Windows XP pre-loads no longer allowed on new PCs

Today marks the first year anniversary of Windows 7. Microsoft's latest operating system has become its most popular and well-accepted OS to date. In just a single year, 240 million licenses have been sold. With much of the tech world's attention on this monumental occasion, people seem less focused on what else October 22nd marks.

Mary Jo Foley, over at ZDNet (via TechFlash), points out that today marks the end of Windows XP being pre-loaded on new machines. As noted, netbooks were the last category of PCs remaining that were allowed to come with the 9-year old operating system loaded from the factory. It's clear that Microsoft wants the world to move full force into a new era of PC computing. In their minds, and rightfully so, Windows XP hinders that possibility.

Unlike with Windows Vista, businesses seem to be jumping onto the Windows 7 bandwagon. Major corporations all over the world are beginning to roll out the new OS as their de facto standard. Windows XP was a great operating system and truly changed the way we, as consumers and businesses, compute. With Windows XP, Microsoft brought stability--a core feature that continues to be improved upon. Before Windows XP, program freezes and driver issues would turn a PC inoperable, forcing you to reboot and lose anything you were working on. Little do we realize just how pivotal XP was. It was such a well oiled OS that companies refused to let go of it and take the leap to Vista. A year ago, it seemed like Windows XP was the OS that would never die. Today, however, it does.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft overhauls Games for Windows Marketplace

Next Story

HP Slate 500 announced, $799 price tag

93 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

It's going to be quite some time before XP goes away because it works, & while they add a lot of features, neither Vista or 7 works any faster/better. Some people buy a new car to have the latest style & features, but many more wait until their old car has too many problems to easily fix. For many moving on from XP works the same way, & they've yet to have enough problems to make it necessary. It didn't help Microsoft that Vista made the move more costly & impractical than it could have been, so as people stayed with it, developer support of XP never really went away like it did with win 3.1 through ME. 7 64 bit lets you use 64 bit apps along with more RAM, but for the desktop, practically speaking so what? 64 bit makes a difference to some people/uses, but for the majority *today* it's just more of a headache to support. If/when you're installing 7 there are a lot of valid reasons to go with the 64 bit version, but most of those evaporate if/when you're talking about why anyone *needs* to move from XP to 7 *today*.

There are a several reasons that XP's held on because of Vista. For many users 1 problem is that the core changes Microsoft introduced in Vista (& kept for 7), prevent a lot of hardware from working -- the audio end of things has not yet fully recovered, & to a lesser extent, neither has video. With Vista Microsoft caused another problem for developers with UAC & it's modified software install -- most all apps I've come across work (or can be made to work) across XP to Vista (with UAC off), but the 1st Vista apps were designed to install only/mainly with UAC on, & that often made a horrible mess of things. Today that's not the huge problem it was then, but once you've soured corp. IT &/or users on Vista they're not terribly likely to try again a year or two later. 3rd, Microsoft designed Vista so there's an awful lot going on, with a lot more processes always running than XP -- they retained much of that in 7, but added better utilization of resources. IMHO it turned out it was silly to try to run Vista on a single core CPU.

Microsoft is using Marketing to try sweetening that sour taste Vista left, & a big part of that is centered on virtualization, i.e. the XP Mode VM. There's a big reason VMs *on the desktop* have always been a niche sort of thing -- the extra layers & lack of real hardware make it slower & less responsive than the real thing, plus not every bit of software will work in a VM. Add in that secure networking can be an extra hassle for corporate. Microsoft's trying to make it as easy as possible, e.g. they're working with including a VM of existing XP installs in the installation image, but with 7 IMHO more often than not it's more about making IT & users feel good than outright necessity. [BTW, Paragon has several apps that can extremely useful for P2V (Physical to Virtual) migration, though any way you do it currently expect a bit of work.]

XP is stable as hell, and is still current.

Any Tech. based business with half a brain will stick with XP, the 9 years its been patched and being fixed has done wonders. A new OS cannot pull that off, Windows7 cannot touch XP, XP is way better.

Aero Shake and the Clock-Thingy on Vista/7 can be done on XP too. My 7 year old computer can act as a DVR function, but if you are stupid the Win7 advertisements will convince you its a new wonder, and only Win7 can do it.
My 2 year old computer has XP, for ****s and giggles, I put 7 on it. Works kinda nice, but video card will not install and games will not launch (GTA SA and Halo 1)

not for me. XP is still #1 for me in performance. i get more FPS then on win7. but i must say that win7 in ok overall. and i think we all agree that vista was a total disaster.

also for me:

1. XP (best performance, i'm used to it - so why go to win7 and searching for things. it still supports all my drivers and software i use)
2. win7 (best for support, drivers etc. + compatible with new software)
3. vista (total crap, worst windows i have had ever installed)

Our security company has customers complaining that we are dropping windows 2000 support in 2012, finally get rid of Windows 95/98 support in 2011, but have no plans to drop support for Windows XP go figure.

i'd say we prob have 20% userbase on win95/9/2k

Looks like people really do have short memory. Remember the perceived Y2K problems? The industry had not switched their software in jillions of years. It was left to us Indians to rewrite the code to comply with 4 digit years in the database. I remember this problem manifesting itself when I was in London some time in late 1997. Boots pharmacy could not enter the year 2000 expiry code as it was seen to be earlier than the date of manufacture.

