Microsoft could keep XP if customers want it: CEO

Microsoft could re-think plans to phase out its Windows XP operating system by June 30 if customers show they want to keep it but so far they have not, Chief Executive Steve Ballmer said.

"XP will hit an end-of-life. We have announced one. If customer feedback varies we can always wake up smarter but right now we have a plan for end-of-life for new XP shipments," Ballmer told a news conference on Thursday.

Microsoft has announced that it will stop licensing Windows XP to computer makers and end retail sales by June 30.

Ballmer said most retailers sold computers with Vista, the latest version of its Windows operating system, and most consumers were choosing to buy Vista.

Some consumers have complained they were unable to buy XP at retail stores, or as consumers. They say that in order to get XP they must buy their computers as small businesses.

View: Reuters News

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

China Worries Hackers Will Strike During Beijing Olympics

Next Story

GTA IV available on torrent sites

90 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I didn't bother to read through this whole thread, but it seems like hardware compatibility is a major complaint often leveled at Vista. An end-of-life for XP is the best way to solve this problem. It will force manufacturers to acknowledge the need for Vista support, and without a choice about what sort of OS their software/hardware is going to be run on, they'll find a way to make Vista work. We can't hang onto XP forever. Even if Vista isn't perfect, it is the next step forward, which is the only way to get someplace even better than we are now.

Are they deaf? the recent protests, petitions, are they turning a blind to it all?
We've been crying out loud to save XP.

(sibot said @ #25)
Are they deaf? the recent protests, petitions, are they turning a blind to it all?
We've been crying out loud to save XP.

No, you have. The rest of us don't give a crap.

(sibot said @ #25)
Are they deaf? the recent protests, petitions, are they turning a blind to it all?
We've been crying out loud to save XP.

That is exactly my thoughts as well when I see this news. Ballmer is thickheaded or something? They act like they have not seen an effort by the users or the market to keep XP alive. Are they just plain dumb or plain stupid?

dangel: speak for yourself. When there's a topic about XP versus Vista, you see there are so many responses. Use your head for once before you type random crap.

Bull bull bull

The OEM and preloaded comps, you dont have a selection, Vista is being squeezed to consumers and they dun have a choice.

Stupid comment Mr Ballamar

I have no reason to switch to Vista. None. There are no amazing improvements that are going to change my computing experience enough for me to upgrade. Im sticking with XP.

This is pretty much what I though when I had Win2k as my desktop and XP was released. With Win2k one at least got good standby/hibernation and USB support (over NT4), but XP only seemed to be a repackaged version of Win2k with an enhanced theme (Luna and 48x48 icon support). It of course did offer some compelling features, but very few of them stood out. The most important changes were to the actually kernel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_XP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Vista

I'm kind of diverse in this argument. I used XP ever sense XP RC2 and Vista business for the last 6 months, as of a few days ago when I switched to Vista business 64 because of my upgrade to 5 gigs of ram. For me Vista ran fast and was rock solid. Vista 64bit ran great with 2 gigs of ram and even better now with 5 gigs. As far as ram goes that should no longer be a limitation, its dirt cheap. (got the 4 extra gigs + 2 of the 4 512 sticks I had before for $79)It's also rock solid and the driver support is awesome. I've also had had ZERO compatibility problems in my conversation.

As far as XP goes, it will always have a place in my heart. Recently installs Sp3 on all my XP machines and they run great. I really think XP should stay around for all the older machines on the market. One of the main reason vista got all the bad press, is because idiots went out and bought it and tried to install it on their 3+ year old machine with 512 or less ram. Let's get something straight. If you are going to use vista, do so on fairly new / new machine with plenty of ram. Do that and it should run great.

So I do think XP should stick around.

I recently purchased a laptop not too long ago which came with Vista Business. It was a drain on the battery, after installing XP my battery life has increased threefold, from turning on the laptop I can get logged on and start using programs within 45 seconds, and I can do everything Vista allows minus the bloat. I will stick with XP thanks

People should have their choice of OS forced down their throat by M$

we are dumb consumers and only know what we want until M$ tells us what we want !

I'm glad i am absolved of evaluating any facts on my own and can sit back and be spoon fed my opinion.

My reality is defined in the M$ Fanboy Cult a world where information
can be warped and twisted to say whatever point i am trying to make
regardless of weather the facts back up my Interwebz Propaganda

These anti-xp TROLLs see what they want to see, hear what they want to hear.

2 posts above mine the guy made a point i agree with "Gaming performance"
i have tested on a few games such as Counter-Strike Source and Battlefield 2
and with the exact copy & pasted settings and get a huge drop in frames per second
not to mention lagginess and sometime graphic glitches, and did they add support for OpenGL yet ? sad lol

But why should i bother typing out a 1,000 problems i have seen with my own eyes ?
will it make any difference to the Vista Trolls ?

