As WinXP Deadline Looms, OEMs Turn To Vista Downgrade Rights

Microsoft may be preparing to discontinue sales of Windows XP, but some OEMs have found a way to circumvent the software giant's June 30 deadline.

In yet another sign of the market's resistance to Windows Vista, Dell Computer, Hewlett Packard (NYSE:HPQ), and Sony on Wednesday all confirmed plans to exercise the downgrade rights Microsoft offers with OEM versions of Windows Vista Business and Vista Ultimate in order to continue offering XP-equipped PCs to their customers.

Downgrade rights, which Microsoft also offers to volume licensing customers, give users the ability to roll back to the previous version of the product they're using. Downgrade rights have existed since 2001 for Windows, but many Microsoft partners say they've been seeing a recent uptick in the number of customers exercising downgrade rights to roll Vista back to XP Professional.

View: The Full Article @ CRN

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

What Happened to Operation Aborted?

Next Story

Microsoft Reports Record Third-Quarter Revenue

91 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Many talks about the Win2000/XP launches but they forget that Win2000 was really a terror to install in those days. Incompatibilites here and there, apps not working properly, drivers weren't available, and so on. Microsoft took this experience before launching XP (which is win2000-based).

Just remember that XP was delayed many times. When it came out, most drivers and software vendors already had, or were about to, patch software and updated drivers. So, the transition of people from Win98, Win98 SE to XP went better than XP to Vista.

But i remember that almost every piece of software and drivers weren't compatible with XP with it came out. Before XP SP2, XP was really "average" and had a ton of issues.

I'm not selling Vista to anyone, so i will keep to myself any comments. I prefer it over XP in a number of ways though.

For a company, supporting a very old OS is really not a business because no matter the number of copies sold, the support for it cost more than the already deployed vista. So, i agree with MS in this one.

That OEM's are using this downgrade rights is just because many of the equipment they sell are not 100% vista ready. May it be hardware, drivers, own applications, etc.

Meanwhile, stick to the OS of your choice. Everyone has something to like/hate.

Buy a tablet PC and see how Vista performs on it and XP "*****y" Tablet PC version. Ive installed Vista, XP, Ubuntu, Shift, and just about all you can with all working drivers and there is no way in the world that any of them can perform half as well as vista as well as what vista gives you - penflicks and so on. Installing third party to do the same is irritating and highly non configurable. Its upto perception anyways - but for my HP tablet, Vista is definitely the way to go!

I had installed in the same computer windows XP and some time ago i installed windows vista , Vista works better in my computer than XP , and all programs i have also works perfectly in Vista.

Please post a complete script of how you require people to behave then we can consider whether we wish to perform in your upcoming play called 'Perfectionism'.

(inbound39 said @ #30.1)
Please post a complete script of how you require people to behave then we can consider whether we wish to perform in your upcoming play called 'Perfectionism'. :D

It makes it easier to read.

Applications and High end filter packages are not cheap....cost will always determine whether the businessman buys or not. Keeping costs down is how money is made. I know of a lot of people in my industry here that have stayed with XP thus far for similar reasons to me. Vista does not cut the mustard. Art and Design is a competitive field and cost and speed of delivery and quality product is what keeps the successful producer in the ballgame.

I had constant problems with ZBrush,PSP8,Photoshop7, Carrara Pro and Ulead Cool 3D not to mention Flexi Sign that I use on my vinyl cutter and plotter. Many of the photoshop filters either do not work or react below par. It was too much of a bother to continue working with it. If you have deadlines to meet you cannot waste time trying to get an OS to cooperate. I remember when ME was getting rubbished and I used that successfully for two and a half years with no crashes or problems. I use the older version of Photoshop because it is less bloated than the CS Versions and still gives me more than satisfactory results. I still use Illustrator 10 ALSO. PSP 8.10 was the last great JASC Version before Corel got a hold of it and made a mess of it. The perspective filters in Corel versions have never acted like they did in JASC Version 8. Of course if you have never used that version and only used Corel then that is what you have got used to. I have no possible reason to lie about my experience. I have presented my encounter honestly. If you do Graphics work there is no point having a piddling HD. I have always had fairly hefty hard drives to cope with the rendering. The one I currently use is a Pentium 4 with 160gb HD and 4gb of RAM. I also use 3DSMAX and VUE. Depends on what I am doing. I have full range of KPT and Flaming Pear. You might have time to surf the net looking for patches but if I can work without interruption instead of fault finding then that is the economical optimum for me and the customer. I may well try Vista again at some point but right now I get everything I need from XP. It has always impressed me that Boxxi created such great work with Photoshop 5 so it is not the latest and greatest that produces the best work. It comes down to the operator using it. I have a CS2 version 9 of Photoshop and was astounded at all the crap that loads with it, half of which I never need to use. Another reason why I stuck with Version 7. I keep my diskspace as free as possible so my render speeds are faster. I had no problems on previous upgrades as I said. Vista caused me to much downtime which is why I removed it. Whether you agree or not is of little consequence. I do what I need to do not what people think I need to do. XP has never given me any problems since I loaded it. I noticed a speed improvement when I moved from ME to XP and a speed loss when I moved to Vista. That is my experience. I am aware people are having different experiences with Vista. If it works for you then great...keep using it. It does not suit my purpose. Roll on Windows 7.....maybe they will get that right. I did not need patches for my software on previous upgrades.

