed, yes, its also had 2 service packs and a load of changes in its growth. Vista has stability and amazing security(even for those who like to click ok on things they shouldn't) and is working on issues related to disk speeds. I am overall quite happy with it, and my Girlfriend who initially didn't want it is in love with it(after some teaching on the new interface).
We all just need take some time and learn the new ins and outs of Vista, it offers alot that many would be surprised of if they just looked.(P.S. Ubuntu is quite nice also)
Reply
Hany Hanna said 8:33AM on 4-05-2008
I hate Vista. Why do I have to have a reason? I do but that's besides the point. I hate the virtual temporary internet files folder. I like to copy cached videos from it. I hate the new sound mixer. I feel I have less control in Vista. I think a "lighter XP" would have been an upgrade. Vista is a burden. For me, hogging more resources is going in the wrong direction. Maybe some people want to be smothered with security. I don't. I reformat every few months anyway. XP is perfect for people like me. Why take it away?
Reply
gnisbe said 2:48AM on 4-26-2008
I have not moved to Vista, it took me long enough to upgrade to XP from W2K so I cannot directly comment on Vistas merits or otherwise but seeing as my wife is the tech. dept. buyer for one of the largest public school districts in WA State with a budget of several million $/yr, I am prepared to listen to what she and her team of techs have to say and surmise that Microsoft have missed the point in giving consumers a "Build it and they will come" scenario. More is not always better, there is a lot to be said for the old saying 'kiss', keep it simple stupid. As for me, so long Microsoft, I am headed to Apple for my next OS and/or I will give Ubuntu a try also. I am fed up with finding appliance after appliance from clothes washers to cellphones to computers coming with far more features than I would ever be interested in. Try buying a new car that is not stuffed with drop down menus, who needs it!!!! See the Kiss comment above.
Reply