Windows XP remains nearly flat; Windows 8/8.1 up slightly in November's OS data

Microsoft's goal of reducing the market share of Windows XP to just 13 percent worldwide by its support cut off date of April 8th is looking more and more like it will miss its target. Newly posted numbers from the research firm Net Applications shows that worldwide, Windows XP is still the second most popular operating system on PCs, claiming 31.22 percent of the market in November.

Those new numbers are nearly the same as what the firm showed for Windows XP in October, with 31.24 percent, and in September when it had 31.41 percent of the market. With just over four months to go, it would seem like the over 12-year old OS will be installed on a large percentage of PCs well after the April 8th cut off date.

Windows 8.1 officially launched in October, and Net Applications showed that in November the free update to Windows 8 claimed 2.64 percent of the OS market, compared to 1.72 in October. Windows 8 saw its share decrease to 6.66 percent in November, down from 7.52 percent in October. Combined, Windows 8 and 8.1 claimed 9.3 percent of the OS market share worldwide last month, which is only up slightly compared to 9.25 percent in October.

Windows 7 remains the number one PC OS and actually gained market share in November, rising to 46.64 percent compared to 46.42 percent in October. Windows Vista went down to 3.57 percent in November, compared to 3.63 in October. There's a good possibility that Windows 8.1 could surpass Windows Vista in December.

Source: Net Applications | Image via Net Applications

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Interview: We chat with Collateral Damage Studios on their Internet Explorer mascot

Next Story

IE11 surges up in market share in latest web browser user numbers

135 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Love the arguments of "My Mom still uses XP" LOL My company still writes code for IE6 and IE5 LOL. All high school comments aside, as many logical people have said: there has been more than enough time to upgrade. It's almost 2014. You want to run XP, fine. Just don't expect patches. Same for when Windows 2000 was coming to an end for support. Get on board or run your decade+ old OS. Are Mac people still running OS 9?

I'm not sure where you are getting the high school comments from. People are expressing real life events here. Here on base and across the Air Force we have hundreds of systems still running XP. It works wonderfully for the task at hand. Hell, we still have some Windows NT machines that are used for storing some of our service manuals.

Wow there's a lot of hate for XP, I liked it
but that was partly because of all the customisation available for the OS, stardock bootskin, custom startup/shutdown wavs, and do on, (hell, by the time I was done the only thing that reminded me that I was using XP was the obligatory random bsod, and for me those were rare.

Riva said,
They supported XP for waaaayyyy to long. They should of killed it when Windows 7 came out.

Things are much more complex than you can fathom to realize. There are so many legal and business decisions to make about the support of the product. Even going by your logic if they had killed XP at that time then people would have been still using XP till today. Don't expect XP to really die for the next 5 years.

Many developing countries are the biggest user of XP and it is not that everyone is getting hacked etc. As long as old hardware are still working and people can find drivers for it, XP is not going anywhere.

how is the IT strategy a legal decision?
Windows XP hardware can run Windows 7 just fine.
A lot of users of the G8 and G20 still use XP This is the problem.

People and businesses will continue to use XP as long as it is working fine on their current hardware. They are not going to get paranoid and start throwing their perfectly fine computer just because one day MS decides that it won't release anymore security updates.

For most of these users their next step will be get Win 7 rather than getting disgraced Win 8 with useless touch centric UI on their computers.

Auditor said,
People and businesses will continue to use XP as long as it is working fine on their current hardware. They are not going to get paranoid and start throwing their perfectly fine computer just because one day MS decides that it won't release anymore security updates.

For most of these users their next step will be get Win 7 rather than getting disgraced Win 8 with useless touch centric UI on their computers.

Remember Blaster? ISPs banned and closed connections that were detected replicating it. It will happen again when the next big exploit hits XP.

Also, if touch-centric is bad then why are touchscreen phones and tablets the biggest selling consumer devices now?

Eric said,

Remember Blaster? ISPs banned and closed connections that were detected replicating it. It will happen again when the next big exploit hits XP.

Also, if touch-centric is bad then why are touchscreen phones and tablets the biggest selling consumer devices now?

I said touch is useless on Desktop and Laptop or any productivity machines. Tablet and Phone are not contender for productivity work but merely good for occasional consuming devices.

Auditor said,

I said touch is useless on Desktop and Laptop or any productivity machines. Tablet and Phone are not contender for productivity work but merely good for occasional consuming devices.

People do more work on their tablets and smartphones than you seem to care to realize. Or at least willing to admit. Working part time in retail, and we're BYOD. Smartphones have increased productivity and have sped up service. But hey, what would I know?

Auditor said,
People and businesses will continue to use XP as long as it is working fine on their current hardware. They are not going to get paranoid and start throwing their perfectly fine computer just because one day MS decides that it won't release anymore security updates.

