48% of IT pros to use XP after it's discontinued



There have been two new releases of the Windows operating system since the release of Windows XP in 2001, yet XP market share is still predominantly ruling the market. Since the release of Windows 7, some people have decided to move but others haven’t.

Some may argue that it’s only a matter of time before those on XP are pushed to Windows 7 when Microsoft discontinues support for the product, but an online survey done by Dimension Consulting on behalf of Dell's Kace systems management appliance business found that this may not be the case.

Zdnet reported the results which found that 48 percent of participants would continue to use XP even after it stops receiving support, including no further security updates. XP will stop receiving support after April 8, 2014, which leaves plenty of time to upgrade. This raises the question, why are people so anxious to stay? On the flip side, 47 percent responded by saying they would upgrade when XP support is gone. The final 5 percent of people said they would continue to use XP but with third-party support.

Although a large amount of people said they would upgrade from XP, the survey also suggested that a large majority would skip Vista and go straight to Windows 7. Vista was never a big hit with companies in the past, and it actually was more rather a huge failure with companies as Vista was never properly adopted by them. The success of Windows 7 and flop of Vista would convincingly explain why they would move straight to Windows 7, if the fact that it’s the newest version doesn’t serve enough precedence.

However, when questioned about Microsoft Office, 78 percent of the 953 participants said they would avoid Office 2010 mainly because of its ribbon interface although a third still said they would skip Office 2007 to upgrade to the 2010 version. 

Image credit: Softpedia

 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

AT&T releases Samsung Evergreen, will save the Earth

Next Story

Microsoft to open Moscow based research center

166 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Purely FWIW, like so many others I dual boot XP & 7, & will add 8 to the mix when avail. When I can do everything I do in XP in 7 (or 8), then maybe things will change, but right now I can't so XP's staying. Preferences &/or appearances have nothing to do with it.

*Most* apps I use work in both XP & 7, & while it's sometimes been a bit of work, 99% of my hardware does too. It's usually pointed out that you can use XP VMs in 7, but for stuff like audio/video that's nowhere near a solution. Others are in the same boat where 7 doesn't always cut it, & that doesn't reflect anything good/bad about 7 or XP -- it's just life & life isn't always as tidy as we might like. ;-)

That said, I know people who for the most part consider the version of Windows they use irrelevant -- you won't find them commenting on [or even reading] articles like this one. They use their PCs/laptops to do whatever, & that's what they focus on, not the OS. They're the one's MS targets with quite a few of their ads, trying to sell them the notion that somehow everything will magically be better on 7 -- most aren't buying it, 'least yet. ;-)

Great - my system is old, fugly and my days are now numbered - but wait...
I've never needed support, my XP desktop looks sweet, I have all security updates and my system is protected using the latest in security software. All of my needs are being met.
I guess this means that upgrades are based on a users needs so at this point for me, unless there are no more updates for my own software, I'm sticking with old, fugly XP.

Just so you know I dual boot with Windows 7 and have tried it for over a year and while it is indeed faster, I feel there are too many 'faults', which I will not go into, that don't meet my needs.

This is fine.

They can stay on their elderly software, I will be on the younger and in my opinion better for my needs software.

Each to their own, but XP users should know their days are numbered.

7 is Vista++ so in layman's terms 7 makes Vista look like it's not a TOTAL fail because 7 is a total fail.

Oh sure there are fan boys who think newer is better and open a video game the moment the OS loads.

...and people who don't realize that SuperFetch and all the other crap is slowing their system down by making them wait to "preload" stuff that they won't use.

...and people who think XP users only use IE6 when XP's market share is like 60%+ and IE6's market share is 10-20% TOPS.

Keep clicking four to five times more with 7 and enjoy your arthritis. As for me I'll be sticking with XP until I switch to what I'm currently thinking is Kubuntu once I get those Linux anti-M$ programmers to help me without asking me to go in to the frigin console just to copy and paste files.

7's file manager Windows Explorer is worthless now and there are now two major things called favorites. The My Computer icon is hidden. I was at a neighbors and was not able to make the My Documents folder work ONLY from the D:\ and it kept saving files to the C:\. So many shortcuts and useful features have been removed.

...oh and I have Aero for XP, here is your linkage: http://customize.org/xpthemes/62024

Features removed in Vista...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...es_removed_in_Windows_Vista

Features removed in 7...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...atures_removed_in_Windows_7

Not only is XP stable it also is MUCH more usable and once you undo a lot of the initial junk you can run a clean system. 7 and Vista are NOT customizable and hide/remove useful features and shortcuts while also adding tons of irrelevant junk and renaming half of the things making it a total f#$%ing nightmare for me to deal with when I need to test IE9 in VirtualBox (which Oracle has totally f@$*ed up, different story).

JAB Creations said,
7 is Vista++ so in layman's terms 7 makes Vista look like it's not a TOTAL fail because 7 is a total fail.

Oh sure there are fan boys who think newer is better and open a video game the moment the OS loads.

...and people who don't realize that SuperFetch and all the other crap is slowing their system down by making them wait to "preload" stuff that they won't use.

...and people who think XP users only use IE6 when XP's market share is like 60%+ and IE6's market share is 10-20% TOPS.

Keep clicking four to five times more with 7 and enjoy your arthritis. As for me I'll be sticking with XP until I switch to what I'm currently thinking is Kubuntu once I get those Linux anti-M$ programmers to help me without asking me to go in to the frigin console just to copy and paste files.

7's file manager Windows Explorer is worthless now and there are now two major things called favorites. The My Computer icon is hidden. I was at a neighbors and was not able to make the My Documents folder work ONLY from the D:\ and it kept saving files to the C:\. So many shortcuts and useful features have been removed.