One guy said above said people should try Vista 64 bit.. thats nice would you buy me a x64 cpu first ?
Yeah i have an old computer.. Amd athlon xp 2800+ OC'd + 1.4gb ddr, on an Asus nforce 2 mobo + Radeon 1650 pro
Is it so old i should throw it in the landfill ? I bet many of you rich brats would say yes lol
With that mentality (Microsofts Bloated Proggramming mentality) our landfills are fast on their way to filling up.

Yeah i have started buying new parts but i wont be able to put the new pc together for a while
so it would be nice to not have what i paid for (XP) taken away from me !
And then endure mouthy rhetoric Vista cult fanboys with too much money to spend & no appreciation for quality coding.
many of these anti-xp losers should learn some programmingand then they would clearly see why Vista Blows !

I would have sworn that Symantec coded Vista LOL -- > Norton Vista Ultimate Premium

I was running Vista Home Premium for the last two months. There were some things I liked about it, but overall I wasn't very satisfied. I was really waiting for SP3, and this morning I finally slipstreamed it and did a clean install. My system is so much snappier now it almost makes me want to cry with joy. It boots to a usable desktop surprisingly fast now and using Windows Explorer is a pleasure again. Folders snap open instantly, file copying is fast, and folders with lots of files don't make me sit waiting on that stupid green bar. Granted my system isn't the latest uber gaming machine but it's not exactly old either. There is still a very good place for XP I think, for those who want a super lean yet extremely reliable OS and just want to get things done without silly eye candy. My copy of Vista is going on eBay, and I'm sticking with XP from now on.

Ans. A) My games perform better and obviously they feel smooth compared to Vista (its not about the overhead, I have the best money can buy at this time). So who is the idiot and does this count as a factor or measure?

Ans. B) Based on facts or mere speculation?

Ans. C) Sold or forced to be sold? Get your facts right. Also the target audience (users) were lower when XP was released and it has grown substantially over the years so the number might seem to be larger.

Vista has its advantages and disadvantages, so does Win XP. For most people the advantages of XP outweigh those offered by Vista. Nobody said Vista is not a good or unstable OS.

Please get your facts straight next time you make an effort to pose as a "know it all" person.

I have a small home network running Win2k3, Win2k8, XP Pro and Vista Ultimate, I decide which OS needs to go where based on the requirements.

A) The people happy with Vista are not on message boards ranting and crying. The majority of them don't even realize that there are idiots that think XP is a better OS by any measure.

B) The 'vocal' minority of people not happy with Vista were never going to be happy with it, as many of them are not even full time Windows users and are more a part of the anti-MS crowd. (Notice the M$ in the posts)

C) Vista has sold a lot of copies and is IN USE a lot of places on a lot of machines. It already surpasses OS X and Linux and BSD combined. So if you think that is a failure, then you should elbow your Mac buddies and tell them the market has spoken, throw their Mac away.

64bit argument? Ok, people above are arguing that x64 isn't any faster than x32. This is NOT true. There are reasons they are not aware of that does make x64 Vista faster. PERIOD. From the expanding registers, to the larger address spaces available for the low level memory management and paging services in NT. NT x64 doesn't have to keep a lookup list for larger memory arrays for things like page files, etc. And in the real world, this DOES make a difference. The only 'bad' aspect to x64, is some processes will use a bit more System RAM as it is stored in 64bit chunks, but this is not a huge difference, and 2GB is enough to deal with this and give your computer faster performance than x32 Vista. This also applies to native x32 applications and x32 games, as Vista x64 drivers are dumping information to the Video in 64bit chunks, and the underlying OS processes are running in 64bit mode, shoving around RAM faster, not having to use lookup tables and other 'tricks' NT x32 does. So 99.9% of the time Vista x64 is Faster, additionally, it is complete, unlike XP x64 that lacked features and compatibility, so it is the first real 'consumer' grade x64 bit OS. (OS X is a hybrid, and not a full 64bit OS, even Cocoa framework applications are restricted to 32bit, as well as main components of OS X itself.)


XP Better? Not so fast. Recent articles show Vista is faster in everything, even gaming, where some games like oblivion is 20% faster on Vista. Vista new WDDM does have advantages that when NVidia and ATI get the drivers optimized it rocks. And it can do things that would drop XP to its knees, like run two games at the same time in a windows while Aero is enabled, and not lose hardly any FPS in either game and Aero is also fully responsive.

XP is an old architecture in terms of the Audio subystem and Video subystem and the non-internal XAML framework that exists in Vista is also a concern for high end publishers that are moving to Vista and skipping OS X because of XPS and its quality of output is far beyond PDF or what PDF can even define, let alone try to reproduce. The audio stack in XP doesn't understand 'channels', 5.1 or can handle the frequencies or input models Vista does.