Who said they have to throw away the computer? Windows 7 may run just fine on it, or even better than Windows XP does.

The rest of your post was ignorant trolling rubbish.

Its really old PC's that can't run modern versions of Windows such as Windows 7/8 that keeping it going. These PC's while not state of the art, can access the modern Internet using a modern web browser such as Firefox or Chrome, use modern websites such as Google or Facebook, no problems. Yet its still performing basic office productivity and run the business apps that meets the needs of that business. 'If it ain't broke, why try to fix it'.

Exactly, I do business at two banks and they both big commercial banks and I was shocked to see XP is still in use. When you take into perspective though, its a single task operation on these computers and it gets the task done.

Best way to kill Windows XP, make all copies of Windows 7 $20, no limit.

Best way to kill Windows 8.1, make all copies of Windows 7 $20, no limit.

Excellent suggestion, although somewhat unrealistic. But, very close to the truth, until the Windows-8 mess has been fixed for non-touch centric users and devices.

Or bring back the $40 Windows 8 upgrade price. When the windows 8 upgrade was $40 I did more XP to windows 8 upgrades in that short time than I had done in 9 years.

warwagon said,
Or bring back the $40 Windows 8 upgrade price. When the windows 8 upgrade was $40 I did more XP to windows 8 upgrades in that short time than I had done in 9 years.

personally. if microsoft charges $20 for win7 and pay ME $40 to upgrade to win8. i'll pay $20.

Geezy said,
That's about what apple charges, and you don't see a lot of people with an old OSX version for no reason.

They've actually decided to stop charging for OS updates. But it doesn't really seem like that's an option for Microsoft...

CSheep said,

They've actually decided to stop charging for OS updates. But it doesn't really seem like that's an option for Microsoft...

When a number of their OS updates were more like Windows service packs, I'm not surprised.

Every computer in the hospital I work in runs XP and almost all of the hardware is unable to run anything more modern. XP isn't going anywhere anytime soon. It's cheap and it does the job for a lot of people as it is.

Kaze23 said,
It's sad that XP hasn't been killed off sooner.

you know the saddest part? judging by microsoft's current strategy. they don't know how to "kill" it. or let win 8 prospers.

sure. blame the existing user base. that'll solve the problem.

wasd- said,
Seriously Microsoft can't see that they did something wrong with Windows 8/8.1? LOL

Windows 8 wasn't perfect and I believe even Microsoft can see that. However, this is a completely different market than a few years ago. Tablets and smartphones have really hit Windows hard. The vast majority of people who only did a few things on their computers can now do it on their phones or tablets. They just don't see the reason to upgrade.

And one big difference too is that to upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 8, you can use the same hardware most of the time. However, to do the same with windows xp, you'd probably need a brand new computer.

wasd- said,
Seriously Microsoft can't see that they did something wrong with Windows 8/8.1? LOL

Well, nothing to see, November has always been a month that almost nothing changes in the OS market, December isn't very intresting either. Holiday season holds back market share, in January, we get a backslash.

wasd- said,
Seriously Microsoft can't see that they did something wrong with Windows 8/8.1? LOL

Develop a next generation operating system? Yeah that's completely wrong. Maybe if they cling to the olds ways even harder, people will abandon their mobile devices and move back to point and clicking on everything.

/s

Dot Matrix said,

Develop a next generation operating system? Yeah that's completely wrong. Maybe if they cling to the olds ways even harder, people will abandon their mobile devices and move back to point and clicking on everything.

/s

Completely missed the point. But that's not a surprise.

No one is saying Microsoft shouldn't have developed newer operating system, just that some people don't have the need or the want to upgrade, and they shouldn't be forced or abandoned.

stevan said,

Completely missed the point. But that's not a surprise.

No one is saying Microsoft shouldn't have developed newer operating system, just that some people don't have the need or the want to upgrade, and they shouldn't be forced or abandoned.

No one is forcing them to upgrade, but technology isn't supported forever. Microsoft is under no obligation to support those who refuse to upgrade. They're a technology company. They can't keep pouring resources into deprecated bits, and expect to remain relevant for long.

Dot Matrix said,

No one is forcing them to upgrade, but technology isn't supported forever. Microsoft is under no obligation to support those who refuse to upgrade. They're a technology company. They can't keep pouring resources into deprecated bits, and expect to remain relevant for long.

There is a fundamental difference between supporting an older software or firmware for a specific program AND supporting an older operating system that tens of millions of people still use.

I am all for the advancement of the technology but when such a huge number of people aren't upgrading, Microsoft should listen.

And to those that think this is only moms and dads that don't know the difference...tons of businesses are choosing to stay with XP.

stevan said,

There is a fundamental difference between supporting an older software or firmware for a specific program AND supporting an older operating system that tens of millions of people still use.