...oh and I have Aero for XP, here is your linkage: http://customize.org/xpthemes/62024

Features removed in Vista...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...es_removed_in_Windows_Vista

Features removed in 7...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...atures_removed_in_Windows_7

Not only is XP stable it also is MUCH more usable and once you undo a lot of the initial junk you can run a clean system. 7 and Vista are NOT customizable and hide/remove useful features and shortcuts while also adding tons of irrelevant junk and renaming half of the things making it a total f#$%ing nightmare for me to deal with when I need to test IE9 in VirtualBox (which Oracle has totally f@$*ed up, different story).

Windows XP's UI is fugly, pathetic and completely unusable. Windows Vista/7's explorer is much more productive and beautiful. The search feature in Windows 7 is awesome. Plus there's Aero Snap and great window management. Simply put Windows 7 has improved productivity by a million times compared to the pathetic XP.

All the features from XP have been replaced by much superior functionality on Windows Vista/7. For example, the pathetic "Up" button of XP's explorer has been replaced by the incredibly useful Breadcrumbs bar in Vista/7. On Windows 7 everything can be done with fewer clicks than on XP. For example, to change screen resolution just type in resolu in the Start Menu search box and immediately you get a link to change screen resolution. On XP one has to remember exactly where this option is buried and click at least 5 or 6 times to get there.
IE9 has by far the best UI of all browsers. It's incredibly minimalistic and functional.

Bottom line is, only pathetic losers who have no idea about computers and Luddites prefer the fugly and unusable XP to the greatest operating system in the history of mankind, Windows 7 .

pezzonovante said,

... The search feature in Windows 7 is awesome...

FWIW, so far (since beta) I've used it for one thing only -- cmd run as admin, which is a non-issue in XP. ;-)

... Plus there's Aero Snap and great window management. Simply put Windows 7 has improved productivity by a million times compared to the pathetic XP.

True, XP doesn't have anything Aero, but I can watch Blu-Ray & other 1080p in XP without having PowerDVD turn Aero off.

Far as productivity goes, I'm sure there's stuff that's enhanced or works better in 7, but for me there's rarely any difference.

...change screen resolution. On XP one has to remember exactly where this option is buried and click at least 5 or 6 times to get there.

I use ATI & their CCC so that's no prob. -- but then again I can't remember changing, or needing to change screen rez. ;-)

...Luddites prefer the fugly and unusable XP...

FWIW, as soon as they were avail. I've jumped on 3.1, 2k, 95, 98, 98SE, XP, Vista, 7, & look forward to 8. I'm in 7 ult SP1 RC 64 right now. Later today I expect I'll be in XP Pro SP3 32 doing some stuff that just doesn't work well, if/when at all, in 7. DO I prefer it? I'd rather not hassle with the re-boot so no. Is my XP Pro install unusable? Hardly... otherwise I wouldn't *have* to use it. Of course the argument can always be made that if 7 won't do whatever, just don't do *that*, whatever *that* is... but that's IMHO just being argumentative. I don't mean to disagree, or argue, but rather just point out another perspective. :-)

Lots of users don't take into consideration the fact that companies pay licenses for a productivity environment.
It's not as easy as install and use WindowsLoader as it is for the vast majority. The fine is pretty huge for companies not using licenses.

using winddows xp at home and in the office.

as long as there are drivers for new hardwares and applications for windows xp, there is no need to upgrade. tell us what is the benefit is.

warr said,
using winddows xp at home and in the office.

as long as there are drivers for new hardwares and applications for windows xp, there is no need to upgrade. tell us what is the benefit is.

take advantage of new hardware the way it's meant to be used. on older hardware it's a user choice.

For the record where I work-- actually upgraded on the work side from a Win2k server to Win2008 Server -- but the workstations on the old computers were NT4 and now they are XP--- But sad to say though --

The software "Opera" (not the browser- but the hotel management system) WILL NOT RUN ON Windows 7 it is completely incompatible and is not 16 bit or old.

We actually tried to install it on the office computer -- and the installer failed even with compatibility modes plus also XP mode-.....Though we did manage on the other hand to get it to install in Virtual Box- but some of the functions did not work. So we are forced to keep a second computer in the office that has XP.

But for the daily reports they do still use the Windows 7 machine.

So until they work out those bugs where I work still has no choice to run XP -- though thank goodness however it is not connected to the web other than the server which has to dial in to get updates.


Shiranui said,
If you can't afford to upgrade, use whatever you like.

Sure, use whatever you want. Just don't whine when software and hardware devs don't support your decrepit OS.

It's foolish to continue to use it as a primary OS after it's been discontinued. Until then I believe it's fine to use, although I would recommend upgrading for security reasons alone. (The new "features" are mostly worthless imo).
I for one will always have it in a VM for backwards compatibility, whether it's supported by Microsoft or otherwise.

Wow. While XP was & still is a great os, there is nothing like Win7. I've been using win7 since beta days & it is very good. Would not use anything else.

78 percent of the 953 participants said they would avoid Office 2010 mainly because of its ribbon

Of all reasons not to upgrade this is about the most childish and ignorant. Yeah, you need to invest a few mintues to learn it and adjust. But your reward is a more intuitive and efficient way of doing just about everything.

C_Guy said,
78 percent of the 953 participants said they would avoid Office 2010 mainly because of its ribbon

Of all reasons not to upgrade this is about the most childish and ignorant. Yeah, you need to invest a few mintues to learn it and adjust. But your reward is a more intuitive and efficient way of doing just about everything.