I totally agree with the motto - don't fix what is not broken. I have clients who are running DOS based accounting software on hardware that is more than 15 years old on Win98. No reason to waste money just for the bragging rights. It does everything they need.

Funny, Windows 7 has much better support for low (processing) powered machines than XP SP3 (RTM has long gone out of support). Also has much better power (as in Watts) management. The same laptop running 7 will give more battery life than running XP.

smithy_dll said,
Funny, Windows 7 has much better support for low (processing) powered machines than XP SP3 (RTM has long gone out of support). Also has much better power (as in Watts) management. The same laptop running 7 will give more battery life than running XP.

FWIW & IMHO, yes & no... XP runs better on older Pentium 4 hardware for example, & 7 won't save any more power if/when hardware support for 7's power saving features just isn't there. OTOH 7 may better support some lower end current hardware (stuff that wasn't around when XP was developed).

xp didn't survive as long as it did because it was great. it survived as long as it did because no one liked vista. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if Vista was everything it was hyped up to be.

seta-san said,
xp didn't survive as long as it did because it was great. it survived as long as it did because no one liked vista. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if Vista was everything it was hyped up to be.

It wasn't just the fact that they press gave Vista a bad name, it was the fact that it was in development for so long too.
Basically,
1. Long ass development + 2. Hate spread by the media = Everyone hates Vista

XP is what it is. A 9 year old operating system that needs to be put to rest.

seta-san said,
xp didn't survive as long as it did because it was great. it survived as long as it did because no one liked vista. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if Vista was everything it was hyped up to be.

Over promising and under delivering; first Bill said was going to be revolutionary, then another group of managers said it would be only evolutionary, then the Windows manager claimed it would be like the second coming of Jesus H Christ, then Ballmer said that it was just a standard release. Please, the media beat up because Microsoft didn't have its **** together with many features in Windows 7 should have been in Windows Vista such as hardware accelerated GDI for starters.

i think the biggest XP killer will be inability to move to x64 hardware. XP is still a better OS than Vista ever was. and i like its UI better in most cases than Win7...it is much more skinnable also.

Leeoniya said,
i think the biggest XP killer will be inability to move to x64 hardware. XP is still a better OS than Vista ever was. and i like its UI better in most cases than Win7...it is much more skinnable also.


sure you can skin it and take resources up that you cant afford to get rid of. Windows 7 is just as skinable since windows blinds for windows 7 uses windows 7 graphics subsystem to skin and takes up no more video ram then Aero does by itself. but also windows XP is less efficient in just about every way on the UI department , With windows Vista and now 7 7 being built on the foundation that was built from the ground up for Vista. and now 7 tho has allot of under the hood tweaks and additions that vista did not get a chance to have but future versions of windows for the next 20 years will be based around and improve upon all the new Framework that Microsoft spent 6 years building (late 2000 to 2006 and 3 years improving (06-09)

Leeoniya said,
i think the biggest XP killer will be inability to move to x64 hardware. XP is still a better OS than Vista ever was. and i like its UI better in most cases than Win7...it is much more skinnable also.

Uh, what? Isn't Neowin one of the main contributors to that uxtheme dll replacement tool? You can skin Windows 7 as easily as Windows XP. It may take some work and the files may be different; but there are plenty of people out there to skin it that do the work for you.

And yes, Windows 7 takes a while to upgrade and configure, along with setting up XPMode, but seriously? You can just install XPMode, configure it with your applications (say the automotive example above, which is notorious for not updating their systems, like AutoZone) -- and just make a VHD of that install, and move it to ... whatever machine you need. ****, even then you can exclude the key, distribute that VHD across the Internet for whoever you want, and force them to active with their own company. I'm actually amazed that hasn't happened yet.

Leeoniya said,
i think the biggest XP killer will be inability to move to x64 hardware...

I agree, though I'd add *eventually*. Someday running 64 bit Windows will be a necessity for everyone -- today it isn't... today in the majority of situations it just complicates things like support.

.Neo said,
And only 9 years after Windows XP's release... Microsoft sure moves quick!

Troll much? The only reason XP is still around is because people complained and complained and complained. Heck, people are STILL complaining because they don't want to upgrade. So Microsoft was kind enough to extend the EoL date. Pretty generous if you ask me. That's something you can't say for Apple.

.Neo said,
And only 9 years after Windows XP's release... Microsoft sure moves quick!

Troll much? The only reason XP is still around is because people complained and complained and complained. Heck, people are STILL complaining because they don't want to upgrade. So Microsoft was kind enough to extend the EoL date. Pretty generous if you ask me. That's something you can't say for Apple.

.Neo said,
And only 9 years after Windows XP's release... Microsoft sure moves quick!

And only 30 years after Mac OS's release, it has only got 5% market share. Apple sure moves at the speed of light!

They just started upgrading the machines at our office to Win7 and it's definitely helped a bit with productivity at least for myself. Hating going back to XP at the office when I had been using Win7 on my home machines for the past year. I think there's only one program that I need to use on the rare occasion which I access through XP mode, but other than that everything seems to be working great for us.