I am all for the advancement of the technology but when such a huge number of people aren't upgrading, Microsoft should listen.

And to those that think this is only moms and dads that don't know the difference...tons of businesses are choosing to stay with XP.

No, "tons of businesses" are not staying with XP. That would be suicide.

stevan said,

Windows XP is no longer generating any money for Microsoft, why would they continue supporting it? They announced the cutoff date long ago and even extended it. It makes zero business sense to continue supporting XP, so they no longer will. If those users are too dumb to move on then it's their fault if they are compromised.

mrp04 said,

Windows XP is no longer generating any money for Microsoft, why would they continue supporting it? They announced the cutoff date long ago and even extended it. It makes zero business sense to continue supporting XP, so they no longer will. If those users are too dumb to move on then it's their fault if they are compromised.

I can see from your reply that you lack the understanding on how a company should support businesses. Microsoft extending the support date is in line with what I'm saying. They were hoping more users would leave it but it hasn't been the case.

wasd- said,
Seriously Microsoft can't see that they did something wrong with Windows 8/8.1? LOL

Should they? IMO the only thing they did wrong is listen to an already-whiny internet.

That is the problem...Microsoft's arrogance prevents them from seeing the mess they made and created with Windows-8.x. Until they do, hopefully soon, XP and Windows-7 will be around for a very long time. Of course, there is the spectre that another viable OS will come on the scene.

TsarNikky said,
That is the problem...Microsoft's arrogance prevents them from seeing the mess they made and created with Windows-8.x. Until they do, hopefully soon, XP and Windows-7 will be around for a very long time. Of course, there is the spectre that another viable OS will come on the scene.

XP's dead on April 8, no matter how much you might whine and complain about it.

Eric said,

Should they? IMO the only thing they did wrong is listen to an already-whiny internet.

Or, they actually listened and responded to customer feedback. First with Windows, then with Xbox. It's much more than just people on the internet whining.

stevan said,

I can see from your reply that you lack the understanding on how a company should support businesses. Microsoft extending the support date is in line with what I'm saying. They were hoping more users would leave it but it hasn't been the case.

LOL you're saying they should indefinitely dump money into supporting XP with nothing in return? Might as well throw a steady stream of cash into a fire.

mrp04 said,

LOL you're saying they should indefinitely dump money into supporting XP with nothing in return? Might as well throw a steady stream of cash into a fire.

We are talking about hundreds of millions of users. Doing their best to convert them to newer software can make them repeat customers.

Nope, not even close. There are many possible way to support Windows XP, either through security updates, or giving people incentives to upgrade and such.

stevan said,

Nope, not even close. There are many possible way to support Windows XP, either through security updates

Building security updates costs MONEY, TIME, and various other resources supporting. This is why they are ENDING in April. This way, Microsoft can spending that money better supporting operating systems that matter.

Dot Matrix said,

Which costs MONEY and TIME and OTHER RESOURCES better used supporting newer technologies. Spending money with no return will not support a business. C'mon dude.

Which is why I said:

or giving people incentives to upgrade and such.

Selective quoting won't get you anywhere. Besides, if you spend money converting those people to newer operating systems, you can more easily turn them into repeat customers.

stevan said,

Nope, not even close. There are many possible way to support Windows XP, either through security updates, or giving people incentives to upgrade and such.

People still on XP aren't people making money for Microsoft. Repeat customers? They haven't bought a product in 13 years, and it only cost them ~$100.

stevan said,

Besides, if you spend money converting those people to newer operating systems, you can more easily turn them into repeat customers.

They did, they released Windows Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1. They spent a lot of money encouraging people to upgrade. They released family packs to allow families with multiple computers cheap upgrades, they released heavily discounted Windows 8 upgrade packs, they advertised, they extended support for Windows XP to facilitate this transition, they provide bucket loads of technical information for those who need it to make seamless transitions, they provided tools to facilitate the upgrade to modern versions of Windows, they allowed Windows to upgrade in-place from previous versions so you didn't have to lose anything.

Microsoft invested heavily in it. They've done their job, they've done about all they can, it's only ignorant fools who continue to wait until just before cut off time before they get up to order or upgrade.

What other incentives could they do? Should they be paying users to upgrade to Windows XP? Is that what you're eluding to?

Please share with us all what Microsoft should do to help this transition; I await with baited breath.

Ideas Man said,

They did, they released Windows Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1. They spent a lot of money encouraging people to upgrade. They released family packs to allow families with multiple computers cheap upgrades, they released heavily discounted Windows 8 upgrade packs, they advertised, they extended support for Windows XP to facilitate this transition, they provide bucket loads of technical information for those who need it to make seamless transitions, they provided tools to facilitate the upgrade to modern versions of Windows, they allowed Windows to upgrade in-place from previous versions so you didn't have to lose anything.

