Filed under: OS Updates, Windows, Microsoft
Microsoft extends Windows XP lifespan through 2011
by Brad Linder Jun 18th 2009 at 3:00PM
Microsoft had planned to phase out Windows XP after introducing Vista, but demand for the older operating system remained high. And while you can't just go out and purchase a boxed copy of XP anymore, you can get it preinstalled on a netbook, and in some cases you can purchase a new computer with Vista and acquire Windows XP "downgrade" rights.
Now it looks like Microsoft will continue to offer downgrade rights for up to 18 months after the introduction of WIndows 7. Computer World is reporting that Microsoft will make Windows XP available as late as April, 2011. The move should give enterprise users who haven't switched to Vista time to make the transition from Windows XP to Windows 7 without rushing.
But it does raise a question. Sure, Windows 7 has improved graphics, an enhanced GUI, and better security features than Windows XP. But is that enough to convince you to upgrade? Or would you be happy using Windows XP for the next 10 years as long as software makers keep pumping out compatible applications?
So, just how good at time waster games are you? Think you've got the stuff? Well, The World's Hardest Game 2.0 doesn't think you do.
Yes, amazingly, it's possible to have a sequel to a game called "The World's Hardest Game". It doesn't seem logically possible, since if the first one was actually the world's hardest, how could another one come along and share the moniker? It made me doubt the name in the first place. That is, until I tried the game.
The mechanics of the game are very simple. You are a small red square, ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
mp3 said 3:27PM on 6-18-2009
Thoes company need to upgrade, this is why they are not making money. Better OS=money!!
Reply
jfjb said 5:15PM on 6-18-2009
@mp3
do you have a lot of Microsoft stock or an opinion?
'cause you don't say much for someone so secure to make strong and profound statements in so few words and no knowledge of, or respect for, the Anglo-Saxon grammar.
P.S. Ah, I almost forgot to tell you about your typo and your punctuation style. You didn't pass. Position declined.
Undrhil said 3:43PM on 6-18-2009
Everyone keeps throwing around the phrase "upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7." Unfortunately, Microsoft isn't providing a clean way to upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7, unless you upgrade from Windows XP to Windows Vista and then to Windows 7. So, what you *should* be saying is "shelling out for a full version of Windows 7." Or whatever iteration of that phrase would be compatible in place of "upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7."
Also, has anyone heard any news of Microsoft having a change of heart about not being able to upgrade from Windows XP to Windows 7?
Reply
Ih8teXP said 3:51PM on 6-18-2009
I don't get why everybody is staying on it, I mean literally its the equivalent of running 3.1 when XP was released. Now I can understand organizations not wanting to switch, do to other organizations being lazy and pretending XP will be here forever. Remember when so many people had problems with their 98/ME software running in XP? Same scenario here and until consumers (both business and personal) start putting the pressures on their software distributors to start making software compatible with Vista and 7 instead of acting like the consumer just needs to stick with XP. XP's security is horrible. The only things that make it attractive to everyday consumers like some members of my family is that they started using computers when XP was the rage and now don't feel comfortable using Vista or 7. Others (like other family members) want to stay on it because it will literally run on anything and legacy hardware is it's speciality. I.E. they can go to goodwill and get Quicken 98 for 10 bucks (instead of breaking down and getting the new Quicken or whatever) and run it fine in XP where in Vista or 7 it won't even run.
LET GO OF LEGACY HARDWARE PEOPLE!!! IF YOU LIKE YOUR ZIP DRIVES AND 64MB Of MEMORY SO MUCH THEN MAKE IT YOUR HOBBY.
Other words: stop beating the dead horse that is XP.
Reply
Schwinn said 4:01PM on 6-18-2009
XP security is horrible? You mean WINDOWS security is horrible. Going to Vista or 7 isn't going to fix that magically. Sure you have the UAC which does well to annoy people, but it's not any more secure unless the user actually reads and understands the prompt... which they normally don't.
Besides which, I have excellent security on XP. I have a good virus scanner and firewall (AVG/Comodo... both free) and have never had a virus infection on my machine. So, what's the benefit of this supposed "better security" for me?
As for "legacy" hardware... my old AthlonXP 1800+ with 384MB RAM is "legacy" according to you and the Vista/Win7 requirements, but it runs Mythbuntu just fine, which is a heavier load than regular desktop duty (when viewing/recording video).
And what's all that upgraded hardware and Vista/7 get me, anyway? Pretty windows? Yay. Not.
I stick to XP because it works well, is stable, does everything I need it to do, and does it faster than Vista. So, instead of complaining about people on "legacy hardware"... why don't you tell me why I should bother to switch anyway?
Evenio said 4:27PM on 6-18-2009
It'd be closer to staying on 3.1 when 98 was released, actually. Still a pretty big difference between the two, in any case.
ih8texp said 7:11AM on 6-19-2009
Well honestly, if you actually used your computer to make money (by developing on it) instead of talking shit on a web post then you might have a need for better hardware and a faster operating system (which obviously you don't, it doesn't really take any kind of special hardware to browse the internet and talk shit because you like XP and my post rubbed you the wrong way, which would account for why you are trying to bash on the fact that I *personally* hate XP).