I can only imagine the amount of computer illiterate people they have working for them. Yes the users will adapt to the new ribbon interface but it will not happen in "Just a few minutes".

C_Guy said,
78 percent of the 953 participants said they would avoid Office 2010 mainly because of its ribbon

Of all reasons not to upgrade this is about the most childish and ignorant. Yeah, you need to invest a few mintues to learn it and adjust. But your reward is a more intuitive and efficient way of doing just about everything.

i really lughed so hard today , when one of co-worker almost cried of the idea of using office 2007 ribbon looooooooool :XD

he is over 45 year old tho

Ci7 said,

i really lughed so hard today , when one of co-worker almost cried of the idea of using office 2007 ribbon looooooooool :XD

he is over 45 year old tho

Seriously, you had a co-worker cry because he didn't wan to use newer software?

Tha Bloo Monkee said,
People don't like change.

They need to get over that. And I don't say that to be an ass, but in the tech world, change literally happens by the minute...

Chris123NT said,
And those 48% would be morons.

I wouldn't call them morons because I have personally never been in charge of 500 PC's in a corporation. I can not even begin to imagine what kind of work and cost is involved with such a drastic upgrade.

There are things to take into account when transitioning an entire corporation from one OS to another. It's not as cut and dry as "and those 48% would be morons"

It's all highly dependent on what the bean counters and higher management say. They're the ones who control the purse strings, and I'm still convinced that many business is in the mode to minimize costs and not spend money. In those folks mind, if it ain't broke, why fix it, and if the XP machines that the actual workers use can do the job, why upgrade? They will only start considering upgrading to Win7 when the limitations of XP affect them. Of course, these are the same people who are stuck on Internet Exploder 6 because their internal web pages can't handle anything else, and they don't want to spend the money on upgrading. (Of course, they have no problem paying the leadership millions for continued profits during this recession... the same millions that could have been used to improve the infrastructure.)

Count me as one of those who will continue to use XP for the forseeable future. It depends on which hard drive I have plugged into my computer. I also have 1TB drives for Win7-32 bit, Win7-64 bit, Ubuntu 32-bit, and Ubuntu 64-bit. I also have, under Virtualbox, XP with IE6, IE7, and IE8 running.

I guess these so-called "pros" are waiting for Windows 8. NAH, who am I kidding? XP will still be super stable in my eyes. Stupid.

Billus said,
I guess these so-called "pros" are waiting for Windows 8. NAH, who am I kidding? XP will still be super stable in my eyes. Stupid.

Fanboy : pros use macs
serious : xp is for pentium / sempron era PC's . Xp was never developed with multicore from the groud-up.

leojei said,
What about those ppl that are still running Win98?

Ah yes, we still have 1 PC running 98, that we can't upgrade because a piece of software that is needed will not run on XP.

This seems like a rather silly study to be honest. First, 2014 is far too far away for someone to claim they're going to stay with XP when in the meantime they'll likely be replacing their computer and end up with 7 anyway... And I'm really not sure why some people are so against the ribbon. Once you get used to it it's really amazing. It is very efficient.

Well, the longer they wait - the more money they save.

And if XP works fine for them - I don't see the need to change immediately. I support switching though, but I can't speak for the business side as they've more requirements to meet and such.

1,700 computers and 2 of us. Well, 1/2 of our large printers do not have Win7 drivers, or "somewhat" work with newer "model" 52xx drivers, or inkjets with no drivers at all. 5 year old Intel MB's that have no Win7 driver support. We install Win7 on what will take it, but many XP machines are still going strong, and it's a good thing, because we would not be able to do them all at the same time anyway. Then there is the whole netbook thing. Old software that is holding records...

3 years ago I was driving a 1991 Cheviot Cavalier. God was that car a piece of crap. It's shocks where basically shot it had no modern day safety features like air bags or anti lock breaks. It was a crappy car that got me from Point A to point B. It was good enough for me.

Everyone who looked at the car always commented what a pile of Junk it was. They told me I should buy a new car. I asked why? Why should I spend money to replace something that right now is doing what I need it to do? Well after a few years stuff started failing and in the end when it was not drive able anymore I bought a used 2007 Ford Escape.

I realize once the end of life comes to XP and no more security update are released then unless disconnected from the net it will be no longer safe to use. But until then if it gets you from point a to point b why spend money to replace it.

+1 I was just thinking of the many people driving cars older than XP, and are happy. XP is not dying anytime soon, so people need to stop pushing others to upgrade.

Doesn't surprise me, however, I think it's time to move on from XP, the only reason I'm using it is because my computer can't handle Vista/7.

I really feel this says more about the features we stand to gain (not that many) by upgrading. XP is nothing special, and 7 is a good OS, its just there is no real improvement in 7 that make it a must have.

Orange Battery said,
I really feel this says more about the features we stand to gain (not that many) by upgrading. XP is nothing special, and 7 is a good OS, its just there is no real improvement in 7 that make it a must have.

I'm blinded by your ignorance.

TCLN Ryster said,

I'm blinded by your ignorance.
No seriously, imagine you own a company and 100 of your workers are currently using 5 year old PCs running Windows XP. Their job require them to use email, office suite and web browsing and that's pretty much it. How much will it cost you to upgrade? Will it be a good investment? (is there a return on the money you're spending or are you just burning money for the sake of it)

Rudy said,
No seriously, imagine you own a company and 100 of your workers are currently using 5 year old PCs running Windows XP. Their job require them to use email, office suite and web browsing and that's pretty much it. How much will it cost you to upgrade? Will it be a good investment? (is there a return on the money you're spending or are you just burning money for the sake of it)

I was referring to the "its just there is no real improvement in 7" comment.