You can give reasons why you're using older versions of software, but you can't expect such older versions of said software to always work on brand new operating systems. Photoshop 7 is six years old... Many things have changed in programming practices as well as security.

It's not Microsoft's fault that you're using outdated software and encountering problems on a brand new operating system. You can either update everything or stick with your older software on an older operating system, but you certainly have no room to complain that Vista isn't running software that hasn't been updated or patched in years.

(gigapixels said @ #28.1)
You can give reasons why you're using older versions of software, but you can't expect such older versions of said software to always work on brand new operating systems. Photoshop 7 is six years old... Many things have changed in programming practices as well as security.

It's not Microsoft's fault that you're using outdated software and encountering problems on a brand new operating system. You can either update everything or stick with your older software on an older operating system, but you certainly have no room to complain that Vista isn't running software that hasn't been updated or patched in years.

My question is, if his choice of software worked perfectly in XP why not in Vista?

I have followed these Vista forum posts for some weeks and what the Vista fans fail to grasp is this. I am a self employed Graphic Designer. It is how I earn a living. I need a reliable system to do my work on. When Vista came out I got a copy given to me by the firm I buy my computer gear from and who also fix or do maintenance work on my equipment. I installed it and gave it a whirl. No argument that it is impressive to look at. I loaded all my graphics apps. Some simply would not load whilst others performed poorly. Of the ones that did work I then found many of my filters and plugs would not. Not good enough sorry. From a business point of view and from my experience if an OS cannot run what I use then it is of no possible use to me. I went from 95 to 98 to ME to XP without a hitch. All my apps functioned with every upgrade even when I purchased newer versions. I am not about to toss a computer that works well in the bucket just to buy a bigger computer just to run Vista to web surf on. Microsoft in my view has made a tragic mistake here and left many people like me completely out of their thought process. Did anyone test it before it was launched? How can they expect businesses to embrace it if their tried and true applications do not work on it. Why would businesses throw perfectly good computers away and buy new computers just so they can run Microsoft Windows Vista? Sorry it makes no logical sense and the system has proved itself to not be worthy upgrading to and certainly not worth the price tag. I will stick with XP until Vista is capable of replacing XP. Currently it is not. It would be interesting to see statistics of those who have gone back to XP after getting a similar experience to me. I am not against Vista....it is simply not fit for my purposes. Economically it is unviable. Microsoft and their technical staff need to open their ears and eyes and realise they are making computers for users to use. If they are unusable and launched as unusable they are simply limiting and damaging their primary market. I use my Vista disk as an ornament these days.....LOL. It is the first OS launched that needed a brand new computer to run it. Maybe microsoft should include a computer free with the disk.

Can you give any sort of example of these applications? I'm a graphic/web designer on the side as well as a hobbyist photographer, and I have all of the relevant Adobe applications installed and everything worked without a single issues. Now, either you're making this up (which would explain why you didn't mention the names of any of these "graphics apps" that you use), or you didn't check the manufacturer's website for any patches and such. If applications did not work with Vista, it was generally caused by much older applications, and even then I haven't found a single application that I've used regularly that hasn't worked properly. But honestly that point is moot seeing as that was over a year ago and, since then, most applications that were having issues, however infrequent, simply do not anymore (as long as they were updated as they should be if they're made by any sort of reputable software developer).