XP in less than a year will be too outdated to install on modern hardware, and you are already seeing this as the lack of drivers from some OEMs as the dual-core GPUs and Audio in some of the new computers just can't be used effectively on the XP platform.


Die hard XP users, imagine this, after Vista learns how you use the computer and how applications load, when you launch a large application or even a game using 2-5gb of data and textures, and the HD light doesn't eve flicker when the application is loaded. Vista already anticipated it and loaded what was needed using superfetch. Now imagine playing a game or MMO where you load into a zone, instance, etc. And your HD light again doesn't even turn on, and you load instantly, while all your friends on XP take 10-30secs even with uber hardware to load into the same area. Now imagine a game that is loading textures on the fly as you are moving through the game or level, adn instead the HD light going wild and the game hiccuping/lagging to wait for the textures to load, it just flows smoothly, as Vista has already prepared for it and the game runs so much more smooth.


(PS Keep Aero ON when using Vista. Turning it OFF results is lower performance. There are benchmarks out there that show this. Aero enables the ability to shove Fonts/bitmaps/some GDI functions through the 3D GPU in addition to the shared texture composer, and these all speed up the drawing even in Adobe Illustrator. The 'pretty' of Aero is so light that the most GPUs shift down to 2D Mhz speeds because the extra speed is not needed to maintain the glass/blur effects.)

The people happy with Vista are not on message boards ranting and crying. The majority of them don't even realize that there are idiots that think XP is a better OS by any measure.

There are plenty of people who wouldn't go within a million miles, that aren't posting their feelings on message boards either. You know the reasons for staying away from it go far deeper than just fanboy's complaining about video games dropping a few frames per second, or such things - the most concerned people are enterprise users and with more than enough justification.

The 'vocal' minority of people not happy with Vista were never going to be happy with it, as many of them are not even full time Windows users and are more a part of the anti-MS crowd.

What a ridiculous comment. Most of the anti-Apple crowd never even own / try a Mac, yet somehow they're entitled to troll Apple discussion threads.

I'm part of the vocal minority. I do own a Mac, yes, but also use Windows every day and am a Windows system administrator for my day job - I progressed to that role from being a Windows desktop support tech in the years before! I've grown up with Windows, and lived with its frustrating traits, and see so many of them completely ignored or made WORSE in Vista just reaffirms to me that Microsoft needs to step back and take a look at just what the product has become and where it should be going. If anything, having lived outside of the Microsoft world for any amount of time makes you more qualified to criticise Windows as at least you have an understanding of how the competition are working.

Vista has sold a lot of copies and is IN USE a lot of places on a lot of machines. It already surpasses OS X and Linux and BSD combined. So if you think that is a failure, then you should elbow your Mac buddies and tell them the market has spoken, throw their Mac away.

I'd love to know the percentage of people who tried Vista and uninstalled, vs the number of people who tried Leopard and uninstalled to go back to Tiger.......

I can't be bothered to carry on picking apart your argument mostly because I feel it'd be a complete waste of time. Your comments seem to suggest that you're completely ignorant of what folks such as Canonical and Apple have achieved in recent years, and I don't think a well reasoned discussion is something you're looking for! Correct me if i'm wrong though - i'd love to carry on debating this further.

(anthonyspt said @ #16)
(PS Keep Aero ON when using Vista. Turning it OFF results is lower performance. There are benchmarks out there that show this. Aero enables the ability to shove Fonts/bitmaps/some GDI functions through the 3D GPU in addition to the shared texture composer, and these all speed up the drawing even in Adobe Illustrator. The 'pretty' of Aero is so light that the most GPUs shift down to 2D Mhz speeds because the extra speed is not needed to maintain the glass/blur effects.)

Actually, if the "Vista capable" machine doesn't really have a capable GPU (think along the lines of those built-in Intel GPUs) turning off Aero seems to be an overall good idea. I mean if the GPU is so slow that offloading anything to it results in even worse performance, why bother? I've been disabling Aero on most of the office machines I admin with good performance results.

(personally I am using Vista, but with a much more capable Radeon HD 3870 so no Aero issues here)

(Chicane-UK said @ #16.1)


I find it laughable that the guy that didn't have enough common sense to research buying an iMac a week before a speculated product-line refresh takes it upon himself to not only pick apart one of the most intelligent and logical posts in this entire thread, but insult the person as well. Go buy a 'Vista for Dummies' book, or drivel on about your new laptop-on-a-stand, but get off your high horse. After reading posts on this site for quite awhile now, it becomes apparent who is clueless in real-world practice, and who is not. Since I've owned a few dozen macs over the years, does that make me more qualified to give my opinion than someone that, up until now, bases their opinion on solely owning a Mac Mini?