Anyhow, I'm not advocating upgrading old PC's. That doesn't make sense and is just asking for trouble. But most companies refresh their desktops every 3-5 years. I know in my company laptops are refreshed every 3 years, and desktops every 4 years. New PCs come with Windows 7 licenses so it just doesn't make sense to keep rolling out XP now.

Orange Battery said,

Not really ignorance now is it?

Well actually it is lol. Saying there are no real improvements in Windows 7 from Windows XP is just dumb.

They never said that these users would be installing it on new machines. I mean, I wouldn't upgrade any older machine that had XP but if I built a new machine at this point it would definitely have Win7.

XP will have patch support (not saying new versions of WMP, IE, etc however) until 2014.

I have several games that does not like Vista / 7, however it's graphics intensive so VM is not the route to go. I dual boot Xp/7/Ubuntu.

etempest said,
XP will have patch support (not saying new versions of WMP, IE, etc however) until 2014.

I have several games that does not like Vista / 7, however it's graphics intensive so VM is not the route to go. I dual boot Xp/7/Ubuntu.

Running Centos 5.5 x64 in VM. What are you talking about?

People still use it because it costs more money to change. Period. The fact XP still runs okay is just icing on the cake, but not the deciding factor in IT deployment/usage decisions.

Too many people on this forum clearly do not understand how businesses work and only focus on the end home user. If XP is fine for a company, why would they pay hundreds/thousands/hundreds of thousands to upgrade??

Tha Bloo Monkee said,
Too many people on this forum clearly do not understand how businesses work and only focus on the end home user. If XP is fine for a company, why would they pay hundreds/thousands/hundreds of thousands to upgrade??

Because XP is nearly 10 years old, has lots of little issues that make it difficult to support, and because the only updates it will EVER get from now onwards are critical security patches. Also because the 64bit version is obsolete and unsupported (Office 2010 refuses to install on it for example) and the 32bit version is limited to 3.x gb of RAM. Also because it runs worse on new hardware than Windows 7. Also because Offline Files is a bag of poo that keeps failing and losing the offline copies. Also because of the way it handles domain logons, quite frequently not mapping drives in logon scripts or applying user policies correctly.

I could go on, but I'd just bore you.

TCLN Ryster said,

and because the only updates it will EVER get from now onwards are critical security patches.

So what you are saying is.. they are making the current OS safer by patching known holes in the operating system instead up introducing new security vulnerabilities through features updates?

warwagon said,

So what you are saying is.. they are making the current OS safer by patching known holes in the operating system instead up introducing new security vulnerabilities through features updates?


No lol. What I'm saying is that with XP, what you've got now is all you're ever going to get. No new features, no new OS components (IE, Media Player, etc). Any non-security bugs in XP now are bugs forever, they'll never be fixed.

TCLN Ryster said,

No lol. What I'm saying is that with XP, what you've got now is all you're ever going to get. No new features, no new OS components (IE, Media Player, etc). Any non-security bugs in XP now are bugs forever, they'll never be fixed.

so? People running xp have been doing so for a long time and those "bugs" have not affected them yet. All they need / want is security updates.

warwagon said,

so? People running xp have been doing so for a long time and those "bugs" have not affected them yet. All they need / want is security updates.

Some people would be happy with Win 95. Guess they better resume security updates for it too and just drag every one of their OSs behind the bus indefinitely.

If they're keeping XP on older hardware, I don't see the issue. Do you want to fork up the money to upgrade those hundreds/thousands (depending on the company) of computers? Because if they don't have to upgrade it, they won't.

warwagon said,

so? People running xp have been doing so for a long time and those "bugs" have not affected them yet. All they need / want is security updates.


Says who? As a PC technician working for a large UK manufacturing firm, I struggle with the quirks and issues of Windows XP on a daily basis. I can't wait for the day when XP can be retired.

Where I work it's a cost thing that keeps us on XP. As we replace older PC's, they will have Windows 7 on them, but until then XP it is. Although, some of the work we do can be done on Linux, so we may just use that on a few of the machines.

At home, I use XP, the g/f uses Vista. Again, because of cost I will stick with XP until I have to get a new PC. Although at the minute I am dual booting with Mint Linux, so Linux could eb my way to go when needed.

For existing small business where the hardware was bought with xp, there is little reason to upgrade just for the sake of it. None of my staff pc are connecting to the Internet and some printers only have xp drivers.

it's childish and stupid to buy a core i7 machine with over 4 g ram and dx 11 card, but use XP on it, i mean, xp is great in older machines, and sure, it has it's place, but i can't understand those who buy state of the art hardware just to use xp.
People don't get it, Vista was a huge leap and improvement in how the OS works, you have WDDM 1 and 1.1 in W7, the new audio stack (i work with audio, vista/7 have a much better definition for recording and playback), networking stack, security layer, user mode as default account privileges, that eliminates lots of problems people had on xp over the last 9 years.
Vista was a very good OS but these new technologies needed new drivers and big changes to the software used on XP-era machines.
7 is nothing more then small updates and a general cleanup and consistency leveling. People tend to consider it better because we now have stable drivers and mature software to use.

as IT's I respect their preference but they should allow users to migrate to windows 7 and future windows os' and not influence users much to stick to XP indefinitely. their word is gold to most casual users and most will be thrown back to the past instead of moved forward to the future. hardware innovations come faster these days and casual users may/will regret they didn't move on. the longer users stay in XP, the higher the learning curve they face on newer os'.

on the a lighter note: i find this insistence on still using XP these days kinda romantic. also, i dont see any mac users endear themselves this way on any of the osx. thats saying something

3rd impact said,
... but they should allow users to migrate to windows 7 and future windows os' and not influence users much to stick to XP indefinitely...
Never give your users the chance to pick their software. You'll have security holes all over the environment before you know it. The work place needs to be standardized and repeatable on each machine. I say this from experience in working on a 50,000+ machine environment. If they had the choice we'd have NT4 running around here enmass yet. People fear and hate change, but Win7 provides a more stable and secure environment than WinXP.