And I guess you really don't remember the days of 98/2000 -> XP, as I certainly do remember looking at the XP system requirements and thinking "OH MY GOD!" XP had quite a good amount of difference, though it doesn't seem as drastic as Vista since the hardware itself hadn't changed as much between 98/2000 and XP as it did between XP and Vista, but relatively it was pretty similar. People could still install XP on a regular machine they had, but performance was frankly pretty bad if you didn't meet the minimum system requirements.

I don't think people should be forced to use Vista, but I think that keeping XP available any longer is ridiculous, as many of the initial Vista issues have been ironed out. As long as customers are informed that perhaps something like their old Canon printer might not work with Vista (which I blame wholly on Canon and their shoddy driver support), then they should have few, if any, problems switching over. The biggest hump is getting used to the way things work differently, and as long as you have an open mind about that, you should have a very smooth transition.

I've had one issue with vista and i've had it on this machine since it's release , i reinstalled my cd-rom drivesd and when i restarted my user profile didn't get loaded and my desktop was back to default, it gave me a pop-up saying my profile didn't load right and i should restart, so i did and everything was fine.XP downgrade is fine if they do it right,if joe blow user purchase a computer that wont really be able to handle vista all that great the oems should allow them to downgrade and let them know why they can, if they get a fairly nice system downgrading shouldn't be an option.

To some extent, this is actually starting to happen. I bought an Acer laptop a couple of months ago (my first laptop) and I noticed something interesting on the Acer forum at Notebook and Laptop Reviews site. Some people wanted to replace Vista with XP but were having problems finding XP drivers for the hardware Acer uses.

If you give yourself the time to look around, you always find all the drivers you need. They will not usually list the XP drivers for PCs or Notebooks that came with Vista, but you will find them if you look at similar model that came with XP.

Or sometimes, like in the case of a motherboard with an Nvidia chipset, you'll get the right drivers from the Nvidia website.

Acer are actually the easiest one to upgrade, and their people are very helpful with that. For Notebooks I sell, I was able to order reinstallation disk for XP from Acer. All the Vista Business one come with the XP disk by default.

Problem is the upgradation from XP to Vista comes with a price. I am a die hard fan of XP, but am using Vista nowadays. And Vista is pretty good, I'm happy with this OS. The reason I like it over XP is just cause it gives a shiny look to my Desktop and makes it look more attractive.

Why did I move to Vista? I got another gig of RAM, a new GPU, a c2d, blah blah. Okay so the point is, the transition from 2000 to XP, did not demand such a huge upgrade in hardware as the transition from XP to Vista demands. Thats where Vista falls back in the line. People don't realize not everyone can afford new hardware or not everybody is in the favor or spending money just so they can have a new OS. My friends are still working on XP, all of them. Their hardware can't support vista and they don't see any point in upgrading, since XP is doing everything Vista can, only faster.

Not to lie, I am also considering downgrading to XP, but not cause im a Vista hater (which I have been in the past), but cause my computer sometimes crashes, which is something I can't live with. Despite doing countless tests, no solution in sight, while XP works flawlessly. Everyone will agree, Microsoft is trying to shove Vista down the consumer's throat, whether they want it or not. It is in the best interest of Microsoft to extend the life-cycle of XP by another one or two years until Windows 7 is in sight and majority of consumers have upgraded their computer. The day hardware and softwares start to roll out exclusively for Windows Vista, that will be the day when people will consider to upgrade. But which company wants to lose out on their profits? So they cater to all OSs, atleast of Microsoft, cause thats where their majority user base exists.

Microsoft boasts about selling maximum liscences of Vista than anyother OS of it, what i see is, they have practically shoved/forced or guided the blind consumer to buy what they want them to. Vista is great and so is XP. A world exists where both can live together.

(sibot said @ #21)
Okay so the point is, the transition from 2000 to XP, did not demand such a huge upgrade in hardware as the transition from XP to Vista demands. Thats where Vista falls back in the line. People don't realize not everyone can afford new hardware or not everybody is in the favor or spending money just so they can have a new OS. My friends are still working on XP, all of them. Their hardware can't support vista and they don't see any point in upgrading, since XP is doing everything Vista can, only faster.

The problem with that logic is the time frame. There was only about a year in between 2000 and XP releases so there wasn't that much hardware advances during that time. The difference between XP and Vista is of course 6 years and there has been a lot of advancements during that period. So why not make an OS to take advantage of today's technology instead of 2001?