My god, new converts to anything are so very annoying...

(anthonyspt said @ #1)
A) The people happy with Vista are not on message boards ranting and crying. The majority of them don't even realize that there are idiots that think XP is a better OS by any measure.

B) The 'vocal' minority of people not happy with Vista were never going to be happy with it, as many of them are not even full time Windows users and are more a part of the anti-MS crowd. (Notice the M$ in the posts)


I don't mind vista, my points which bother me is that M$ cannot even write a driver for one of their products on a 64 bit system.

(I have ordered the 32 bit version of HP, as amazon gave me my money back for the 64 bit version and said keep the software as a gift).

So now I have every driver except my trust webcam of which I purchased a new webcam which is vista enabled on a 32 bit system.

How many years since XP has there been for a new system?

6 years.

Still they want us to use 64 bit systems but they can't themselves for their own hardware write 64 bit drivers.

(abulfares said @ #16.7)

Thus cried the Vista haters

I don't think he actually hates Vista. I think he hates himself, and no computer, OS, or anything else short of intense therapy will fix that...

(leesmithg said @ #16.8)


I don't mind vista, my points which bother me is that M$ cannot even write a driver for one of their products on a 64 bit system.

(I have ordered the 32 bit version of HP, as amazon gave me my money back for the 64 bit version and said keep the software as a gift).

So now I have every driver except my trust webcam of which I purchased a new webcam which is vista enabled on a 32 bit system.

How many years since XP has there been for a new system?

6 years.

Still they want us to use 64 bit systems but they can't themselves for their own hardware write 64 bit drivers.

Normally your stupid "M$" would make me stop reading immediately, but...

Trust Webcams are made by Trust. It's not Microsoft's job to provide drivers for their product. Go complain to them that they don't have 64-bit drivers. Microsoft's LifeCam webcam has 64-bit support.

(gigapixels said @ #15)
Just cut it off already. June 30 is way too late if you ask me, it should be done ASAP.

I agree. We need to move on.

maybe if people would stop using god damn XP, then manufacturers can spend more time developing drivers for Vista rather than being torn between the two.

and for those who think Vista is harder to use than XP, WOW i am speechless. with integrated search, i haven't navigated once in the start menu, but i understand not every1 is very bright at adopting newer technology.

The only reason MS is forcing a premature EOL for XP is because Vista is incapable of doing it for them.

Windows XP and 2K sold themselves. A business case to upgrade was easy as training was minimal and the financial advantages of going from a DOS based OS to an NT based OS was a no brainer.

Vista has no such advantage over XP and in some important areas is a step backwards.

MS has yet to establish in clear terms how Vista will increase my revenue or reduce my expenses. Until that happens we will stick with XP and then evaluate Windows 7.

I know people will bash me but you need to try the 64 bit version of vista. I had 32 bit version of home premium and upgraded to 64bit vista ultimate and even though it wasnt supposed to be there was a huge difference in speed.

The main goal of 64bits is to able to address more that 4gb of memory ram and to able to operate 64bits variables in a single step (and the program must be compiled to understand this difference).

So, a common users will not need 64bits right now. In fact you can loss on performance in many cases (even in 3d render).

(majortom1981 said @ #11)
I know people will bash me but you need to try the 64 bit version of vista. I had 32 bit version of home premium and upgraded to 64bit vista ultimate and even though it wasnt supposed to be there was a huge difference in speed.
I'm going to call "placebo effect" on this one. While some benchmarks show improvements by using the 64-bit version of the OS, other show worse performance under the 64-bit version.
(reference with several pages of information)

While benchmarks are synthetic, they don't necessarily lie. You might have a slight advantage, but I sincerely doubt it is noticable overall, and you would need some sort of other benchmarking to actually measure and quantify.

Not saying I agree with this but seriously everyone posting on here has to know there are other ways of getting xp and the people that don't know how after it is dead really won't notice the difference between vista and xp cause all they do is play solitaire. I'm not even suggesting pirating although that is probably the easiest. Amazon will probably have copies in a warehouse for years to come. Here is a link to windows 95 for Christ sake http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-95...09052249&sr=8-2

Product Features
* Unlock the potential of your PC
* 32-bit operating system that can run on 40Mhz 386 PCs, 486 and 586-class AMD/Cyrix/Intel PCs and higher
* Windows 95 replaces the older Write word processor with WordPad
* Has advanced Paint and Defrag programs
* Built-in networking, Internet Dial-Up Networking, multimedia CD player and Media Player

:laugh: Times change...
And in that link, you're not buying directly from Amazon, for the record. They're other resellers.

pardon me? "if customers show they want to keep it but so far they have not"

you obviously have not been listening to a god damn word we have been saying for the last year and half then

sorry double post

For the most part, you, the end user are not the customer. At least not directly. It is the OEM retailers. And, as long as they can sell higher-end PCs with more hardware, there is a greater potential for profit for them. After all a Windows license is the same cost of the PC whether it has 512MB of RAM or 2GB of RAM. The Dells of the world just make more money if they sell the 2MB upgrade option.