Keep WinXP if you want at home, but should you complain that apps and games don't run on it anymore when it is retired for commercial sale and almost retired for public support?

3rd impact said,
as IT's I respect their preference but they should allow users to migrate to windows 7 and future windows os' and not influence users much to stick to XP indefinitely. their word is gold to most casual users and most will be thrown back to the past instead of moved forward to the future. hardware innovations come faster these days and casual users may/will regret they didn't move on. the longer users stay in XP, the higher the learning curve they face on newer os'.

on the a lighter note: i find this insistence on still using XP these days kinda romantic. also, i dont see any mac users endear themselves this way on any of the osx. thats saying something

Users should not be allowed to choose their software. There are security and stability issues in a corporate environment that home users do not have to consider. Also, you have to keep in mind software compatibility when migrating OSes in a corporate environment.

zeke009 said,
Never give your users the chance to pick their software. You'll have security holes all over the environment before you know it. The work place needs to be standardized and repeatable on each machine. I say this from experience in working on a 50,000+ machine environment. If they had the choice we'd have NT4 running around here enmass yet. People fear and hate change, but Win7 provides a more stable and secure environment than WinXP.

Keep WinXP if you want at home, but should you complain that apps and games don't run on it anymore when it is retired for commercial sale and almost retired for public support?

take it easy there buddy. you just preached to the coverted we have zero XP machines on our workplace.

48% of IT pros don't care about security. Great.
I wonder what they'll think when 48% of all companies will be hacked...

Aethec said,
48% of IT pros don't care about security. Great.
I wonder what they'll think when 48% of all companies will be hacked...

I agree 100%! What about security updates? What kind of IT pro advises their business to stay with an unprotected OS?

bankajac said,

I agree 100%! What about security updates? What kind of IT pro advises their business to stay with an unprotected OS?

You do realize XP is still being patched, right? And "security" is the entire insfrastructure, not just XP machines

Lexcyn said,
Using Windows 7 with XP mode here (for legaacy applications) - works fine. Glad we ditched XP.

We have been migrating 6000 users to Windows 7. First the Researchers and then the Clinical staff will receive it. XP mode works perfectly well for our old scripts / legacy applications so far. I think some others might be difficult to port/re-write.

There are too many "IT pros" out there giving us a bad rep.

norseman said,

We have been migrating 6000 users to Windows 7. First the Researchers and then the Clinical staff will receive it. XP mode works perfectly well for our old scripts / legacy applications so far. I think some others might be difficult to port/re-write.

There are too many "IT pros" out there giving us a bad rep.

Agreed. Like someone said in a previous comment - it seems anyone with a laptop and a bit of knowledge is an IT Pro these days.

Sorry but I think Windows 7 is much more polished compared to XP. Stability is not an issue on 7 either, personally I've had over a 8 week uptime. I duno, I will personally never use and\or recommend that anyone use XP again now that 7 is here and working extremely well.

Like WinXP users say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Like Win7 users say, "if it ain't broke, you're not trying hard enough."
Like Mac users say, "it's broke! Don't even bother."

java2beans said,
Like WinXP users say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Like Win7 users say, "if it ain't broke, you're not trying hard enough."
Like Mac users say, "it's broke! Don't even bother."

I didn't think there was anything wrong with Windows 98, but I'm not still using it...

norseman said,
Any "ITPro" using XP on their personal computer is no pro in my eyes. Maybe in a VM or something but VM or GTFO.

Yeah, it's amazing how many people consider themselves "IT pros" or "power user" ever though they are so dumb as to believe that Page Files are bad for system performance.

norseman said,
Any "ITPro" using XP on their personal computer is no pro in my eyes. Maybe in a VM or something but VM or GTFO.

Also, what "IT Pro" reads ZDnet still?? Seriously.

norseman said,
Any "ITPro" using XP on their personal computer is no pro in my eyes. Maybe in a VM or something but VM or GTFO.

Well technically this laptop i'm using XP on would be my personal computer. The laptop lives next to my recliner upstairs. All I do with this laptop is monitor my driveway cam and type on digsby and maybe the occasional web surfing. It came with an OEM copy of XP.

So with your methodology I should spend $100 and buy and install windows 7 on this aging machine. Just because XP is not the newest OS on the market?

warwagon said,

Well technically this laptop i'm using XP on would be my personal computer. The laptop lives next to my recliner upstairs. All I do with this laptop is monitor my driveway cam and type on digsby and maybe the occasional web surfing. It came with an OEM copy of XP.

So with your methodology I should spend $100 and buy and install windows 7 on this aging machine. Just because XP is not the newest OS on the market?

Other than being weird (staring at your driveway webcam) what makes you believe you're an ITPro? I forgot that anyone with a laptop is one nowadays.

norseman said,

Other than being weird (staring at your driveway webcam) what makes you believe you're an ITPro? I forgot that anyone with a laptop is one nowadays.