Bad, Bad news for people like me. In the automotive industry 99% of auto manufacturers haven't upgraded their sites to work with IE 7 let alone IE8. Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen/Audi, and Nissan just to name a few. One of the biggest things I always did when ordering a new pc was get it with XP pre-installed... A lot of parts catalogs still run in Windows XP. Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

The only place I can really use Windows 7 are at BMW and Honda Dealers... Not good.

giantsnyy said,
Bad, Bad news for people like me. In the automotive industry 99% of auto manufacturers haven't upgraded their sites to work with IE 7 let alone IE8. Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen/Audi, and Nissan just to name a few. One of the biggest things I always did when ordering a new pc was get it with XP pre-installed... A lot of parts catalogs still run in Windows XP. Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

The only place I can really use Windows 7 are at BMW and Honda Dealers... Not good.

Time for them to upgrade their software then. You can't expect a software company to support an OS for 15-20 years.

giantsnyy said,
Bad, Bad news for people like me. In the automotive industry 99% of auto manufacturers haven't upgraded their sites to work with IE 7 let alone IE8. Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen/Audi, and Nissan just to name a few. One of the biggest things I always did when ordering a new pc was get it with XP pre-installed... A lot of parts catalogs still run in Windows XP. Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

The only place I can really use Windows 7 are at BMW and Honda Dealers... Not good.


But you already have XP mode in 7 so I won't think it'll be a problem. But not entirely sure about with IE versions

Zan said,

But you already have XP mode in 7 so I won't think it'll be a problem. But not entirely sure about with IE versions

You misunderstood what he said. XP mode doesn't come pre-installed and pre-configured in Windows 7, that is something the user has to do.

roadwarrior said,

You misunderstood what he said. XP mode doesn't come pre-installed and pre-configured in Windows 7, that is something the user has to do.


Oh My mistake

giantsnyy said,
Bad, Bad news for people like me............Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

But as a company with multiple PCs why are you installing from scratch on new machines anyway? It would be far quicker, and makes more sense, to use system images. Thus, once you've configured one Windows 7 environment with XP Mode you can install the image to all new PCs.

Bengal34 said,

Time for them to upgrade their software then. You can't expect a software company to support an OS for 15-20 years.

They're not in the business of upgrading their software... They're in the business of manufacturing cars, parts, services, and selling all of the above. In fact a person at Nissan told me they don't intend on upgrading software that works perfectly as is for another 3-4 years.

giantsnyy said,
Bad, Bad news for people like me. In the automotive industry 99% of auto manufacturers haven't upgraded their sites to work with IE 7 let alone IE8. Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen/Audi, and Nissan just to name a few. One of the biggest things I always did when ordering a new pc was get it with XP pre-installed... A lot of parts catalogs still run in Windows XP. Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

The only place I can really use Windows 7 are at BMW and Honda Dealers... Not good.

Not Microsoft's fault that companies have sat on their ass forever.

giantsnyy said,
Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

Then I suggest you start charging them by hour...

giantsnyy said,
One of the biggest things I always did when ordering a new pc was get it with XP pre-installed... A lot of parts catalogs still run in Windows XP.

Personally, I wouldn't have made the assumption that I could just keep ordering XP machines indefinitely. I would've started looking for a migration path a long time ago (hint: you're calling it "bad news"; it shouldn't be "news" to anyone by now), and review the service agreement with those responsible for something as mundane as *parts catalog software* that somehow gets broken because of the underlying OS...Who signed off on *those* specs?

giantsnyy said,
Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

Any IT admin worth his salt will do it once and deploy an image, or use group policies, etc...not spend time at each machine to configure XP mode.

giantsnyy said,
Bad, Bad news for people like me

Complacency is a bitch. I think you've just named its source.

giantsnyy said,
Bad, Bad news for people like me. In the automotive industry 99% of auto manufacturers haven't upgraded their sites to work with IE 7 let alone IE8. Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen/Audi, and Nissan just to name a few. One of the biggest things I always did when ordering a new pc was get it with XP pre-installed... A lot of parts catalogs still run in Windows XP. Configuring Windows XP mode for each machine takes time... a lot of un-necessary time.

The only place I can really use Windows 7 are at BMW and Honda Dealers... Not good.

Sorry to break to those companies but if they want to be in the computing age, they need to have the budget to do so. When the decision makers decided to use software as a major part of their business they should have been smart enough to have some sort of upgrade path and budget. There is cost of ownership in using hardware and software.

_dandy_ said,

Personally, I wouldn't have made the assumption that I could just keep ordering XP machines indefinitely. I would've started looking for a migration path a long time ago (hint: you're calling it "bad news"; it shouldn't be "news" to anyone by now), and review the service agreement with those responsible for something as mundane as *parts catalog software* that somehow gets broken because of the underlying OS...Who signed off on *those* specs?
Any IT admin worth his salt will do it once and deploy an image, or use group policies, etc...not spend time at each machine to configure XP mode.