Microsoft invested heavily in it. They've done their job, they've done about all they can, it's only ignorant fools who continue to wait until just before cut off time before they get up to order or upgrade.

What other incentives could they do? Should they be paying users to upgrade to Windows XP? Is that what you're eluding to?

Please share with us all what Microsoft should do to help this transition; I await with baited breath.

You give them incentives by releasing quality upgrades, and not just bumping the version number.

Vista and 8 are failures, and on an enormous scale. The numbers show it: most people are using XP or 7.

stevan said,

You give them incentives by releasing quality upgrades, and not just bumping the version number.

Vista and 8 are failures, and on an enormous scale. The numbers show it: most people are using XP or 7.

Vista set the base for Windows 7 and was a solid OS. It's technologies live on in Windows 7. Windows 8 has sold over 100 million licences and continues to push boundaries and inspire new form factors.

Such failures.

Windows Vista, 7, and 8 are all quality upgrades. They feature new technologies that, quite frankly, are needed. They all work, and work remarkably well. They're hardly "bumped numbers" (whatever that means.)

Dot Matrix said,

Vista set the base for Windows 7 and was a solid OS. It's technologies live on in Windows 7. Windows 8 has sold over 100 million licences and continues to push boundaries and inspire new form factors.

Such failures.

Windows Vista, 7, and 8 are all quality upgrades. They feature new technologies that, quite frankly, are needed. They all work, and work remarkably well. They're hardly "bumped numbers" (whatever that means.)

Sorry to break it to you but Vista was a complete and utter failure. Windows 8 isn't there....yet.

stevan said,

Sorry to break it to you but Vista was a complete and utter failure. Windows 8 isn't there....yet.

Why? Because it didn't sell eleven billion million copies? Hate to break it to you, but Vista was a success. It marked many firsts for Microsoft - not only with their development process (after the Longhorn failures), but the Trustworthy Computing Initiative undertaken by the company was a huge step forward in terms of OS stability and security.

And proof Windows 8 has "failed", 100 million licences isn't proof enough that it's selling? Or are you moving the goal posts here by claiming market share isn't high enough?

Dot Matrix said,

Why? Because it didn't sell eleven billion million copies? Hate to break it to you, but Vista was a success. It marked many firsts for Microsoft - not only with their development process (after the Longhorn failures), but the Trustworthy Computing Initiative undertaken by the company was a huge step forward in terms of OS stability and security.

And proof Windows 8 has "failed", 100 million licences isn't proof enough that it's selling? Or are you moving the goal posts here by claiming market share isn't high enough?

First, Microsoft themselves admitted Vista was a failure on many levels. Not sure jos you're going to spin that one.

Secondly, you're forgetting which article were arguing about:

Combined, Windows 8 and 8.1 claimed 9.3 percent of the OS market share worldwide last month, which is only up slightly compared to 9.25 percent in October.

stevan said,

Secondly, you're forgetting which article were arguing about:

Ok. And? Windows 8.1 was just released a few months ago.

stevan said,

You give them incentives by releasing quality upgrades, and not just bumping the version number.

Vista and 8 are failures, and on an enormous scale. The numbers show it: most people are using XP or 7.

OK, you're nothing more than a troll. This isn't the first time you've skirted around Windows 7 to try and justify your silly position. You ignore all rationale, all reason and continue to live in a fantasy land.

Just bump the version number? How disingenuous that is. Microsoft made massive changes to the stability and security of Windows since Windows XP and provide many financial incentives to encourage upgrades, which you completely dismiss out of hand. I don't see what else they need to do to make you believe they put effort into getting users to upgrade, but I'm fairly convinced that it would've either been money in the box, or you're a prolific troller.

You also completely failed to provide examples of how Microsoft could incentivise users to upgrade. How about you put some effort into responses, instead of lame (And disproven) retorts like "VCRs are still available".

Good for you.

Ideas Man said,

OK, you're nothing more than a troll. This isn't the first time you've skirted around Windows 7 to try and justify your silly position. You ignore all rationale, all reason and continue to live in a fantasy land.

Just bump the version number? How disingenuous that is. Microsoft made massive changes to the stability and security of Windows since Windows XP and provide many financial incentives to encourage upgrades, which you completely dismiss out of hand. I don't see what else they need to do to make you believe they put effort into getting users to upgrade, but I'm fairly convinced that it would've either been money in the box, or you're a prolific troller.

You also completely failed to provide examples of how Microsoft could incentivise users to upgrade. How about you put some effort into responses, instead of lame (And disproven) retorts like "VCRs are still available".

Good for you.

Don't be so pathetic that you have to resort to personal attacks to prove your point.

stevan said,

Don't be so pathetic that you have to resort to personal attacks to prove your point.