I'm not an IT pro as in I don't support any computer networks. but I'm not a novice and i operate my own computer repair business for the home use and a few business. I stare at my driveway for any customers that my just "show up" or ones that I'm expecting to drop off.

warwagon said,

I'm not an IT pro as in I don't support any computer networks. but I'm not a novice and i operate my own computer repair business for the home use and a few business. I stare at my driveway for any customers that my just "show up" or ones that I'm expecting to drop off.

Sorry about that. Super busy day today @ work. I understand -- I did that for sometime too!
All I am saying is that Windows 7 really is a great OS. If you don't need any of its features and are content with Windows XP I don't see a reason for you to change as long as you keep the updates current and practice safe browsing.

I too am typing this on an XP Laptop-- Main reason I will not upgrade this-- even though it has 1.8Ghz Pentium M -- and 1 gig of memory on an 80 gig partion -- is that This laptop came with an OEM XP. So Cost would be the determining factor. I already have a Windows 7 desktop. When the EOL (that is without Security Updates happen) I will probably Linux this machine that is if it still runs.

48% of IT pros to use XP after it's discontinued = 48% of IT pros are idiots!
and that % is even bigger as more are using xp today.

I'm an IT pro, and I use Windows7 (with RSAT)

Even my slow ass company is in final stages of testing right now and pretty much everyone in IT is already using it. I'd question the relevance of any IT person trying to hang on to XP in a meaningful way. And before anyone comes up with application compatability or expense, IT is a field driven by change, keep up or go work for Geek Squad, work is hard and technology moves fast.

bob_c_b said,
Even my slow ass company is in final stages of testing right now and pretty much everyone in IT is already using it. I'd question the relevance of any IT person trying to hang on to XP in a meaningful way. And before anyone comes up with application compatability or expense, IT is a field driven by change, keep up or go work for Geek Squad, work is hard and technology moves fast.
Well looks like your slow ass company isn't so slow

warwagon said,
I just wish windows 7 wasn't so god damn ugly on computers that don't support aero

But nothing beats the fugliness of Windows XP. Windows 7 is 100 billion times more beautiful and productive than the pathetic and unusable XP even on machines that don't support Aero.

warwagon said,
I just wish windows 7 wasn't so god damn ugly on computers that don't support aero

Ya it is pretty insane. Microsoft must be betting on every new computer having Aero.

pezzonovante said,

But nothing beats the fugliness of Windows XP. Windows 7 is 100 billion times more beautiful and productive than the pathetic and unusable XP even on machines that don't support Aero.

Wow.... you smoke some good stuff
The_DINGUS said,
That's what the Windows Classic theme is for.

Yea but on Vista/7 it looks like ****.... this is coming from someone who loves the classic theme...

pezzonovante said,

But nothing beats the fugliness of Windows XP. Windows 7 is 100 billion times more beautiful and productive than the pathetic and unusable XP even on machines that don't support Aero.

With XP the UI on every computer looks the same. With Windows 7 machines that can't support aero, have the "Oh look this machine doesn't support aero so we are going to make the UI look like ass" look. All of these machines that you want to install windows 7 on that are currently running XP ,especially laptops will have have that chunky unsupported aero look.

I think microsoft should have included a theme for non aero users that looked as natural as XP, minus the fisher price look.

warwagon said,

With XP the UI on every computer looks the same. With Windows 7 machines that can't support aero, have the "Oh look this machine doesn't support aero so we are going to make the UI look like ass" look.


No, the UI on every XP system does not look the same. Some use the fugly default Luna theme, while some use the still fugly Royale theme, but worst of all, some Luddites use the worst UI in the history of computing called "Windows Classic". Where's the consistency? Except for the fact that they are all fugly and unusable?

On the other hand every single PC which have been sold in the last three years support Aero. And PCs which were bought earlier still have a good chance of supporting Aero. Only those PCs from dinosaur age have to use Windows Basic theme, which, although much worse than Aero, is still better than any XP UI.

pezzonovante said,

But nothing beats the fugliness of Windows XP. Windows 7 is 100 billion times more beautiful and productive than the pathetic and unusable XP even on machines that don't support Aero.

Ummm...no. Windows XP Classic VS >>>>>> Windows 7 Classic non-aero style. It was like MS decided they needed to hit it hard with the ugly stick before release.

And here are all the XP haters, anyone stop to think that maybe people like myself I can't afford 6 windows 7 licenses to replace my windows XP machines?

Take in to account games that I have which will not run under windows 7 and companies who have applications that do not work even on Windows Vista that cost millions to develop and will eventually be Windows 7 compatible just not right now.
If there wasn't a demand for it Microsoft would have just dumped it already, but since they still offer support for it why should it stop being used?

Teebor said,
And here are all the XP haters, anyone stop to think that maybe people like myself I can't afford 6 windows 7 licenses to replace my windows XP machines?

Take in to account games that I have which will not run under windows 7 and companies who have applications that do not work even on Windows Vista that cost millions to develop and will eventually be Windows 7 compatible just not right now.
If there wasn't a demand for it Microsoft would have just dumped it already, but since they still offer support for it why should it stop being used?

Well, you can get the Win 7 Family pack that gives you 3 licenses for almost the same cost of one Win7 premium license.

Teebor said,
If there wasn't a demand for it Microsoft would have just dumped it already, but since they still offer support for it why should it stop being used?

The problem is that the new APIs only work in Windows Vista/7 so at some point new software that wants to take advantage of new API features won't work in XP. For instance, the author of Paint.NET said that the next major release will drop XP support. Why? Because he wants Paint.NET to take advantage of the new Windows features. Same reason why a lot of stuff doesn't work in Windows 98 anymore.