I'll tell you who signed on those specs... the CAR MANUFACTUERS. They tell US what we can use... they don't really give us an option. The only options we have are the DMS software... which finally, two months ago, added Vista and 7 support. The parts catalog software is proprietary to them, and it's up to them to update the software itself. Most of them use a database file (usually MS Access based) and just interface with that. The biggest manufacturer of these is Snap On. Unfortunately their parts catalog software compatible with Vista and 7 is still in Beta. I have one store using the beta, but it's extremely buggy and doesn't work with my DMS software, which means parts managers need to put in parts orders by hand, and typing something like L321-14-302A-9U for an oil filter 900 times a day is just counter-productive.

I do have Acronis Images for all of the different XP installs I have... which makes it easier. The version of Acronis True Image Server we purchased doesn't like 7's partition structure, so I have to pop in an XP disk, wipe the drive, and then boot acronis. 10 minute re-imaging process now bumped up to 15. Those 5 extra minutes per machine make a huge difference when you're one IT person imaging 100 machines for a new dealership.

Also... would help if the previous IT manager didn't spend the entire AD budget LEASING servers... I can't buy copies of Server 2008 R2 for 7's WDS and Group Policy support... We have Server 2003 R2.

Also... Making images of Windows 7? Can you tell me where I can find a generic OEM product key like i can on Microsoft's site for XP? Can you also show me documentation for that insanely tedious version of SysPrep for 7 (That is if it's the same as the one for Vista)? I barely use 7... I know the OS from a user standpoint and basic Administration... I'm a Mac user at home... outside of work I'd have no way to mess with it.

Complacency is a bitch. I think you've just named its source.

No... it's called having a previous IT team with no direction, trying to step up and do things and get shot down by the company's higher ups. Now we're short a guy since they fired him last month. You try to coordinate opening a dealership, doing a huge server move involving changing T1's around and IP subnets in locations without DHCP (due to the previous IT manager), setting up a new prep facility, clearing off malware and fixing broken printers and balance learning a new OS and sysprep when your other IT person is sitting at his division 30 miles away. Oh and I'm clearing off malware because my previous IT manager said that AD would block viruses and be a web content filter... Now that they know it doesn't... they don't want to spend money on it.

</Rant about how bad my job sucks>

Edited by giantsnyy, Oct 23 2010, 1:11am :

Xenosion said,

Sorry to break to those companies but if they want to be in the computing age, they need to have the budget to do so. When the decision makers decided to use software as a major part of their business they should have been smart enough to have some sort of upgrade path and budget. There is cost of ownership in using hardware and software.

It's not so much software... it's their web standards. They have the budget to do it... Take BMW for example. Their site is IE7 compatible... but when it comes to IE8, some stuff like interfacing with the KeyReader is broken. Compatibility mode works 50% of the time. The other 50% you have to exit the KeyReader software (which has native 7 64-bit support) and re-open it... and the only way BMW lets you do that is if you restart because there's a bug that opens 100 copies if you don't. Instead of bringing their site up to date, they're spending their money fixing their relatively-new Integrated Service Information Server system... which is sooo bad that they send out e-mails weekly that usually start with "We know the last ISIS update sucks and that it broke XXX or YYY".

With Audi and VW most of the links are not clickable, with Nissan it just locks up randomly, Mazda works fine, Honda/Acura work fine, but the best is Mercedes-Benz... they still require java 1.5.05... which last I checked won't install on Windows 7. Firing up XP mode for a web browser is pretty stupid.

giantsnyy said,
It's not so much software... it's their web standards. They have the budget to do it... Take BMW for example. Their site is IE7 compatible... but when it comes to IE8, some stuff like interfacing with the KeyReader is broken. Compatibility mode works 50% of the time. The other 50% you have to exit the KeyReader software (which has native 7 64-bit support) and re-open it... and the only way BMW lets you do that is if you restart because there's a bug that opens 100 copies if you don't. Instead of bringing their site up to date, they're spending their money fixing their relatively-new Integrated Service Information Server system... which is sooo bad that they send out e-mails weekly that usually start with "We know the last ISIS update sucks and that it broke XXX or YYY".

With Audi and VW most of the links are not clickable, with Nissan it just locks up randomly, Mazda works fine, Honda/Acura work fine, but the best is Mercedes-Benz... they still require java 1.5.05... which last I checked won't install on Windows 7. Firing up XP mode for a web browser is pretty stupid.

I feel for you mate; I've worked in companies whose managers see IT as something that they reluctantly accept - in other words they write something one and expect it to last for ever because after all it is a 'real' piece of capital equipment. Until that culture changes in these organisations people like you are going to keep getting shafted by companies whom you depend upon for your business.

What I find interesting is how they treat their sales channel like crap - after all, it is you who make the sales not them, without you they would have no business to speak of.

giantsnyy said,

I'll tell you who signed on those specs... the CAR MANUFACTUERS.
[...]
</Rant about how bad my job sucks>

I guess if you're in that position in the food chain, it's easy to agree to keep taking in a salary and quietly keep deploying XP machines even though you're aware that all hell's gonna break loose...and then claim that none of this is your fault? Am I reading this right?

giantsnyy said,

They're not in the business of upgrading their software... They're in the business of manufacturing cars, parts, services, and selling all of the above.