So, in the end, as long as general consumers buy PCs off the shelves, then Microsoft sees its "customer" happy with the increased profits from hardware sales.

pardon me? "if customers show they want to keep it but so far they have not"

you obviously have not been listening to a god damn word we have been saying for the last year and half then

(X'tyfe said @ #5)
pardon me? "if customers show they want to keep it but so far they have not"

you obviously have not been listening to a god damn word we have been saying for the last year and half then

On one hand MS continues to say stuff like this, but on the other hand there are stories like this coming from Microsoft that keep addressing users' desire for XP. It is just PR to keep their partners happy and to keep users happy at the same time without changing their strategy.

One user wrote that they don't understand how phasing out XP is more profitable for MS. If they introduce Vista, then eventually all customers who bought XP will also buy Vista, so they will have two Windows licenses from MS, not just one. Many families also typically do not understand how to upgrade or install a new OS and just go out and buy new computers, figuring that they will need the added power to take advantage of new software anyway, and spurring hardware purchases makes MS partners happy, and some even use this as an opportunity to phase out old hardware as well.

Also, they need to justify their Software Assurance program somehow...

Pardon me but whining and crying about it at Neowin (or any other forum) isn't showing Microsoft anything. Have you tried sending feedback to Microsoft? Is it constructive and helpful or is it a copy and paste of the whining you found on the Internet?

If people took the time to band together and send constructive feedback to Microsoft they will listen. What makes you think any organization has the resources to scour the Internet for people complaining about discontinuing an obsolete product?

If YOU were an exec at Microsoft what would give more credibility - angry bloggers/forum posters or a constructive request or petition sent directly to you?

Think about it.

(C_Guy said @ #5.2)
Pardon me but whining and crying about it at Neowin (or any other forum) isn't showing Microsoft anything. Have you tried sending feedback to Microsoft? Is it constructive and helpful or is it a copy and paste of the whining you found on the Internet?

If people took the time to band together and send constructive feedback to Microsoft they will listen. What makes you think any organization has the resources to scour the Internet for people complaining about discontinuing an obsolete product?

If YOU were an exec at Microsoft what would give more credibility - angry bloggers/forum posters or a constructive request or petition sent directly to you?

Think about it.

you seem to forget that microsoft is a huge monopoly, and when companies get that big
the tend to care alot LESS for there customers

they will not give me the time of day at all

(X'tyfe said @ #5.3)
you seem to forget that microsoft is a huge monopoly, and when companies get that big
the tend to care alot LESS for there customers

they will not give me the time of day at all

Way to reply with total irrelevance.

Fact is, you along with many many others have done nothing but complain on the forums about Vista, yet expect Microsoft to do something as if they all visit Neowin just to read some whiny comments possibly coming from someone who is either biased or 12.

"they will not give me the time of day at all".
Synchronize your computer's clock with time.windows.com.


"you seem to forget that microsoft is a huge monopoly"

Wow, someone's never heard of UNIX, Linux, Mac, or OS/2.

Give me one product or service in which Microsoft has a true monopoly. That's right, you can't. Each and every product and service they have has competition. Therefore, it cannot be a monopoly.

Did you sleep through economics class?

Yeah, except the 'we' in your statement is a very whiny 1% of the total market. The rest either likes Vista, or is indifferent. 1% isn't going to get them to change their mind.

-Spenser

(X'tyfe said @ #5.3)
you seem to forget that microsoft is a huge monopoly, and when companies get that big
the tend to care alot LESS for there customers

they will not give me the time of day at all

Precisely, M$ doesn't give a rats arse about the people who pay money for their operating systems, that has been proved with their pricing, outsourced support, activation blunders, gestapo style WGA and of course Vi$ta.

For that matter look at the ultimate extras, you people that paid extra were suckers, M$ screwed you all, will they make it right? of course not, they got their money and that's all that matters to them, obviously.

(C_Guy said @ #5.5)
"they will not give me the time of day at all".
Synchronize your computer's clock with time.windows.com.


"you seem to forget that microsoft is a huge monopoly"

Wow, someone's never heard of UNIX, Linux, Mac, or OS/2.