" The success of Windows 7 and flop of Vista would convincingly explain why they would move straight to Vista, if the fact that it's the newest version doesn't serve enough precedence."
errr.....typo perhaps?

At my company they are upgrading to Windows 7 w/ new hardware. Old hardware they are keeping with XP. I just got an upgrade w/ Windows 7 and it is rocking my socks at work. The offline files seems to be working (or at least seems easier to work with). I love Aero Snap too. That alone has boosted my productivity.

Xilo said,
Old dinosaurs are afraid of change.

No. Why upgrade when what you currently have is sufficient? Do you buy a car when the newest model comes out just because there is newer? If the car is sufficient, then it suits your needs.

Tha Bloo Monkee said,

No. Why upgrade when what you currently have is sufficient? Do you buy a car when the newest model comes out just because there is newer? If the car is sufficient, then it suits your needs.

How many people do you know that keep a car for about 10 years?

Tha Bloo Monkee said,

No. Why upgrade when what you currently have is sufficient? Do you buy a car when the newest model comes out just because there is newer? If the car is sufficient, then it suits your needs.

thing is, it wont suit your needs much longer if the computer is going to be used to access the internet... things like web standards change, and things like web browsers change with them too... but new programs wont be released for xp anymore for a bunch of reasons

^ Maybe because it doesn't cost thousands of dollars to do? I don't upgrade upgrade my OS because the old one stopped working. I update because the new features make my regular tasks easier or faster.

Xilo said,
Old dinosaurs are afraid of change.

Ever priced the cost of upgrading 1000, 5000, 10000 or more PCs? And not just the software- the employee hours testing the software used in the company, the hours used to install, and the retraining of those end-users that make your company money?

SoCalRox said,

Ever priced the cost of upgrading 1000, 5000, 10000 or more PCs? And not just the software- the employee hours testing the software used in the company, the hours used to install, and the retraining of those end-users that make your company money?

Then how come all companies aren't still running Windows 3.1? You talk as though upgrading is impossible and should never be done, and you believe that its just great to deploy an OS that no longer receives any type of security updates.

Xilo said,

How many people do you know that keep a car for about 10 years?

More than a million. Try traveling to poorer countries such as anywhere in Latin America.

Xilo said,

How many people do you know that keep a car for about 10 years?

Nearly everyone I know. My current vehicles are 18 and 19 years old. Both run fine, and I currently have no reason to get a newer one.

i've been moving my users off XP as fast as i can. if their laptop works fine, then i dont touch it. as soon as there's an 'unfixable' issue, i format and put Vista or 7 on it.

Jdawg683 said,
i've been moving my users off XP as fast as i can. if their laptop works fine, then i dont touch it. as soon as there's an 'unfixable' issue, i format and put Vista or 7 on it.

That's about what our IT is doing. People with XP on their systems are allowed to keep it for now, but if they come to IT wanting something fixed they're getting Windows 7 installed or they aren't getting help.

Jdawg683 said,
i've been moving my users off XP as fast as i can. if their laptop works fine, then i dont touch it. as soon as there's an 'unfixable' issue, i format and put Vista or 7 on it.

i want such an IT support at work

The_DINGUS said,

That's about what our IT is doing. People with XP on their systems are allowed to keep it for now, but if they come to IT wanting something fixed they're getting Windows 7 installed or they aren't getting help.

I want to work for your IT department!

Zdnet = facepalm

Anyone still using XP when it goes EOL is a dumbass. Win7 will have been replaced by then.

ahhell said,
Zdnet = facepalm

Anyone still using XP when it goes EOL is a dumbass. Win7 will have been replaced by then.

Can you imagine trying to run Xp on circa 2013/4 hardware?

Frylock86 said,

Can you imagine trying to run Xp on circa 2013/4 hardware?

Plenty of people here will be doing it, and using it as a reason why MS should extend support another 5 or 6 years.

I believe it

I'm writing this on an XP laptop. I don't understand what the big deal is. It might be old but it's still a very stable usable OS. I can easily have a 30 day update only rebooting for updates. This laptop has been up for 18 days. i know newer is better.

Once updates stop being released for XP then I think it should be time to move on or disconnect it from the net. But until then....

warwagon said,
I believe it

I'm writing this on an XP laptop. I don't understand what the big deal is. It might be old but it's still a very stable usable OS. I can easily have a 30 day update only rebooting for updates. This laptop has been up for 18 days. i know newer is better.

Once updates stop being released for XP then I think it should be time to move on or disconnect it from the net. But until then....

Well, I have to disagree with you. I have a Win 7, c2d with 2 GB of RAM and a 8800 gts at home, that I use to many things, including gaming and software development. At work, I have a c2q, with 4 GB of RAM and a 9600 gt that I use to develop software as well, and there is no comparison, my Win 7 machine is way faster, things are much fluid and smoother (man my workstation sometimes have applications freeze for a couple of secnds and I loose productivity due to this).

The good thing is that my company is migrating to Win 7 (all new computers come with it installed) and only one application has issues with it (and only a few people use it anyways)

sviola said,

Well, I have to disagree with you.

So, because your experiences is different to his makes him wrong? you are a ****ing genius.

sanctified said,

So, because your experiences is different to his makes him wrong? you are a ****ing genius.

I never said he was wrong. I only said I disagreed with him, and pointed my experience with both OSes.

You should be more polite though.

warwagon said,
I believe it

I'm writing this on an XP laptop. I don't understand what the big deal is. It might be old but it's still a very stable usable OS. I can easily have a 30 day update only rebooting for updates. This laptop has been up for 18 days. i know newer is better.

Once updates stop being released for XP then I think it should be time to move on or disconnect it from the net. But until then....