...and from what I'm reading, you're in the business of maintaining their IT infrastructure which, for them, is a cost of doing business.

giantsnyy said,

In fact a person at Nissan told me they don't intend on upgrading software that works perfectly as is for another 3-4 years.

...and so it's your job to make this Nissan person understand that this is not gonna fly if you can't even get licenses for the new systems you're accountable for. If you're just going to leave it at that (and keep doing the same job despite this), of course you're gonna find out you've been setting yourself up all along.

_dandy_ said,

I guess if you're in that position in the food chain, it's easy to agree to keep taking in a salary and quietly keep deploying XP machines even though you're aware that all hell's gonna break loose...and then claim that none of this is your fault? Am I reading this right?

...and from what I'm reading, you're in the business of maintaining their IT infrastructure which, for them, is a cost of doing business.
...and so it's your job to make this Nissan person understand that this is not gonna fly if you can't even get licenses for the new systems you're accountable for. If you're just going to leave it at that (and keep doing the same job despite this), of course you're gonna find out you've been setting yourself up all along.

You understand I work for a group of car dealers right... not the manufacturers? I don't even have a contact with their IT team. They post a list of requirements on a website... I have to follow them. If i need anything I call their help line... that's about all I can do. That person over in India working for Nissan can't do ANYTHING for me because all he can do is just tell me yes, or no. Even if I did have a chance to speak with their IT design teams... why would they listen to me? One dealer group out of hundreds in the world? Why would I make a difference? 99.9% of Auto dealers in the US don't have an IT support staff... we do because we have close to 20 stores. Everyone else uses their DMS software provider to maintain their computers and internet connections... and they couldn't give a **** what happens in the stores as long as they get paid their annual fee. A friend of mine works at another dealer group and the company they use (Reynolds and Reynolds) just dropped off 4 *NEW* computers for them... HP Brio BA410's (633Mhz Celerons with Windows 2000). Guess how much they were charged... about $2k for that hardware. And there's really only 2 DMS software providers out there so don't say switch.

Also... do you even understand that without these websites my personnel can't do their jobs? Why would I order new machines that DON'T work with what the manufacturers have? Does that make any sense to you?

Edited by giantsnyy, Oct 23 2010, 4:00pm :

giantsnyy said,
why would they listen to me? One dealer group out of hundreds in the world? Why would I make a difference?

If the same problem applies to *all* of the dealers who use their software, then surely *that* makes a difference. So either they're doing something that you're not, or the "why would they listen to one guy" argument is not valid.

In the meantime, what's your Microsoft sales rep's response to your situation? Surely you can negotiate a deal to keep getting XP licenses until this mess is sorted out? Back when I used to write software for IT asset management, the understanding throughout the industry was that for enterprise customers, a license for the latest version of Windows came with downgrade rights. You're not getting your OS licenses from the retail chain, are ya?

_dandy_ said,

You're not getting your OS licenses from the retail chain, are ya?

We are... I've tried pitching Volume Licensing to my bosses... and all they say is that it's not necessary to spend money on something that already comes with a computer. They're so technologically illiterate and have no clue what does what. I couldn't even spend the $5,200 on a layer-3 cisco switch that I needed (required by BMW for their shop network). My boss's reaction: They sell switches and stuff at best buy for $100 get one of those.

giantsnyy said,
We are... I've tried pitching Volume Licensing to my bosses... and all they say is that it's not necessary to spend money on something that already comes with a computer. They're so technologically illiterate and have no clue what does what. I couldn't even spend the $5,200 on a layer-3 cisco switch that I needed (required by BMW for their shop network). My boss's reaction: They sell switches and stuff at best buy for $100 get one of those.

I just have to shake my head man. They're having you build their IT infrastructure in an unsustainable way. Sooner or later it's going to come back and bite you...you're going to be held accountable for this--it's your job after all to keep this going--and it's not going to be pretty for you.

Cut your losses and run, while you still can. Especially given that (according to a few messages above) they've already fired a competent guy. It's starting to sound to me like he's the one who got the better end of the deal.

Windows XP should have been put out to pasture as soon as 7 was mainstream, it's been holding back systems for far too long. RIP Windows XP

melted98 said,
Windows XP should have been put out to pasture as soon as 7 was mainstream, it's been holding back systems for far too long. RIP Windows XP

Not before 2020.

Invariably Windows 7 includes much of XP within it! with all of its new features and functionalities. I bet people won't miss XP anymore like they did after the Vista

Zan said,
Invariably Windows 7 includes much of XP within it! with all of its new features and functionalities. I bet people won't miss XP anymore like they did after the Vista

Vista ? What's that ?

We order allot of PC's with Windows XP downgrade's as allot of custom software is written for windows XP etc as a buiness requirment. We are phasing out windows XP though and starting to roll out windows 7 & server 2008.

tomcoleman said,
We order allot of PC's with Windows XP downgrade's as allot of custom software is written for windows XP etc as a buiness requirment. We are phasing out windows XP though and starting to roll out windows 7 & server 2008.
This is specifically why Microsoft put XP mode into 7 Pro. Now companies with expensive custom software can maintain compatibility while still upgrading their infrastructure. Granted this isn't going to work in all cases, it is certainly much better than having to have every custom program rewritten for 7.

rafter109 said,
This is specifically why Microsoft put XP mode into 7 Pro. Now companies with expensive custom software can maintain compatibility while still upgrading their infrastructure. Granted this isn't going to work in all cases, it is certainly much better than having to have every custom program rewritten for 7.
EXACTLY!