(midway40 said @ #21.1)
The problem with that logic is the time frame. There was only about a year in between 2000 and XP releases so there wasn't that much hardware advances during that time. The difference between XP and Vista is of course 6 years and there has been a lot of advancements during that period. So why not make an OS to take advantage of today's technology instead of 2001?

Your logic fails in more ways than one.

God damn, just give it a rest already.

People won't stop buying computers if they're not given the choice to XP. People need to be forced into it in order to realize that IT'S AN EXCELLENT PIECE OF SOFTWARE. The reason most people want XP on a new computer is that they hear a bunch of BS about Vista from somebody they know who read that BS on the internet from some idiot blogger who thinks he knows everything about computers. It's getting ridiculous.

This is true about the BS going around. Some weeks ago I was shopping on NewEgg for a new desktop. I always read the customer reviews about a product to get a feel for it. These are actual quotes I came across:

"Vista is not that bad. I don't understand why people blow it up..."

"It works flawlessly even though I have heard bad things about windows vista, it gives me no problems."

"Vista is much more user-friendly than everyone had told me."

Yes, I am familiar with that rather quaint little article. But I am more to believe "real world" users than someone who might have a hidden agenda. Sorry, it just does not cut the mustard here.

Houuu ! You're dissing PC World. Wow. Sorry but for us, expert in this business, they have a solid reputation.

You're choosing to believe what you want to believe.

If you're willing to do the exercise, go look at some of the forum on the PC builder's website. For example, HP. You will find post after post of people looking for drivers to reinstall XP on their Vista-pre-installed PCs and Notebooks. That's "real world".

(Captain555 said @ #20.4)
If you're willing to do the exercise, go look at some of the forum on the PC builder's website. For example, HP. You will find post after post of people looking for drivers to reinstall XP on their Vista-pre-installed PCs and Notebooks. That's "real world".

Even more "real world" is when I get customers in at Circuit City who spew ridiculousness about Vista and how it's somehow bad, but they have no idea why. And then when I explain to them the differences and the reasons for any potential problems, they're much more comfortable with a Vista machine than they were before.

All this "fear" of Vista is simply from hearsay. Uninformed users are telling other uninformed users and so on that Vista is bad, and by the time it gets to customers going on a quest to find a machine that still has XP, that customer has no idea why they shouldn't go with Vista but just that it's "bad." Nobody's giving Vista a chance and seeing that it is indeed an excellent operating system but that it just takes some getting used to.

To midway40: Good point. But don't just take my word for it.

To +gigapixels: Oh, so you're the one.

I agree with you about your customers at Circuit City. But then you don't get to see them in 2 or 3 months. I do. They might not have known why Vista was "bad", but when I see them, they do.

Most of them are ready to pay for an XP license and pay for my time to reinstall it for them. I've been doing at least a dozen a month since Vista came out. And I'm in small town.

Personally I love Vista. I make money as the alternative to your big store by selling XP installed computers or I make money when you sell them a Vista computers. It's a win-win for me.

(Captain555 said @ #20.7)
Oh, so you're the one.

I agree with you about your customers at Circuit City. But then you don't get to see them in 2 or 3 months. I do. They might not have known why Vista was "bad", but when I see them, they do.

Most of them are ready to pay for an XP license and pay for my time to reinstall it for them. I've been doing at least a dozen a month since Vista came out. And I'm in small town.

Personally I love Vista. I make money as the alternative to your big store by selling XP installed computers or I make money when you sell them a Vista computers. It's a win-win for me.


Don't make assumptions, thanks. I'm not a computer salesman, I'm a firedog technician, and I couldn't care less whether a customer buys a computer at my store or orders one online from Dell or HP so that they can still get XP installed. What I do care about, however, is when customers are afraid to buy Vista because they're completely uninformed of the real issues they might face. I do get some customers back with some minor issues, but it's very infrequent. Most of my work is done removing viruses and spyware on XP machines.

(Captain555 said @ #20.7)
To midway40: Good point. But don't just take my word for it.


I won't. If I took all the words that were said about Vista in the beginning, I probably wouldn't have upgraded. But I saw past the FUD that was being spread around about it--such as stories of how Vista would either delete all of your non-DRM media or report you to the RIAA to Vista having a backdoor to the FBI. This reminds me of a paper I wrote in college about the launch of Sputnik and it's impact on America at the time. I saw a headline in a newspaper from back then stating "REDS BOMB THE MOON!" (FUD is exactly not a new thing, lol).