100% Agree. Im on a very stable, very fast XP Machine. I still prefer the non bloated look XP has over Vista and 7, and neither of them have offered me anything that matters to me.

I hold a lot of files (as we all do now) and would love Explorer to have more detail and file manipulation, a decent tagging system for any type of file - Id buy Window 8 in seconds if it had that and pay twice the price of 7. Im not interest in gadgets, big task bars and tool bars which are set the way MS wants - I want an operating system I can make my own - and I don't mean by changing the colour of the taskbar or the size of the icons.

I stick with XP because I have no incentive to upgrade, I wish i did.

sviola said,

Well, I have to disagree with you. I have a Win 7, c2d with 2 GB of RAM and a 8800 gts at home, that I use to many things, including gaming and software development. At work, I have a c2q, with 4 GB of RAM and a 9600 gt that I use to develop software as well, and there is no comparison, my Win 7 machine is way faster, things are much fluid and smoother (man my workstation sometimes have applications freeze for a couple of secnds and I loose productivity due to this).

The good thing is that my company is migrating to Win 7 (all new computers come with it installed) and only one application has issues with it (and only a few people use it anyways)

I agree. A system with those specs should be running Windows 7. That machine has some life left in it. But my Pentium M 1.6mhz laptop with a DirectX 8 compatible graphics card, not so much. I see no reason spending $100 on that laptop to install Windows 7. As well as spending money to add more ram. Right now it's sitting at 768 megs of ram.

These companies have Old windows XP machines that are doing EVERYTHING they need them to do. They are working great and are getting the job done. But now they should throw a ton of money at them to upgrade them to Windows 7. I understand their hand will be forced once xp is not supported anymore. But it's just sad they have to upgrade at all if they having a perfectly working system doing quite well for them.

Orange Battery said,

100% Agree. Im on a very stable, very fast XP Machine. I still prefer the non bloated look XP has over Vista and 7, and neither of them have offered me anything that matters to me.

I hold a lot of files (as we all do now) and would love Explorer to have more detail and file manipulation, a decent tagging system for any type of file - Id buy Window 8 in seconds if it had that and pay twice the price of 7. Im not interest in gadgets, big task bars and tool bars which are set the way MS wants - I want an operating system I can make my own - and I don't mean by changing the colour of the taskbar or the size of the icons.

I stick with XP because I have no incentive to upgrade, I wish i did.

Windows 7 has a tagging system for any type of file.... no ?

warwagon said,

I agree. A system with those specs should be running Windows 7. That machine has some life left in it. But my Pentium M 1.6mhz laptop with a DirectX 8 compatible graphics card, not so much. I see no reason spending $100 on that laptop to install Windows 7. As well as spending money to add more ram. Right now it's sitting at 768 megs of ram.

These companies have Old windows XP machines that are doing EVERYTHING they need them to do. They are working great and are getting the job done. But now they should throw a ton of money at them to upgrade them to Windows 7. I understand their hand will be forced once xp is not supported anymore. But it's just sad they have to upgrade at all if they having a perfectly working system doing quite well for them.

School computers come with Windows Vista and now this year we have at least a hundred computers that came with Windows 7. Wanna know what happened to them all--networked booted to XP or it was erased and XP was put on. The computers were powerful too.

SX86 said,

Windows 7 has a tagging system for any type of file.... no ?

I don't believe you can, well at least you couldn't during the Betas. Can you add tags to text files and to folders now?

Dashel said,
No IT 'Pro' is still running WinXP.

I guess you speak for them all. I've seen plenty of IT departments still running XP. I don't care for the features of Vista or 7 which is why I still use XP.

warwagon said,
I believe it

I'm writing this on an XP laptop. I don't understand what the big deal is. It might be old but it's still a very stable usable OS. I can easily have a 30 day update only rebooting for updates. This laptop has been up for 18 days. i know newer is better.

Once updates stop being released for XP then I think it should be time to move on or disconnect it from the net. But until then....

Why not try Ubuntu? It's free, and breathes life into any old computer. Run a live CD to make sure it is fully compatible and away you go!

Dashel said,
No IT 'Pro' is still running WinXP.

You obviously don't work in a company that enforces standards on their desktop installs and has a large enough number of PCs that they have to consider the cost.

I'm been an IT professional since you were a gleam in Daddy's eye, and I am stuck using XP because that is the standard at the client I am with these days. It's up to the management, not the IT professional.

Dashel said,
No IT 'Pro' is still running WinXP.

I am working for one of Australia's largest retailers as a 3rd Level Systems Engineer looking after two data centers using a laptop that runs Windows XP. As SoCAlRox mentioned it is up to management and the business. To upgrade to Windows 7 for over 5000+ machines would cost a fortune. Please think before you post....

Electric Jolt said,

School computers come with Windows Vista and now this year we have at least a hundred computers that came with Windows 7. Wanna know what happened to them all--networked booted to XP or it was erased and XP was put on. The computers were powerful too.

I see it all the time. I install these pc's. They have 7 Pro come with them and then wiped to put XP Pro. Big waste. In my eyes, 7 is a lot more productive and has a lot more potential than XP ever had.

Dashel said,
No IT 'Pro' is still running WinXP.

The definition of an IT Professional would be someone that gets paid to work in IT. As such, IT pros are still running WinXP, I'm a good example as well as a few people above me.

I work for a large, global data recovery company and we still use XP on our 3,000 XP desktops and blade workstations just because our devs haven't coded their tools to work in 7. It is coming, though, as we found that transfer speeds across the network for our recovered image files transfer nearly twice the speed than XP.