Dashel said,
Downgrade is uneffected by this. XP mode isn't a solution to enterprise concerns.
It's not a solution? Really? Then why is MS pushing it as that? That's the whole reason they made it.

Dashel said,
Downgrade is uneffected by this. XP mode isn't a solution to enterprise concerns.

Eh? XP Mode = Run program as XP would, therefore no need for the insecurities of an ancient OS. It obviously is a solution, as what was it? 90% of companies are starting to migrate!

XP actually runs pretty well on newer machines. I'd like to try installing Windows 95 on a Intel Core i7 box. I bet a fresh install would be pretty close to instant on.

bj55555 said,
XP actually runs pretty well on newer machines. I'd like to try installing Windows 95 on a Intel Core i7 box. I bet a fresh install would be pretty close to instant on.

Well, it wouldn't even make it to windows. It would just bluescreen because of how much ram you have!

warwagon said,

Well, it wouldn't even make it to windows. It would just bluescreen because of how much ram you have!

You're probably right. Heck, it would probably say "Agh! WTF is this SATA connector???"

bj55555 said,
XP actually runs pretty well on newer machines. I'd like to try installing Windows 95 on a Intel Core i7 box. I bet a fresh install would be pretty close to instant on.

anything pre- XP

doesn't have drivers for X58 chipset at all

you wouldn't make it past install i would say!

bj55555 said,
XP actually runs pretty well on newer machines. I'd like to try installing Windows 95 on a Intel Core i7 box. I bet a fresh install would be pretty close to instant on.

I hate it when people put XP on core i7 machines. It's stupid. Gimps the hardware. It's a terrible waste.

bj55555 said,
XP actually runs pretty well on newer machines. I'd like to try installing Windows 95 on a Intel Core i7 box. I bet a fresh install would be pretty close to instant on.

Why would you do that? you're wasting your money doing that.

AnotherITguy said,
got that right! Why would anyone build/buy a machine with xp is beyong my comprehension

some Organization buy XP for compatibility of legacy software.
This should have been done a year ago and i am sure windows 7 would have sold 10 millions copies extra.

AnotherITguy said,
got that right! Why would anyone build/buy a machine with xp is beyong my comprehension

I agree, specially with XP Mode on Professional and Enterprise editions.

still1 said,

some Organization buy XP for compatibility of legacy software.
This should have been done a year ago and i am sure windows 7 would have sold 10 millions copies extra.

Tired of hearing about legacy software. With XPM, Xbox, VMware, and other VM's there is no reason to put XP as the main OS on any computer put out after October 22, 2009. Get over it.

AnotherITguy said,
got that right! Why would anyone build/buy a machine with xp is beyong my comprehension

A lot of older software doesn't run on Windows 7. I have an XP install in dual boot purely running older programs. (And yes I have tried running in compatibility mode)

AnotherITguy said,
got that right! Why would anyone build/buy a machine with xp is beyong my comprehension

I am still building/selling more new PCs with Win XP (Home or Pro) than Win 7. That what my customers demand. I'm giving them what they want.

Majesticmerc said,
Excellent news. XP is incompetent for today's hardware.

Fail, it's awesome for a production environment, Vista killed the default file manager, ripped out tons of features, and made the OS a lot less usable. 7 is nothing but hype and UAC turned down a notch with DirectX 11. I have been eying Kubuntu for a while now as I can make it act a lot like XP (XP as in without all of it's own junk present).

Of course if all you do is play video games then sure, ANY OS that works you could say is awesome, though if all you do is game then you're not interacting with the OS. Newer is not always better.

JAB Creations said,

Fail, it's awesome for a production environment, Vista killed the default file manager, ripped out tons of features, and made the OS a lot less usable. 7 is nothing but hype and UAC turned down a notch with DirectX 11. I have been eying Kubuntu for a while now as I can make it act a lot like XP (XP as in without all of it's own junk present).

Of course if all you do is play video games then sure, ANY OS that works you could say is awesome, though if all you do is game then you're not interacting with the OS. Newer is not always better.

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

pezzonovante said,

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

It's old, silly looking by default but it is NOT unusable. XP is still very easy to use. I'm using Windows 7 myself mind, don't worry

JAB Creations said,

Fail, it's awesome for a production environment, Vista killed the default file manager, ripped out tons of features, and made the OS a lot less usable. 7 is nothing but hype and UAC turned down a notch with DirectX 11. I have been eying Kubuntu for a while now as I can make it act a lot like XP (XP as in without all of it's own junk present).

Of course if all you do is play video games then sure, ANY OS that works you could say is awesome, though if all you do is game then you're not interacting with the OS. Newer is not always better.

If that is how you feel don't let the door hit you in the behind.