When you have this much disinformation going around of course people will be leery of it when they buy a new computer. And because of it's differences (which are definitely for the better) they will not spend much time on it before giving up after already having all these preconceived notions about it. But as I illustrated above, at least some people have a mind of their own and saw past the paradigm. I'm for one am not a technological Luddite.

I still don't get the Vista hate. I've had it installed since last October and a number of my friends have installed it as well and all their computers run perfectly fine and their system specs are much lower than mine. For many of them it has taken some time to get used to the way things are changed here and there in Vista but in the end they seem to like what's been done for the most part.

I also run MacOS X Leopard on my machine and guess what, it runs just as well as Vista. Vista boots and shuts down faster but overall the user experience is great on both operating systems. Neither is without faults and both have some things that are better than the other.

Without even reading the comments (which might be a bit of a troll myself), I bet i can spot FUDposts from Foub, toadeater, LTD and company. Sigh. Neowin is getting mundane lately.

"I'm out in the field selling and most customers still aren't comfortable going with Vista,....

This is it, right there, in a nutshell. It's what people feel comfortable with. And in the business world, that makes all the difference. End-users haven't got the time or the inclination to learn how to do things differently. Remember, a lot of these users have only ever used XP, and the very idea of change for... what reason exactly? Because it's new? It simply doesn't out-weigh the comfort factor.

(abulfares said @ #16.1)
but aren't those the same customers who broke their comfort and switched from 2000 to XP?

XP is just windows 2k with a enhanced multimedia (and gaming) experience (xp w, vista instead is a eyecandy and burdensome xp version.

Also XP in fact is MORE compatible that windows 2k with legacy software (dos and windows9x), Vista instead is less compatible with legacy, 2k and xp software.

(abulfares said @ #16.1)
but aren't those the same customers who broke their comfort and switched from 2000 to XP?

No, not necessarily. In my experience, the majority of end-users in todays modern businesses have only ever used XP, and work procedures and practices are based around that OS and whatever apps they use on it. Their argument is "it works for me, so why should I change?" So far there hasn't been a compelling enough reason to do so.

2000 to XP wasn't really such a quantum leap, and users could easily adjust, and in fact welcome the extra functionality XP brought. But that was 7 or 8 years ago. Since then users have gotten used to XP. You could argue that they are "stuck in their ways". I wouldn't disagree. Unfortunately, this very fact makes switching to Vista unwelcome.

(Magallanes said @ #16.2)
Vista instead is less compatible with legacy, 2k and xp software.

Which is 99.99% of the (windows) digital world.

Meanwhile while there is evidence EVERYWHERE that more than proves vi$ta is a steaming pile, the M$ fanboy excuse machine is still running strong despite the many defeats the fanboys have suffered.

(Danrarbc said @ #15.1)
Wow. That's all I can say.

This steaming pile of a comment has made me speechless.

Good, we don't need anymore comments from the peanut gallery.

sony its doing this for a while, they include a windows xp pro dvd for downgrade in their vaios. Its good to have a choice vista or XP, in my case i prefer vista with a brand new machine, but if something happens i have an option there.

It comes down to this. On the same hardware is XP faster than Vista, does it use far less disk space, less memory? Yes. Now that is perfectly ok assuming that Vista actually offers me a better computing experience. Does Vista offer me personally anything that XP doesn't? No, it does not. Well it's more stable though, right? Oh well not really. More compatible? Oh, actually less at the current time. Well that sure makes it a tough choice...which should I choose? Decisions...

Nope, I loved XP when it came out. Well not the Luna theme but with the classic theme I never had any complaints with it.

You have to question the people who so XP is outdated. Its reliable, less bloated and credits the user with some baisc pc knowledge. Vista is a big bubble of friendly chunky buttons for the novice user. Its easy to use because you can only have your ui one way, Microsoft's "my child's first operating system" way.

Huh, what? How is XP any less a user friendly UI created for the utter novice (Luna)? I think both systems are completely brain dead and give the user little choice by default (though this is easily changed). I think if anything, Vista might actually be a little too complex for the average user who doesn't want to mess with learning a slightly altered interface, use UAC because he prefers to chick first and think later, and likely suffers from impaired vision because to him their is little difference between the XP and Vista interface.