Provide examples to prove yours! You ignore everyone else and regurgitate the same stuff in response to everyone else's responses.

Question for your: How could Microsoft incentivise users to upgrade from Windows XP?

Your answer cannot include extend support, because that's been done at least twice already.

Go.

Windows 7 is great, but the only thing going for it now is the start menu.

I went back to Windows 7 after formatting from the Windows 8.1 preview, just to see if I could give up on the metro crap Microsoft was pushing.

Well.. I'm back on Widows 8.1 and the main reason is simply speed. Windows 8 simply blows Windows 7 out of the water when it comes to the sheer performance boost I gained, it's just too good to give up on.

If Microsoft wanted to kill off Windows 7, they could do right now. Just give us options put the start menu back, something that should have been there from the release.

http://i.imgur.com/DS5LsyR.jpg

Exclusive mode (on): Classic desktop. Like we all know and love from Windows. No full screen metro, no apps, just boot to desktop with the traditional start menu like we had in Windows 7.
There would be no reason for anyone to keep Windows 7 installed at that point.
Exclusive mode (on): Windows 8 modern UI Style. Forgoing the traditional desktop, everything in this mode is go large with Apps or go home. No access to anything desktop related.
Exclusive mode (off): With exclusive mode turned off, it acts as Windows 8 is now, with a mixture of old traditional desktop OS with start screen, no start menu but with access to apps.

Why Microsoft didn't provide this option to ease the transition? Who knows, people say the startmenu code was removed due to restrictions of the code, yet we already have multiple 3rd parties creating their own fully functional start menus that mimic Windows 7's.

Surely it would have made more sense to lure people over with the ability to 'try' apps for themselves, or indeed if they needed to jump back to the start menu, to be able to do so.

tldr; http://i.imgur.com/DS5LsyR.jpg

People should just update to Windows 8.1 and have it launch to desktop. There's really no reason to buy Windows 7 at this point... especially because support for Windows 7 will expire sooner than Windows 8.1.

cybersaurusrex said,
People should just update to Windows 8.1 and have it launch to desktop. There's really no reason to buy Windows 7 at this point... especially because support for Windows 7 will expire sooner than Windows 8.1.

BS

I have friends and family that still use windows xp. However, they barely use their computers at all. They all have various tablets and upgrading their pcs isn't a priority nowadays.

Microsoft should continue to support it with future updates only because so many people are still using it.

What should worry Microsoft is: If XP users decide to upgrade to a newer Windows OS and get Windows 7, Microsoft could have real trouble on their hands. Lets say 20% XP users update to Windows 7 in a year or two, that's 66.64% of Windows 7 share and it will be Vista and XP all over again. This is likely going to happen with businesses, schools, and many homes too.

stevan said,
I have friends and family that still use windows xp. However, they barely use their computers at all. They all have various tablets and upgrading their pcs isn't a priority nowadays.

Microsoft should continue to support it with future updates only because so many people are still using it.

Um. [u]NO![/u]

[quote=stevan said,][quote=Dot Matrix said,]

Um. [u]NO![/u][/quote

Because abandoning or forcing such a large amount of users is better...[/quote]

At this point they deserve nothing. Kill XP, it's rotten to the core.

Dot Matrix said,

At this point they deserve nothing. Kill XP, it's rotten to the core.

Yes, Microsoft should alienate even more people. Great strategy.

stevan said,
Because abandoning or forcing such a large amount of users is better...

How long should a company realistically be required to support something it discontinued years ago? The date was set long ago, years worth of advance notice... why should Microsoft be penalized for other people's poor judgement?

Just a heads up so there's no surprises, Windows 7's end of life is in 2020. So try and make plans sometime before 2025 mmkay?

Max Norris said,

How long should a company realistically be required to support something it discontinued years ago? The date was set long ago, years worth of advance notice... why should Microsoft be penalized for other people's poor judgement?

Just a heads up so there's no surprises, Windows 7's end of life is in 2020. So try and make plans sometime before 2025 mmkay?

That's why I said "because a lot of people are still using it"....

No matter how old the software, when we are dealing in the tens of millions of users, Microsoft should definitely support them. And I'm not taking about new software, just security updates.

My mom uses XP, she doesn't know it's "expired", or that there's windows 7 or even Windows 8. And there are millions like her out there.

stevan said,

Yes, Microsoft should alienate even more people. Great strategy.

What Max Norris said. XP is friggin 13 years old. There's no reason to waste more time or energy supporting deprecated code. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the idiotic few.

Dot Matrix said,

What Max Norris said. XP is friggin 13 years old. There's no reason to waste more time or energy supporting deprecated code. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the idiotic few.

Hmm, by that reasoning you could call those that upgraded to windows 8 "idiotic few". Because MANY are still using windows xp and they got needs.

stevan said,
That's why I said "because a lot of people are still using it"....