JAB Creations said,

Fail, it's awesome for a production environment, Vista killed the default file manager, ripped out tons of features, and made the OS a lot less usable. 7 is nothing but hype and UAC turned down a notch with DirectX 11. I have been eying Kubuntu for a while now as I can make it act a lot like XP (XP as in without all of it's own junk present).

Of course if all you do is play video games then sure, ANY OS that works you could say is awesome, though if all you do is game then you're not interacting with the OS. Newer is not always better.

You missed my point. XP is known to be lacking in certain areas. XP's hard disk formatting capabilities are a known limitation that will start to see light with people purchasing hard disks in 2011. It also lacks WDDM, which makes it much more prone to BSOD in the face of driver or hardware issues. Aside from those two shortcomings off of the top of my head, there are literally thousands of tweaks under the hood of Vista and 7 that make them much more capable with newer hardware than XP. Some of the hardware that we have now didn't exist when XP was released (USB3, etc), and since there will be no more service packs, it's only going to become more obsolete from here on out.

XP might work, but it won't work as well in the future. "Good enough" is not as good as "Good". Its a natural progression of software in a developing field, and this attachment to operating systems baffles me. I loved XP for many years, but in terms of technological advance, its very old now, and setting up XP on new hardware is a waste of good hardware.

Note again that I'm not moaning about XP as an operating system, since it was a great operating system for its time, but hardware capabilities exceed it. Its much like a car without satellite navigation. The car could be fantastic, but the satellites are there, but the car isn't taking advantage of them to the drivers advantage.

I'm using an Aero theme for XP, looks just as good as Vista/7. Also Vista and 7 are NOT customizable and you can not add and remove controls in Windows Explorer which add to the fact that IE9 is now even LESS customizable then IE8 with the TAB bar stuck next to the address bar. M$ is gimping access to the file system because Hollywood is trying to force everyone to stream everything.

Also I do production work and don't need 3TB hard drives. The OS requires less clicking, less waiting, is more responsive, and is ACTUALLY customizable and by that I'm not talking about choosing the Aero theme color rather I'm talking about GUI controls to customize your interaction with it. A friend also said that Vista removed the ability to see folder sizes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...es_removed_in_Windows_Vista

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...atures_removed_in_Windows_7

JAB Creations said,
I'm using an Aero theme for XP, looks just as good as Vista/7. Also Vista and 7 are NOT customizable and you can not add and remove controls in Windows Explorer which add to the fact that IE9 is now even LESS customizable then IE8 with the TAB bar stuck next to the address bar. M$ is gimping access to the file system because Hollywood is trying to force everyone to stream everything.

Also I do production work and don't need 3TB hard drives. The OS requires less clicking, less waiting, is more responsive, and is ACTUALLY customizable and by that I'm not talking about choosing the Aero theme color rather I'm talking about GUI controls to customize your interaction with it. A friend also said that Vista removed the ability to see folder sizes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...es_removed_in_Windows_Vista

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...atures_removed_in_Windows_7

Your friend is a moron and I'd say it straight to his face if I ever saw him.

For a person who has made only 26 posts in a space of 8 months you seem to have an awful lot to say about Windows XP

*cough* troll *cough*

I'm just wondering why everyone is just bashing Windows XP if we all know that it was one of our best pals in time, and when Vista was released. We can not talk about the UI of Windows XP or the uneasiness it presents, as it should be stated, it was made with that time technology.

And, btw, Vista made what Windows 7 and XP are today. If it weren't for Vista we wouldn't have changed back to XP. If it weren't for Vista we wouldn't have all this new hardwares we would have today; I would bet a 4,000 US alienware would be 2GB of RAM DDR2 and a Dual Core processor, plus no SSD. And Windows 7 was possible because all of the feedback to Vista and the beta stages.

JAB Creations said,
I'm using an Aero theme for XP, looks just as good as Vista/7. Also Vista and 7 are NOT customizable and you can not add and remove controls in Windows Explorer which add to the fact that IE9 is now even LESS customizable then IE8 with the TAB bar stuck next to the address bar. M$ is gimping access to the file system because Hollywood is trying to force everyone to stream everything.

Also I do production work and don't need 3TB hard drives. The OS requires less clicking, less waiting, is more responsive, and is ACTUALLY customizable and by that I'm not talking about choosing the Aero theme color rather I'm talking about GUI controls to customize your interaction with it. A friend also said that Vista removed the ability to see folder sizes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...es_removed_in_Windows_Vista

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...atures_removed_in_Windows_7

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

IE9 has by far the best UI of all browsers. It's incredibly minimalistic and functional. Only Luddites prefer the fugly and unusable XP UI to the great Windows 7 UI.

pezzonovante said,
On Windows 7 everything can be done with fewer clicks than on XP. For example, to change screen resolution just type in resolu in the Start Menu search box and immediately you get a link to change screen resolution. On XP one has to remember exactly where this option is buried and click at least 5 or 6 times to get there.

Speaking as someone who uses only Windows 7 and would die if he had to go back to XP, what you've said is not all true. In general, I agree, fewer clicks, but: On XP, to change the resolution, actually only requires 3 clicks. Windows 7 requires 2. But not everything is faster in 7 - if you want to check the "status" of a network connection, for example to determine IP address, in XP usually only required 3 clicks, but in Windows 7 requires 6.