Oh downgrade rights... I remember when XP came out and at work it was this all over again "We arnt going to that new XP os because I heard it's junk... *call to hp to get rights to downgrade to 2000*".......

i think that its more about people complaining about everything always.

give it time, let vista mature like XP did. sure have performance, compatibility and reliability issues but they will get fixed eventually. Its not that vista its totally a mess, have its opcion improvements that carry over previous windows version

(eilegz said @ #10.2)
give it time, let vista mature


It's been well over a year and a service pack later, how much more time does vi$ta need? will we all be grey and bald before we see vi$ta turn into something worth using?

(Captain555 said @ #10.1)
History repeating itself. Make you wonder how come Microsoft doesn't learn from their mistake. :D

There is no mistake. It'd be impossible to release a relevant bug-free OS that supports all the hardware Windows has to support from day one. Sure you could take 2 more years of internal bug squashing but then all the tech in the OS is 2 years older (hence my point about being relevant), and you still have the issue where some companies won't work on drivers until AFTER an OS releases and there's a user base to make it 'worth it' (see: Creative)


(James Riske said @ #10.3)


It's been well over a year and a service pack later, how much more time does vi$ta need? will we all be grey and bald before we see vi$ta turn into something worth using?


It is something worth using. I remember pre-SP1 XP, Vista pre-SP1 is a hell of a lot better than that was (and I upgraded from a crashy ME install so don't tell me my XP wasn't already a step up, but I certainly had problems). For me it feels like the two SP1s are on-par, they fixed many of my nags in both cases.

One thing I will say is right now XP is far faster than Vista still. With SP1 I found that, on a clean install, all of my hardware is now detected and installed. However performance is still lacking. I do realize that Aero is probably a big part of it but my system also ran hotter and the drive activity was higher with Vista due to other factors. I also had compatibility issue with certain products working together. Both products are vista compatible but for some reason would not work together.

Ok and MS does not see this as a want to keep XP alive? Did not Steve B not say XP could stay... Lets see we roll out SP3 in April and then stop OEM sales in June. Lets face it Vista is not what it should or could have been. (Not a MS hater neither fanboys I do run a Vista PC in the throng of the 6 in house) But lets face it with the lessons learned from the roll out of ME they would (should) have learned not to release before its time.

(Apple-a-Day said @ #7)
Ok and MS does not see this as a want to keep XP alive? Did not Steve B not say XP could stay... Lets see we roll out SP3 in April and then stop OEM sales in June. Lets face it Vista is not what it should or could have been. (Not a MS hater neither fanboys I do run a Vista PC in the throng of the 6 in house) But lets face it with the lessons learned from the roll out of ME they would (should) have learned not to release before its time.

No, they don't. Anything less than millions of people complaining and they're not going to care, nor should they. Why cater to the minority when the majority are happy?

why don't u grab a copy of Win98 while u r at it. and make sure that copy is SE to ensure minimal "illegal operations" error messages. XP gave me nothing but BSODs and I was formatting every 3 months. with Vista, its been 13 months, not a single format, not a single BSOD and I am running nVidia drivers. I mean XP on new systems? please.

again, I am not taking about those who own older hardware. those should run XP fine.

All hail user-made feedbacks!

Come on, it's NEOwin, what do you expect?

Did you knew that I actually have a penguin in my fridge? And I wear my communist GPL hat all days? We've got a geek gathering at the Party's convention!

(Azmodan said @ #5.1)
All hail user-made feedbacks!

Come on, it's NEOwin, what do you expect?

Did you knew that I actually have a penguin in my fridge? And I wear my communist GPL hat all days? We've got a geek gathering at the Party's convention!

r u high or something? yeah nothing beats an actual user experience.

again, older hardware should stick to XP, but for newer systems, its a waste.

and regarding that penguin and communist hat, good for ya buddy. whatever makes u sleep the night.

did you check your hardware? a swollen capacitor can trigger BSODs more frequently than animal farts on a farm.

check your motherboard and your graphics card, since you thought you needed to update your drivers so often. a bad video card (blown capacitors) was responsible for my cronic BSOD on Vista 32.

(abulfares said @ #5.2)

r u high or something? yeah nothing beats an actual user experience.

again, older hardware should stick to XP, but for newer systems, its a waste.

and regarding that penguin and communist hat, good for ya buddy. whatever makes u sleep the night.

Not only that but sometimes you can't even find the drivers for the hardware so you can use it in XP. Dell is providing seperate configurators for XP and Vista on their website because of this. Some hardware that you can use in Vista is not available in the XP configurators.