It's really hard to find *any* manystream company that would support their software for that long, especially after it's been retired by multiple newer versions. It's unreasonable... may as well demand support for MS-DOS or Ubuntu 6.10 while you're at it.

stevan said,
My mom uses XP, she doesn't know it's "expired", or that there's windows 7 or even Windows 8.

Seriously? Never watches the news? Never seen any commercials? Doesn't have a son who's nice enough to say "Hey ma, your computer needs an upgrade"?

stevan said,

Microsoft should continue to support it with future updates only because so many people are still using it.

No. This is absurd.

Microsoft has played Weekend at Bernie's with Windows XP for far too long already. That's the reason so many still cling to it, because the mistake of extending support time and time again has been made.

No more. Time to kill it off for good and let technology move on.

Max Norris said,

Seriously? Never watches the news? Never seen any commercials? Doesn't have a son who's nice enough to say "Hey ma, your computer needs an upgrade"?

Her son told her not to upgrade. All she does is Facebook and email. Upgrading would be pointless for her.

Lord Method Man said,

No. This is absurd.

Microsoft has played Weekend at Bernie's with Windows XP for far too long already. That's the reason so many still cling to it, because the mistake of extending support time and time again has been made.

No more. Time to kill it off for good and let technology move on.

It's the other way around. Microsoft extended the support because a lot of people are still using it. That number hasn't dwindled enough for Microsoft to abandon it.

stevan said,

It's the other way around. Microsoft extended the support because a lot of people are still using it. That number hasn't dwindled enough for Microsoft to abandon it.

Doesn't matter. XP is old news. Extending its death for the umpteenth time isn't going to do much except give people an excuse. Microsoft can't move forward as a company, and still drag this along. Time to let it go.

Dot Matrix said,

Doesn't matter. XP is old news. Extending its death for the umpteenth time isn't going to do much except give people an excuse. Microsoft can't move forward as a company, and still drag this along. Time to let it go.

Of course it matters. That's a ton of users. Some of which don't purchase Windows again bc of the malware they will experience. They may buy a Mac where there are zero viruses.

stevan said,
They may buy a Mac where there are zero viruses.

*All* operating systems can get malware. Each and every one. OSX has gotten them. Even Linux has gotten them. The only way an OS would be immune to malware is to deny the ability to install any software, and you're still at the mercy of any unknown vulnerabilities the OS may have, never mind third party applications such as browsers. The only reason Windows is targeted so often is because there's so many people using it, especially with a large number of users who continue to use an old version that's inherently less secure.

Max Norris said,

*All* operating systems can get malware. Each and every one. OSX has gotten them. Even Linux has gotten them. The only way an OS would be immune to malware is to deny the ability to install any software, and you're still at the mercy of any unknown vulnerabilities the OS may have. The only reason Windows is targeted so often is because there's so many people using it, especially with a large number of users who continue to use an old version that's inherently less secure.

There are zero viruses on the Mac. It has gotten few malware and Trojan vulnerabilities but currently, in the wild, there are no viruses on the Mac.

stevan said,

It's the other way around. Microsoft extended the support because a lot of people are still using it. That number hasn't dwindled enough for Microsoft to abandon it.

Yes, it has because Microsoft IS abandoning it, as they should.

stevan said,
There are zero viruses on the Mac. It has gotten few malware and Trojan vulnerabilities but currently, in the wild, there are no viruses on the Mac.

That is called "cherrypicking". You know that the overwhelming majority of malware for Windows isn't real viruses either right? Or are you going to try and sell the idea that "Malware's ok, but hey, no viruses?"

stevan said,

Of course it matters. That's a ton of users. Some of which don't purchase Windows again bc of the malware they will experience. They may buy a Mac where there are zero viruses.

If that's the case then these users are useless to Microsoft. Better they go to Mac than continue support XP.

Lord Method Man said,

Yes, it has because Microsoft IS abandoning it, as they should.

Really, because I could swear this article is about Windows XP being stagnant. Kind of like Windows 8...

mrp04 said,

If that's the case then these users are useless to Microsoft. Better they go to Mac than continue support XP.

You're taking about hundreds of millions of users.

Lets say 20% XP users update to Windows 7 in a year or two, that's 66.64% of Windows 7 share and it will be Vista and XP all over again. This is likely going to happen with businesses, schools, and many homes too.

Fragmentation will be an even bigger problem if MS sticks to its plans to release a new version of Windows every year.

Dot Matrix said,

That have had SEVERAL YEARS to upgrade.

Past several years the economy has tanked and not everyone, or companies, have the money to upgrade. It isn't as easy as saying they should of upgraded our they had plenty of time. Not saying MS should support xp longer, rather that it will be in use by many when support ends on April.