Mikeyx11 said,

Speaking as someone who uses only Windows 7 and would die if he had to go back to XP, what you've said is not all true. In general, I agree, fewer clicks, but: On XP, to change the resolution, actually only requires 3 clicks. Windows 7 requires 2. But not everything is faster in 7 - if you want to check the "status" of a network connection, for example to determine IP address, in XP usually only required 3 clicks, but in Windows 7 requires 6.

6 clicks to determin IP address? Damnnn

Just do it the way I do it

Windows Key + R -> cmd -> ipconfig ... done!

Mikeyx11 said,

Speaking as someone who uses only Windows 7 and would die if he had to go back to XP, what you've said is not all true. In general, I agree, fewer clicks, but: On XP, to change the resolution, actually only requires 3 clicks. Windows 7 requires 2. But not everything is faster in 7 - if you want to check the "status" of a network connection, for example to determine IP address, in XP usually only required 3 clicks, but in Windows 7 requires 6.

Hm, Ubuntu requires 2. Right click on the network icon and select "Connection Information"

Tanooki said,

6 clicks to determin IP address? Damnnn

Just do it the way I do it

Windows Key + R -> cmd -> ipconfig ... done!


What gave you the impression that I don't do it that way?

The point was that not everything requires fewer "clicks", and some things even require more. Not to mention that using ipconfig can be done in XP as well so in regards to that, nothing is different...

Change your My Documents folder location, they removed two of the three shortcuts.

The start menu is now massive and they did nothing to organize the programs, merely worked around it.

The organize menu in Windows Explorer requires two clicks and more dexterity then XP's single click buttons which weren't merged.

I can go on and on!

pezzonovante said,
All the features from XP have been replaced by much superior functionality on Windows Vista/7.

Like the defrag program, yeah, that was a total win, not.

rawr_boy81 said,
For a person who has made only 26 posts in a space of 8 months you seem to have an awful lot to say about Windows XP

How about you keep posting to your heart's content and I'll keep being productive on XP.

JAB Creations said,
Change your My Documents folder location, they removed two of the three shortcuts.

The start menu is now massive and they did nothing to organize the programs, merely worked around it.

The organize menu in Windows Explorer requires two clicks and more dexterity then XP's single click buttons which weren't merged.

Using the Start Menu search any program can be found within a fraction of a second. The same thing used to take at least 15 seconds on XP.
The Windows Explorer on Vista/7 is much more productive than XP's explorer. Using stacks, the breadcrumb bar, the navigation pane, the preview pane and the search box, anything can be accomplished with much fewer clicks than on XP.

pezzonovante said,
...anything can be accomplished with much fewer clicks than on XP.

XP --> Cut (single click)
Vista/7 --> Organize-->Cut (two clicks, requires more dexterity, and holding the mouse button down to release over the button doesn't do anything).

The usual counter is to use the keyboard controls which aren't always the first thing everyone in the world thinks about.

The start menu's programs folder and EVERY SUBSEQUENT FOLDER requires you to CLICK to open those folders.

JAB Creations said,

XP --> Cut (single click)
Vista/7 --> Organize-->Cut (two clicks, requires more dexterity, and holding the mouse button down to release over the button doesn't do anything).

The usual counter is to use the keyboard controls which aren't always the first thing everyone in the world thinks about.

The start menu's programs folder and EVERY SUBSEQUENT FOLDER requires you to CLICK to open those folders.

Everyone I know of uses the right-click context menu to cut/copy/paste. So, it's a complete non-issue.

And only XP users (i.e. Luddites) are used to navigating the Start Menu Programs folders. On Windows 7/Vista there's no need to do that. Everything can be found within a fraction of a second using the incredibly useful Start Menu Search on Windows 7. XP has no Start Menu search. How pathetic is that? I wonder how the Luddites manage to survive without such a useful feature.

Majesticmerc said,

You missed my point. XP is known to be lacking in certain areas. XP's hard disk formatting capabilities are a known limitation that will start to see light with people purchasing hard disks in 2011. It also lacks WDDM, which makes it much more prone to BSOD in the face of driver or hardware issues. Aside from those two shortcomings off of the top of my head, there are literally thousands of tweaks under the hood of Vista and 7 that make them much more capable with newer hardware than XP. Some of the hardware that we have now didn't exist when XP was released (USB3, etc), and since there will be no more service packs, it's only going to become more obsolete from here on out.

XP might work, but it won't work as well in the future. "Good enough" is not as good as "Good". Its a natural progression of software in a developing field, and this attachment to operating systems baffles me. I loved XP for many years, but in terms of technological advance, its very old now, and setting up XP on new hardware is a waste of good hardware.

Note again that I'm not moaning about XP as an operating system, since it was a great operating system for its time, but hardware capabilities exceed it. Its much like a car without satellite navigation. The car could be fantastic, but the satellites are there, but the car isn't taking advantage of them to the drivers advantage.

It is Microsoft's fault for not releasing a SP4 to fix those problems.