Give me one product or service in which Microsoft has a true monopoly. That's right, you can't. Each and every product and service they have has competition. Therefore, it cannot be a monopoly.

Did you sleep through economics class?

Someone actually gets it!!!!! I'll be dipped. Way to go C_Guy, most of the clowns on this site have no clue what monopoly means, if you want to know look at your utilities, don't like who provides your electricity go somewhere else, oh that's right you can't, now that is a monopoly.

(waxman830 said @ #5.10)
most of the clowns on this site have no clue what monopoly means

Oh? Really? Monopoly doesn't always mean 100%. Just most. This site tells me I'm right.
http://www.investorwords.com/3112/monopoly.html
A situation in which a single company owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service.

I believe it's safe to assume that "M$" has most of the market share.

(C_Guy said @ #5.5)
Wow, someone's never heard of UNIX, Linux, Mac, or OS/2.
Each and every product and service they have has competition. Therefore, it cannot be a monopoly.
Did you sleep through economics class?

Obviously you also slept through economics. View a few Youtube Ron Paul videos, and learn why the USA is serious trouble - a country that has spent it's way into oblivion!

Since when does M$ actually listen to their customers? Usually M$ just tells them what they want instead.

(Foub said @ #4)
Since when does M$ actually listen to their customers? Usually M$ just tells them what they want instead.

For a second there I thought you where talking about here's what we want you to want Apple :P

Calling Microsoft "M Dollar Sign" just screams credibility and maturity.

Apparently you skipped over the Vista press releases that discussed how much customer feedback went into Vista. Maybe it's not a perfect implementation but saying that M Dollar Sign doesn't listen to their customers is very ignorant and just plain incorrect.

I rather enjoy C_guy's posts. I don't recall him ever saying (or typing) "CrApple" or anything of the sort.

People just do that to show how behind the times they are. Go ahead, keep typing "M$", it just makes you stand out as a dip****. Typing "M$" is so 2001. Get with the times people!

(Kushan said @ #3)
Apart from less support costs, I wonder what exactly Microsoft has to gain from phasing out XP?

They will be be gaining $$$ since it will force new buyers into paying more money for a lesser operating system, oem's will not have the option of installing XP, it will only be vi$ta.

(Kushan said @ #3)
Apart from less support costs, I wonder what exactly Microsoft has to gain from phasing out XP?

I guess you could also ask the question "I wonder what exactly Microsoft has to gain from making Direct X 10 Vista only".

If you figure out the answer to this question, it's also the answer to yours.

One other things everybody keeps forgetting: DRM

The movies and musics cartel are on M$ ass to remove XP so they can start controlling what you see and hear. Making more money is the name of the game.

Ahh, those awful pirates are ruining it for Hollywood.

Choosing Vista? Consumers don't have a choice. They don't even know the difference until they actual buy the damn thing.

(WICKO said @ #2)
Choosing Vista? Consumers don't have a choice. They don't even know the difference until they actual buy the damn thing.

Ha! You beat me to the punch!

The vast majority of consumers don't choose Vista [or any other operating system], they just buy whatever the salesman at Circuit City or Best Buy tells them to buy.

Ballmer is using the BS argument that has been used against Microsoft for years: that consumers have the knowledge and experience to intelligently choose one software product over another. And that given the opportunity, many would choose one competing product over another.

Well, I'm here to tell you that the argument smells every bit as bad coming from Microsoft as it did when it was being aimed at them. P-U!

(WICKO said @ #2)
Choosing Vista? Consumers don't have a choice.

That's precisely the problem. Never before has MS tried to shove a new release down everyone's throats like this. Win9x was available long after Win2K shipped, and Win2K was around after XP's release. With Vista being such a miserable failure, MS (someone at MS... take a guess who! Hint: flying chairs are involved) wanted to strong arm customers into buying it. That just isn't good business. If you **** up, you can't blame your customers for it.

The blame lies with Gates and Ballmer, who didn't listen to Allchin in 2005 when he said Vista (Longhorn at the time) was unmanageable because of all the bloat and MS had to change their development practices. It's amazing that Allchin was saying the exact same thing that customers were saying, yet Gates and Ballmer ASSumed they knew better than everyone else.

In case you think I'm making this up, read this:

Microsoft group vice president Jim Allchin walked into chairman Bill Gates' office in July 2004 and told him that the software project was horribly behind schedule and would never get caught up. "It's not going to work," he said, according to a report in "The Wall Street Journal." The problem was that Vista was too complicated, and Microsoft's age-old methods for developing software just weren't going to be good enough.

http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/...ng-to-work.html

(toadeater said @ #2.2)

That's precisely the problem. Never before has MS tried to shove a new release down everyone's throats like this. Win9x was available long after Win2K shipped, and Win2K was around after XP's release. With Vista being such a miserable failure, MS (someone at MS... take a guess who! Hint: flying chairs are involved) wanted to strong arm customers into buying it. That just isn't good business. If you **** up, you can't blame your customers for it.