Dot Matrix said,

That have had SEVERAL YEARS to upgrade.

Wow you just don't get it do you. It's not about what they should or shouldn't have done, it's the fact that they didn't upgrade and now there are hundreds of millions of them. Microsoft would be stupid to abandon them.

Wow you just don't get it do you. It's not about what they should or shouldn't have done, it's the fact that they didn't upgrade and now there are hundreds of millions of them. Microsoft would be stupid to abandon them.

It's likely no longer cost effective to maintain the staff, code, and test platforms to ensure that security updates continue to work, and don't wreck anything on these older systems.

I'd say this is a non-issue though. Mission critical infrastructure on XP has no business being online anyway, so it won't be severely impacted by lack of security updates. End users who want to stick with it will be able to do so - it's not as if Microsoft's last update will make every XP machine explode.

Edited by zhangm, Dec 1 2013, 11:43pm :

stevan said,

Of course it matters. That's a ton of users. Some of which don't purchase Windows again bc of the malware they will experience. They may buy a Mac where there are zero viruses.

Good. Maybe they can cry to Apple about having to upgrade every few years compared to every several. I'm sure they'd love to hear how they should be supporting a 13 year old version of Mac OSX.

Dot Matrix said,

Good. Maybe they can cry to Apple about having to upgrade every few years compared to every several. I'm sure they'd love to hear how they should be supporting a 13 year old version of Mac OSX.

Old Macs, like new Macs, don't have to worry about malware.

stevan said,
I have friends and family that still use windows xp. However, they barely use their computers at all. They all have various tablets and upgrading their pcs isn't a priority nowadays.

Microsoft should continue to support it with future updates only because so many people are still using it.

Ummm... Ok. So when Windows 7 is supposed to be cut off, we still support those users, so we have people on Windows XP being supported and people on Windows 7 supported. After that, we have less and less people upgrading to each future operating system, and Microsoft would be supporting 25 operating systems, each with different new features, vulnerabilities, etc. After a while, Microsoft sees that only 10 people are upgrading their systems, so they decide to stop developing new operating systems, and they just do bug fixes on their now 1743 different operating systems. If they don't stop Windows XP now, when would they stop it? The only reason people would ever upgrade is because their operating systems aren't being maintained anymore.

mastercoms said,

Ummm... Ok. So when Windows 7 is supposed to be cut off, we still support those users, so we have people on Windows XP being supported and people on Windows 7 supported. After that, we have less and less people upgrading to each future operating system, and Microsoft would be supporting 25 operating systems, each with different new features, vulnerabilities, etc. After a while, Microsoft sees that only 10 people are upgrading their systems, so they decide to stop developing new operating systems, and they just do bug fixes on their now 1743 different operating systems. If they don't stop Windows XP now, when would they stop it? The only reason people would ever upgrade is because their operating systems aren't being maintained anymore.

Thank you! That's exactly it, Microsoft is forcing people to upgrade from XP ONLY because it's not supported any more. If they actually went out and created a new operating system worth updating, people would update in a hurry. But they didn't, Windows 8 is a huge publicity mess and Windows 7 simply works.

This is another example where Microsoft isn't adopting to the change in markets. Forcing your customers to upgrade isn't the answer. Making an operating system worth upgrading is the way to do it.

stevan said,

Thank you! That's exactly it, Microsoft is forcing people to upgrade from XP ONLY because it's not supported any more. If they actually went out and created a new operating system worth updating, people would update in a hurry. But they didn't, Windows 8 is a huge publicity mess and Windows 7 simply works.

This is another example where Microsoft isn't adopting to the change in markets. Forcing your customers to upgrade isn't the answer. Making an operating system worth upgrading is the way to do it.

Where is Microsoft forcing people to upgrade? What universe do you live in?

stevan said,

Old Macs, like new Macs, don't have to worry about malware.

Please. Apple has to worry about Malware, and shame on you for claiming otherwise. In case you're lost, here's a few reminders of the reality Apple faces:

Why not straight from the source?
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5666

Also:
http://www.neowin.net/news/app...fix-flashback-malware-issue
http://www.neowin.net/forum/to...tacks-mac-os-x-and-windows/
http://www.neowin.net/news/new...uld-be-worse-than-flashback

Dot Matrix said,

Where is Microsoft forcing people to upgrade? What universe do you live in?

I thought by now, in this discussion, you would know exactly what I mean by "forcing".

stevan said,

I thought by now, in this discussion, you would know exactly what I mean by "forcing".

Cutting off support != forcing.

stevan said,
I thought by now, in this discussion, you would know exactly what I mean by "forcing".

I ask again, how about other OS's that do the exact same thing? Why aren't you raising up a stink about old versions of Apple's OS or Linux? Where's the MS-DOS love? How about my older Androids that never get updated?