(Captain555 said @ #5.4)
Hey +abulfares, you like Vista. Good for you. I'm not going to rain on your parade.

People who prefer XP should have the choice.

dude, I am a Mac user (thank god). my positive experience with Vista vs. XP comes from the family PC.

between Vista and XP, I would take Vista anytime, but I don't really care if MS would shutdown today b4 tomorrow. Its yr PC and its yr time spent on it; u have the right to choose the best combo that works for u.

I love when the Vista defenders try to compare using XP to being basically the same as using Windows 98. Because that's a totally valid comparison.

(TRC said @ #5.7)
I love when the Vista defenders try to compare using XP to being basically the same as using Windows 98. Because that's a totally valid comparison. :rolleyes:

Yeah, just like the comparison between Vista and WinMe.

(Azmodan said @ #5.1)
All hail user-made feedbacks!

Come on, it's NEOwin, what do you expect?

Did you knew that I actually have a penguin in my fridge? And I wear my communist GPL hat all days? We've got a geek gathering at the Party's convention!

Come again?

(Captain555 said @ #5.4)
Hey +abulfares, you like Vista. Good for you. I'm not going to rain on your parade.

People who prefer XP should have the choice.


THANK YOU! The people want it, then microsoft should sell it. Simple. It doesn't matter if vista is better or not. If they want the "inferior" Windows, Microsoft will still make money. Why do they care?

(ikyouCrow said @ #5.3)
did you check your hardware? a swollen capacitor can trigger BSODs more frequently than animal farts on a farm.

check your motherboard and your graphics card, since you thought you needed to update your drivers so often. a bad video card (blown capacitors) was responsible for my cronic BSOD on Vista 32.

Ya, I've seen alot of video cards do that.

Here's a definition in the dictionary for OBSOLETE:

- no longer in general use; fallen into disuse. example: an obsolete expression.

There are a lot more XP out there right now than Vista.

On top of that with SP3 coming out, XP will be just like a brand new OS.

Obsolete ? I don't think so.

Of course it's stupidity! People should go for the new OS, the big software bloat everyone likes! They're just hanging themselves, really!

Why people hates the new and shiny OS? Because it's like MacOSX or a nix distro with CompizFusion, but over 10 times the memory/cpu/gpu cost? Why don't you just buy a new computer, you poor people!

Or the great protection system that comes shipped with it! The complete black screen / insert password is there just for your safety, you stupid! What if it doesn't remembers you did the same action 5 seconds ago... No matter how annoying or concurrent it is, it's for your SAFETY! Exception rules? Are you crazy? Disabling it? You shouldn't be allowed to post in the Internets!

Explorer pane that doesn't hide the "default" locations? Why would you hide them? Un-resizable menus? You should be ashamed! You're not adapting to the new breed of technological advance that is Vista.

(Azmodan said @ #4.2)
Of course it's stupidity! People should go for the new OS, the big software bloat everyone likes! They're just hanging themselves, really!

Why people hates the new and shiny OS? Because it's like MacOSX or a nix distro with CompizFusion, but over 10 times the memory/cpu/gpu cost? Why don't you just buy a new computer, you poor people!

Or the great protection system that comes shipped with it! The complete black screen / insert password is there just for your safety, you stupid! What if it doesn't remembers you did the same action 5 seconds ago... No matter how annoying or concurrent it is, it's for your SAFETY! Exception rules? Are you crazy? Disabling it? You shouldn't be allowed to post in the Internets!

Explorer pane that doesn't hide the "default" locations? Why would you hide them? Un-resizable menus? You should be ashamed! You're not adapting to the new breed of technological advance that is Vista.

New doesn't always mean better which is the case in point with Vista. Its an inferior product. Let's hope that Microsoft learns its lesson with Windows 7.

(Foub said @ #4.3)

New doesn't always mean better which is the case in point with Vista. Its an inferior product. Let's hope that Microsoft learns its lesson with Windows 7.

You don't use Vista, do you?

(franzon said @ #1)
A choice to put an obsolete OS such as XP on a new computer? :confused: That's a stupid choice!

Once no more security updates get released for XP then it will be obsolete

In the last years or so, I've deliberately bought only laptop for my store with Business license. They all came with a CD or DVD that allows me to upgrade them to XP. I'm glad to hear that this will continue.

Another one in the free choice colums.