The blame lies with Gates and Ballmer, who didn't listen to Allchin in 2005 when he said Vista (Longhorn at the time) was unmanageable because of all the bloat and MS had to change their development practices. It's amazing that Allchin was saying the exact same thing that customers were saying, yet Gates and Ballmer ASSumed they knew better than everyone else.

In case you think I'm making this up, read this:

Microsoft group vice president Jim Allchin walked into chairman Bill Gates' office in July 2004 and told him that the software project was horribly behind schedule and would never get caught up. "It's not going to work," he said, according to a report in "The Wall Street Journal." The problem was that Vista was too complicated, and Microsoft's age-old methods for developing software just weren't going to be good enough.

http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/...ng-to-work.html

Actually those were references to longhorn, not vista. Also, longhorn was over bloated and would never fly in todays' market with has intensive as it was.

(sirgh0st said @ #2.3)
Actually those were references to longhorn, not vista. Also, longhorn was over bloated and would never fly in todays' market with has intensive as it was.

Yes, Vista came out of Longhorn. However, Vista was NOT what Allchin said had to be done. The point still stands, because Vista is still too bloated to fly. Vista is a failure for the same reason Longhorn was a failure. Vista is just Longhorn cut down, instead of starting from scratch on a modular OS that could scale to different hardware and roles. It's even more pitiful that Server 2008 uses Vista as its base. Why would you put all that consumer junk into Server?

What Allchin was complaining about wasn't really the bloat. It was the design process of Windows. MS has been trying to tack on features on an old monolilthic OS design and it has finally gone too far. It is unsustainable, it takes too many people to maintain and there is no one that knows WTF is going on within Windows anymore. There is no single Windows dev team anymore, it's a bunch of directionless teams all working on their own stuff without thinking about how the overall product will be affected. The overall product ends up being a quagmire!

The last good OS that MS made was Win2K. The idea of creating a monolithic one-size fits all OS since then as seen in XP and Vista has been a complete failure.

(toadeater said @ #2.4)
The last good OS that MS made was Win2K. The idea of creating a monolithic one-size fits all OS since then as seen in XP and Vista has been a complete failure.

I liked WinNT 3.5x and 4.0 (without IE 4, 5 etc.) Lack of "Plug and Play" was the only real down side, but that was were many Windows "System Admins" found their nice little niche (inc. me). IMO, all software has headed towards bloat and overcomplexity, often having the opposite of the desired effect. MSSQL is another example, SQL 2000 is a great bit of software, about as easy as can be. SQL 2005 is a real handful by comparison, perhaps it has features that some people need, but for me it is way over-kill.

The whole PC model is going off the rails, it needs to come back to simple, basic user friendly software, that is understandable to the majority. The need for ever more complex software is often not in the customers interest.

XP professional is a perfect operating system for the work place and the home.

M$ should just release a second edition with some extras at a far upgrade or full price.

I have tried vista, it's o.k., not as easy as XP.

Eventually we will all move on, however the flaws in vista are it's lack of support for even microsoft drivers at 64 bit, finger print reader being one device no 64 bit support, I had to purchase a new webcam as trust can't be bothered to update my one to vista and the name vista sucks big time.

Windows vista should be a big fat lesson to M$ and they should make sure that windows 7 does not go the way of vista.

+1

Best post ever, and considering the thousands of posts on this subject, most of which I've read, that's really saying something.

So basically your argument is that the 64 bit version of Vista has issues. Have you seen the 64 bit version of XP? That thing is almost unusable. What about the 32 bit, that the version most consumers are going to buy?

"and the name vista sucks big time."
Wow, so scientific! Thats a great analysis.

"M$"
I think you putting that in your response is enough.

I personally am tired of XP. Its a good OS, but its too freaking old. Sure you can keep piling crap on, but eventually you need to move on. Just let it go. If you have XP now, keep it, June 30th will not affect you one bit. But, for the people who actually like Vista, can we please dump XP and force the hardware and software people to support the future? Only by forcing the 3rd parties will we ever get Vista to be as widely liked and accepted as XP is. Please just let XP die in peace.

(Chrono951 said @ #1.3)
So basically your argument is that the 64 bit version of Vista has issues. Have you seen the 64 bit version of XP? That thing is almost unusable. What about the 32 bit, that the version most consumers are going to buy?

"and the name vista sucks big time."
Wow, so scientific! Thats a great analysis.

"M$"
I think you putting that in your response is enough.

