Given its history of moving deadlines at a moment's notice, it hardly seems surprising that Microsoft is keeping Windows XP alive even longer than expected, but its latest move looks particularly bad for Vista.The apparent decision to allow OEM computer sellers to offer disks that downgrade installations of Windows Vista to XP until the end of July next year clearly bumps up against the period when Windows 7 might be released.
Microsoft had previously said it would end the scheme next January, but the continued lack of demand for Vista appears to be behind the change of heart.
If the move is confirmed, it's yet more bad news for Vista, as XP users may have the option to skip the unloved OS entirely and move straight to Windows 7.
View: TechRadar
Economically (and this is the language Microsoft speaks) you are completely right. But in terms of technology XP is behind and that should be good enough reason to kill it off in a perfect world.
You can add just about everything that Vista has to XP. Vista was primarily eye candy. Maybe if it had what was originally promised to be in it, but they just took out too much to make it anything of a real change.
You can add just about everything that Vista has to XP. Vista was primarily eye candy. Maybe if it had what was originally promised to be in it, but they just took out too much to make it anything of a real change.
The same could be said of Windows NT. Why don't you stick with it? (What took you so long to get here and blather, btw?)
That statement alone shows how little you know about Windows Vista, please do not ask me to list the actual technical changes because you probably would not understand them.
You can add just about everything that Vista has to XP. Vista was primarily eye candy. Maybe if it had what was originally promised to be in it, but they just took out too much to make it anything of a real change.
The same could be said of Windows NT. Why don't you stick with it? (What took you so long to get here and blather, btw?)
Oh please. NT (4) didn't have USB support, device manager, any official ability to upgrade DirectX past version 5, etc. There were many, many reasons why upgrading from NT would have provided genuine, practical benefits. Going from XP to Vista hasn't provided a "killer reason" for many people, and I say this as a Vista user who even though I enjoy using Vista, I can see why people might want to stick with XP.
You can add just about everything that Vista has to XP. Vista was primarily eye candy. Maybe if it had what was originally promised to be in it, but they just took out too much to make it anything of a real change.
Vista is NOTHING but crappy eye candy at that, and a ton a totally useless "are you sure you want to that" popups. Not to mention needing almost a super computer to run the trash!
MS should be sued for publishing such garbage and while I'm at it, I just tested the beta IE8 out yesterday. What another POS!! It's so screwed up, it locks/hangs windows explorer up constantly even.
MS is SO FAR off the mark on everything they do now a days, it's no wonder I've mainly migrated to Linux, for the most part.
It's a beta. Sure perhaps not as polished as Google's betas but it's still a beta.
It's like people have totally lost rational thought when it comes to computers these days.
Thats incorrect. Fact is, by staying with XP, they are holding back technology. Some games have already started using DX10, which IS better than DX9. Yet if Microsoft continues to baby the XP owners, technology will never advance.
Kinda like Nvidia not adding DX10.1 support, because they are intentionally trying to hold back technology (they have this stupid idea they are getting back at ATI). Its been proven by several websites that DX10.1 is much faster than DX10 for games using AA.
I can guarantee anyone here, that as long as they continue to support XP, no one will buy any future version of Windows, including their next version. I suppose we all could be running Windows 3.1... wouldn't that be great.
This 'news article' is merely a speculative bash based on a Reg article.
Vista will be dubbed "Oops, our bad, here try Win 7".
Vista will be dubbed "Oops, our bad, here try Win 7".
Vista is "rock solid" for me also. And your comment is complete BS.
Yup... Go to the source and click the "apparent decision" link.
Now with this recession in the us, they should consider that the ppl wont waste money on stupid thing likes an OS... Please dont get mad, its true.
I guess the sales will be low, then? It's possible people will suddenly stop buying Apple products or even food. I don't see it happening, though.
The problem is that "many people" don't believe that. There's a small chunk of Neowin users and a bunch of bloggers whose job depends on them attracting anyone with a mouse and web browser to their site for ad revenue.
He probably meant to say whinging - it's a well known British word (and maybe used elsewhere.. I don't know) that pretty much means whining.. but often used when talking to a kit or something - like "Stop your whinging!!"
More like third or forth.
Some would say it is thinly-veiled attempts at bashing "Vi$ta" that are the epic failure... That and the habit said bashers of dropping stinkbomb comments like this and not bothering to come back to babysit them...
Some would say it is thinly-veiled attempts at bashing "Vi$ta" that are the epic failure... That and the habit said bashers of dropping stinkbomb comments like this and not bothering to come back to babysit them...
Seeing that the folks in Redmond are extending downgrade rights to XP even more, with vi$ta swiftly heading toward its 2 year birthday, is nothing short of a thinly veiled admission that vi$ta is an epic failure of embarrassing proportions.
I happen to agree. Ever since I moved to vista ultimate, I have had no issues with the OS. Plus, when I work on my customers computers (xp, linu
Alienware M9750
Dual 8700GT Nvidia (SLI)
Dual 350 Gig drives (Raid0)
4 Gig Ram
Intel Core 2 Extreme
Some would say it is thinly-veiled attempts at bashing "Vi$ta" that are the epic failure... That and the habit said bashers of dropping stinkbomb comments like this and not bothering to come back to babysit them...