Try compiling a .NET package on mythbuntu. Won't work because Mythbuntu won't have the runtime compilers. Or try writing .bat scripts to automate some of what your customers do. Won't happen because Linux doesn't support batch and you don't have any customers. If WINDOWS overall is so horrible why are you running XP at all? One of the oldest Operating System still being sold (besides Unix)?
You Schwinn sound like one of those fanboys that will hate any OS after XP either way, just because its semi-forcing you to buy new hardware (Windows 7 will bring almost ANY P.O.S. back to life, even yours! for the point).
Go back to playing your WoW little one...
ih8teXP said 3:54PM on 6-18-2009
Or in other thoughts they could just drop 7 and call it XPAero, then everybody would think it was XP with the Aero interface layed over it.
Reply
Molly said 4:13PM on 6-18-2009
"I don't get why everybody is staying on it"
maybe because it is just what many people want? while Windows 7 certainly is an improvement over Vista, it is just that. imho, taking something as rotten as Vista and working on it to make it better is still the wrong approach. the goodness of the appraised and anticipated Longhorn went into the Server OS line, while the enduser desktop operating system was discarded and completely redesigned from scratch (hence the incredible delay back then). the result was a complete and utter failure.
as they say: Windows XP, the operating System that won't go away :)
Reply
Crazy Serb said 4:30PM on 6-18-2009
Nothing wrong with Windows XP... been using it for ages now, and will continue to use it for ages even if Microsoft drops support for it tomorrow.
Why?
Because I've never contacted Microsoft for any issues regarding Windows XP, as it's stable and secure enough to consider working off in personal or corporate environment.
And you call going from WinXP to Vista or Windows 7 "upgrading"?
Bwhahahaaa! Aside from making a decent coin for Microsoft, or satisfying some internal need for faster, bigger, stronger, NEWER software on your computers, it's mostly a downgrade in terms of ROI and performance, so for our common-sense people it doesn't really make much sense (unless you really, really, really need an OS that will fully utilize all those multi-core intel chips in your desktops)
Most IT Admins wouldn't touch Vista or Windows 7 with a ten foot pole... I know those guys around here will hate their life if they ever have to migrate this computer farm of XP machines to Vista/7...
Reply
jfjb said 5:36PM on 6-18-2009
can someone refresh my memory and list application makers that have incorporated 64-bit processing and multi-thread (core) capability in their software?
Quick, how many, compared to the (ahem...) legacy single-core 32-bit?
I don't hear much noise from the business department, apart from manufacturers of x-core chips and x-GB DDR3 or 5 banks...
Maybe it's me trying to be the devils's advocate at the same time when I remember Microsoft offering coupons for free memory with an OS upgrade.
Where is my medication?
Honey!!!
:-))
Restoration said 4:44PM on 6-18-2009
Ih8teXP,
consumers have stayed with XP for the same reason the netbook category has become popular. The average person realizes they need a computer to type the occasional letter in a word processor, compile a monthly budget into a spreadsheet, and possibly make a presentation for work or a family get-together. These tasks don't require an OS with a fancy user interface. XP simply works.
Reply
Yep said 6:39AM on 6-19-2009
I agree. Some people just can't (or aren't willing to) pay hundreds of dollars every year to upgrade their operating system just to keep Microsoft in business. What is the point of that? Why fix it if it's not broken? It's a waste of money.
billcantfart said 5:11PM on 6-18-2009
Just shoot that dog, already!
Reply
Kevin said 2:09AM on 6-19-2009
Actually, you can still purchase boxed copies of XP. In fact, I work at an OfficeMax and we have several copies of XP in stock (Home & Pro, full & upgrade). They sell better than boxed versions of Vista, actually.
Reply
larry said 9:15AM on 6-20-2009
i asked to downgrade my vista laptop to windows and they said it would null my warrantyon my lap top sooooooooooooooooooooo i dont use it i willwait till windows 7 comes out and if they have problems with that im switching to a mac
Reply
bigsofty said 2:51PM on 6-19-2009
Its faster, simple as that, there no excuse for newer O.S. being slower on the same hardware. Get used to it being around, the current rebadged bloatware that MS is trying to flog every couple of year, simply does not appeal to people who want their hardware to run at its most optimum speed.
Reply
thomas32408 said 2:51PM on 6-19-2009
I'm 62 years old and hate television. I get all of the current events news I need from my computer via XP. I wouldn't have a reason to switch OSs even for free.
Reply
Wiwi said 11:38AM on 6-20-2009
I'll keep using XP for another two or three years, and when Ubuntu Linux become really matured, I'll switch to the free OS forever. Bye bye Microsoft.
Reply
t0ny said 11:42AM on 6-30-2009
Yeah as an end user, I really don't see any advantage over switching to Vista or W7. To me Vista/W7 have only new GUI and some extra features that can be added to XP separately anyway. That's all. If I'm bored with XP's visual style then it is soooo easy for me to apply new visual styles. There are thousands of visual styles available for xp. I tried my best to use Vista for about 4 months. It worked fine but it was too much demanding on my laptop's resources even after applying SP2 on a clean install. So finally I switched back to XP. My software run smoother, my laptop's cpu is always cool, and XP's user interface is so convenient to use.
Reply