I personally am tired of XP. Its a good OS, but its too freaking old. Sure you can keep piling crap on, but eventually you need to move on. Just let it go. If you have XP now, keep it, June 30th will not affect you one bit. But, for the people who actually like Vista, can we please dump XP and force the hardware and software people to support the future? Only by forcing the 3rd parties will we ever get Vista to be as widely liked and accepted as XP is. Please just let XP die in peace.


SO what if it's really old? It still works nowadays, all the software still works on XP, hardware IS compatible with XP. Indeed there would be a moment to move on, but it's not really on this year, probably on 1 or 2 more years.... Maybe someone is just trying to defend Vista....

(leesmithg said @ #1)
XP professional is a perfect operating system for the work place and the home.

M$ should just release a second edition with some extras at a far upgrade or full price.

I have tried vista, it's o.k., not as easy as XP.

Eventually we will all move on, however the flaws in vista are it's lack of support for even microsoft drivers at 64 bit, finger print reader being one device no 64 bit support, I had to purchase a new webcam as trust can't be bothered to update my one to vista and the name vista sucks big time.

Windows vista should be a big fat lesson to M$ and they should make sure that windows 7 does not go the way of vista.


So MS should make other companies drivers for them.
Sorry but it aint MS's fault if other companies cant or wont update their own drivers.
Those other companies should hire better programmers.

On the right hardware Vista is actually quite good, esp now sp1 for vista is now out.

So are you using XP 64-bit? (you're comparing to Vista 64-bit)

Honestly XP 64-bit is fairly unusable, plus if any 64-bit drivers are coming they'd likely be coming for Vista 64-bit, not XP 64-bit...that's almost a reason to upgrade instead of sticking with XP 64-bit, if anything.

(Chrono951 said @ #1.3)
I personally am tired of XP. Its a good OS, but its too freaking old. Sure you can keep piling crap on, but eventually you need to move on. Just let it go. If you have XP now, keep it, June 30th will not affect you one bit. But, for the people who actually like Vista, can we please dump XP and force the hardware and software people to support the future? Only by forcing the 3rd parties will we ever get Vista to be as widely liked and accepted as XP is. Please just let XP die in peace.

Pure crap mate unless I've got the wrong end of the stick, most USB sticks and 3rd party devices come with drivers for windows 98SE and ME, thats 11 years outdated, I still use it but your saying XP that is 5/6 years outdated is worse than ME ?

(leesmithg said @ #1)
XP professional is a perfect operating system for the work place and the home.

M$ should just release a second edition with some extras at a far upgrade or full price.

I have tried vista, it's o.k., not as easy as XP.

Eventually we will all move on, however the flaws in vista are it's lack of support for even microsoft drivers at 64 bit, finger print reader being one device no 64 bit support, I had to purchase a new webcam as trust can't be bothered to update my one to vista and the name vista sucks big time.

Windows vista should be a big fat lesson to M$ and they should make sure that windows 7 does not go the way of vista.

I have to agree with this dude.. I vlite the crap out of WinVistasp1 and tweaking to my liking. I used it for good
month, and fair I have my pro and cons.. the one I can't stand the most is fcking AERO, I mean the colors,theme etc.. but I do love the fact GUI is being render into gpu so no more of the sluggishness. Vista had good Administrators tool loved them. So I am back to xp.

(leesmithg said @ #1)
XP professional is a perfect operating system for the work place and the home.

M$ should just release a second edition with some extras at a far upgrade or full price.

I have tried vista, it's o.k., not as easy as XP.

Eventually we will all move on, however the flaws in vista are it's lack of support for even microsoft drivers at 64 bit, finger print reader being one device no 64 bit support, I had to purchase a new webcam as trust can't be bothered to update my one to vista and the name vista sucks big time.

Windows vista should be a big fat lesson to M$ and they should make sure that windows 7 does not go the way of vista.

TRUE STORY:

In the beginning, Google execs were going to name their new company with a name that contained an "S", but when the noticed idiots abbreviating "Microsoft" like "M$", they decided they didn't want that happening to their new company. So, thanks to you idiot, we have to get used to the stupid name "Google". Hey, thanks moron. It's idiots like you that ruin it for the rest of us!!

(Chrono951 said @ #1.3)
So basically your argument is that the 64 bit version of Vista has issues. Have you seen the 64 bit version of XP? That thing is almost unusable. What about the 32 bit, that the version most consumers are going to buy?


I have seen the 64-bit version of XP, in fact I've been using it almost exclusively on a daily basis since its release in 2005, thank you very much.

As far as I'm concerned, it is, by far, the best workstation OS Microsoft has ever put out. I don't have any weird-ass hardware that doesn't have drivers for it. Which part of XP 64-bit do you find "almost unusable"?

I'll keep using XP 64-bit for a long, long time.