Seeing that the folks in Redmond are extending downgrade rights to XP even more, with vi$ta swiftly heading toward its 2 year birthday, is nothing short of a thinly veiled admission that vi$ta is an epic failure of embarrassing proportions.
As I said, the only epic failure of embarrassing proportions is your attacks. Why don't you go find something productive to be angry about? Still haven't made it to 100%?
Completely agree, the amount of times I go to people's houses and fix Windows XP because of these problems.
Windows Vista does not have these problems or at least it is a lot less likely to happen because of the security features built-in.
I challenge anybody to run Windows XP bareback for six months and use it properly on the Internet, and anybody use Windows Vista in the same way I guarantee Windows Vista will stay the cleanest operating system.
It is only the people that have no idea what they are talking about that are advising more people that have no idea what they are listening to ruining Windows Vista.
Rhetorical question: Of the 140 million, how many times did the customer say to the sales person "Please, install Vista on my machine, I heard it's a good operating system." as opposed to "Just give me a computer, the newest thing you got."
I'm willing to bet most people just think "Microsoft Windows", much like "I have a Mac". Don't overestimate the intelligence of Joe 6 pack with regard to computers and can distinguish the difference between XP and Vista.
And judging by the amount of time it took vi$ta to get to 18.33% maybe in another 4 years it will be even with XP.
Dude, your own data shows that Vista is rising as XP declines at almost the exact same rate! That means to me that Microsoft has pretty much lost no market share. You obviouly don't understand how to read a simple chart. Do you really think Microsoft expected every user that had XP to instantly go buy a new copy of Vista? They know the average user doesn't do that. Most people get a new OS when they get tired of their old computer and go buy a new one. If you can infer anything from this data it's that Apple's share increase was pretty underwhelming. Perhaps more people switched to Vista instead of a Mac than they want to admit.
Another predictable reply from you lol
And I never said microshaft was losing market share, I simply showed you the epic failure of vi$ta and I provided evidence to prove it.
Sure I don't think that people should run out and buy vi$ta as soon as it's released, or even windows 7 for that matter, but almost 2 years later and the numbers prove that people are STILL not rushing out to buy it and I would wager that the bulk of the 18.33% comes from OEM's who forced vi$ta onto pc buyers.
Now maybe you should go back and read the chart again, remember, almost 2 YEARS and your beloved law-breaking monopoly giant is still unable to bring its latest os to the forefront of today's computing, why? because it's a steaming pile, after almost 2 years and a service pack later it should be at the very least a 50/50 share but it's not, nowhere close, and that just drives you fanboys insane while everyone else laughs at you all <guffaw>
Here, one example. May 14, 2003.
9x->XP *was* a significant upgrade, but... was XP at 50% here? Nuh uh.
Honestly though. What do you people really gain by laughing and thinking Vista's a failure? Whether it's XP, Vista, or Win7 in the spotlight, MS wins either way. Unless there's a *mass* move to Apple boxes, which I haven't seen yet.
Here, one example. May 14, 2003.
9x->XP *was* a significant upgrade, but... was XP at 50% here? Nuh uh.
Honestly though. What do you people really gain by laughing and thinking Vista's a failure? Whether it's XP, Vista, or Win7 in the spotlight, MS wins either way. Unless there's a *mass* move to Apple boxes, which I haven't seen yet.
Thanks for this post as it further shows the epic failure that is vi$ta.
A quote from the article you cited:
Vi$ta doesn't even have 1/3 of the market share after 20 months, not even 20% LMAO!
Vista is not a failure, just like any other Windows version wasnt (Yes, including Windows ME) Everyone has gone out and bought it/came prebuilt with their system.
Again, if you don't know technology and simply rate how something looks, then you have no use for Vista. Otherwise, under the hood, Vista is a amazing improvement.
Every PC we receive now comes with Vista pre-installed.
We put Windows XP on eevry one of those machines.
Until we certify that all of our 1000+ applications run troublefree on Vista, XP will remain the norm. It will still be a few years until Vista get's adopted.
The company I worked for previously had over 150k machines. It took them over 5 years to introduce XP. How long do you think it will take to introduce Vista?
Big companies don't just run out and install the latest OS on their machines without properly testing them, and the testing phase can take eyars.
Now apply this on a global basis, how many of those 140 million copies are really being used? What does this tell you?
I don't think Vista is a fail, but it takes time to be adopted. You can't expect to launch a new OS and have everyone go out and replace what they got with that one. This only works for the average Joe who "wants a PC to surf and read emails" and to those people that always want the latest thing.
Give it another 2 years and that graph will look a lot different.
Yeah, it might make it to 25% lmao!
Full Disclosure:
I run 3xXP desktops, 1x Vista laptop, 1x Linux machine
Yeah, it might make it to 25% lmao!
I have no idea where that graph came from, but why did you not include XP's performance the first two years it was out if you wanted to say Vista was underperforming compared to XP for the first two years?
Yeah, it might make it to 25% lmao!
Is there an Ignore function I could add you to?
Yeah, it might make it to 25% lmao!
Is there an Ignore function I could add you to?
Just patiently wait for the "hammer" to make its move.
I like how this guy thinks a statement like "Vista is a failure" is a *fact*. Last time I checked, 'facts' that have just as many rebuttals countering them aren't facts.... just stinking opinions.
I've got nothing against Vista, I'm still using XP because the last time I upgraded it was easier to stick with XP for a number of reasons - software issues, I know it's stable (haven't used Vista enough to be able to judge it on it's stability). It was also easier for the family PC keeping it on XP because that's what my parents are used to. Next big PC upgrade will probably see either Vista or Windows 7 getting installed.
.snip.
What compatibility problems? I went from XP 32bit to Vista 64bit, which is about a bigger jump as you can get, and every single peice of software I've tried to run (with the exception of really old stuff, like stuff with 16bit installers etc) runs like a dream.
.snip.
What compatibility problems? I went from XP 32bit to Vista 64bit, which is about a bigger jump as you can get, and every single peice of software I've tried to run (with the exception of really old stuff, like stuff with 16bit installers etc) runs like a dream.
So, because you don't have any problems, does that mean that nobody else will? Can you garantee that all the software we use at the company will run fine on Vista?
That's a question for the IT staff at your company. Assuming they can actually do their job, that is.
Yeah, they can do their job. But testing all the apps to guarantee to the customer that they will work takes a lot of time.
You don't just slap Vista on all the PC's and roll them out.
There is a difference between the individual person and companies upgrading to a new OS, and remember that companies make a huge chunk of the general Vista sales.
But will Balmer in charge now, I remain skeptical about Windows 7. I have my main pc using Vista Ultimate and while it's fairly stable there are some issues with it and also it doesn't work with my laser printer due to lack of drivers from HP.
I have 3 other pc's 2 of them are still using XP.
But nothing like what has happened with Vista, because Vista has far too many real problems.
But nothing like what has happened with Vista, because Vista has far too many real problems.
Like?
But nothing like what has happened with Vista, because Vista has far too many real problems.
Like?
UAC. Dumb users are just going to hit contiune anyways... and disabling it means you're completely defenseless.
Thats my only gripe left with Vista... all others have been taken care of in SP1.
And that's the fault of Vista and Microsoft....how?
But nothing like what has happened with Vista, because Vista has far too many real problems.
Like?
Constant hard drive thrashing, enormous and unreasonable memory usage during idle, slow as molasses start times, slower performance in games vs. XP, tons of bloatware that most people don't need or want, the list is staggering and endless.
But nothing like what has happened with Vista, because Vista has far too many real problems.
Like?
Constant hard drive thrashing, enormous and unreasonable memory usage during idle, slow as molasses start times, slower performance in games vs. XP, tons of bloatware that most people don't need or want, the list is staggering and endless.
Well you know what those guys with the green/gold member names will say don't you - get more hardware, or that you're telling FUD. There's no WAY Microsoft might have actually made an OS requiring far more resources than it deserves.
People refusing to believe other people's experiences just because they don't match their own, is a typical human failing.
And that's the fault of Vista and Microsoft....how?
My point is... it's a useless feature. Dumb users are going to click on it anyways... regardless.. and for advanced users like us.. just wastes our time.
I can't speak for Linux.. but in OS X I've maybe seen that prompt 1 or 2 times a month... it's not as annoying as it is on Vista.
People refusing to believe other people's experiences just because they don't match their own, is a typical human failing.
Let's see:
Yes, there's disk thrashing. Does it always occur? Nuh uh. For the first few minutes after bootup, yes.
Enormous nemory usage? Yes. For some benefit? You bet. Unfortunately there are a few bugged apps who leak memory and end up triggering the Resource Exhaustion Prevention dialog (a.k.a. almost low memory dialog).
Slow start times? Possibly, the first few times around. The next few times? It gets faster.
Slower performance in games? Yes. Back in 2007. Can you please do a F5 on your statistics?
Bloatware? Such as...
I'll come clean and state that my Vista experiences have not been 100% positive the past two years. Now they are, fortunately.
Seriously, some of you still cling onto early 2007-era arguments as if they still hold water almost a year and a half later.
People refusing to believe other people's experiences just because they don't match their own, is a typical human failing.
Let's see:
Yes, there's disk thrashing. Does it always occur? Nuh uh. For the first few minutes after bootup, yes.
Indeed. It's mainly due to superfetch which I admit to being a very useful feature. Would be nice if the REASON for the disk thrashing was made clearer though - it's a product of a useful feature, but few people know this. If Microsoft communicated this better, we would have less of an issue with complaints.
The greater memory is mainly due to superfetch, but the problem is that it doesn't scale down particularly well. If a machine doesn't have that much physical RAM (eg. 512 MB), superfetch kills the RAM. Since superfetch makes best use of systems with a lot of RAM, really if it was smart it should only enable itself on 1GB or over systems, so that with 512MB V