Software gets updated, old versions get retired, support eventually disappears. That's the way of things, always has been. Better get used to it.

Max Norris said,

I ask again, how about other OS's that do the exact same thing? Why aren't you raising up a stink about old versions of Apple's OS or Linux? Where's the MS-DOS love? How about my older Androids that never get updated?

Software gets updated, old versions get retired, support eventually disappears. That's the way of things, always has been. Better get used to it.

I hate repeating myself, specially when all you have to do is scroll up. As I said a few times in this thread already, there are hundreds of millions of people and 45% or businesses using Windows XP.

stevan said,
As I said a few times in this thread already, there are hundreds of millions of people and 45% or businesses using Windows XP.

.... and? Probably a crapton of people with VCR's and old Androids too. So what?

Max Norris said,

.... and? Probably a crapton of people with VCR's and old Androids too. So what?

Except for one huge difference: You can still buy VCR's and Androids with Gingerbread on them.

stevan said,
Except for one huge difference: You can still buy VCR's and Androids with Gingerbread on them.

Uh-huh.. now go pester Google for some Gingerbread updates, let me know how that turns out. What does being able to still buy them have anything to do with it? You can find pretty much any old stuff if you look... even new computers with XP, so what? It doesn't change the fact that you're lamenting over a product that's years past its shelf life, has given *years* of advance warning that it's been depreciated, repeatedly... I get you like to bash Windows 8, fine, don't like it, take advantage of those downgrade rights.

Max Norris said,

Uh-huh.. now go pester Google for some Gingerbread updates, let me know how that turns out. What does being able to still buy them have anything to do with it? You can find pretty much any old stuff if you look... even new computers with XP, so what? It doesn't change the fact that you're lamenting over a product that's years past its shelf life, has given *years* of advance warning that it's been depreciated, repeatedly... I get you like to bash Windows 8, fine, don't like it, take advantage of those downgrade rights.

You can't easily find new WinXP machines out there, whereas VCR's and low end Gingerbread cell phones are everywhere. Not really a fair comparison. Still doesn't change the fact about how many people are using windows xp, both home users and both businesses. Microsoft can't afford to abandon them.

It's sad that Microsoft wants their users to upgrade so much yet they never gave a direct upgrade path from XP to 7.

stevan said,

Microsoft can't afford to abandon them.

They're not abandoning them. Move to a supported OS, and they'll be glad to provide you with updates.

stevan said,

It's sad that Microsoft wants their users to upgrade so much yet they never gave a direct upgrade path from XP to 7.

C'mon dude. There was never a direct upgrade path due to too many differences in OS architecture.

Dot Matrix said,

They're not abandoning them. Move to a supported OS, and they'll be glad to provide you with updates.

C'mon dude. There was never a direct upgrade path due to too many differences in OS architecture.

No matter how you spin it, they're abandoning the huge number of people using Windows XP. I can't wait to see the numbers of malware, such as trojans and viruses skyrocket in the few months after the security updates stop coming.

stevan said,

No matter how you spin it, they're abandoning the huge number of people using Windows XP. I can't wait to see the numbers of malware, such as trojans and viruses skyrocket in the few months after the security updates stop coming.

They abandoned themselves.

stevan said,
You can't easily find new WinXP machines out there, whereas VCR's and low end Gingerbread cell phones are everywhere. Not really a fair comparison.

Why not? I can't buy new movies on VHS nor are any Gingerbread devices getting updates... it's sad that there's so many of them and yet not getting support isn't it? But evil Microsoft *must* be the only exception to the rule. Oh, and I found some new WinXP machines in about 30 seconds. Even Amazon has some. Not that it matters.. it's still a legacy product. Old phone, old computer..both have a large number of users. Why is one special and the other not? Aside from arguing a point to death on a forum that is.

stevan said,
It's sad that Microsoft wants their users to upgrade so much yet they never gave a direct upgrade path from XP to 7.

Well, if you're going to hop versions, it's pretty much like a lot of other OS's... back up your stuff, install new OS, copy stuff back. There's even a web page from Microsoft with step by step instructions, complete with big colorful pictures. Actually pretty clear, but I guess your hatred of staying up to date muddled things.

This is really quite simple. If MS never ended support for something, we would all still be on Windows 3.11. MS makes their money off of selling software. If no one upgrades, then MS would be out of business. XP will continue to function and work just fine. Just no more security updates. So it is not like businesses have to upgrade or their PCs will cease to function come April.

My work will continue to push out mainly Windows 7 and Windows 8 where we see fit. We have roughly 100 systems still on XP but those have special software that we need to test/upgrade to work in Windows 7+. So I doubt we will meet the April end of support date. But we will get there.

XP had a good run and will be forever seen as one of the best Windows releases. But all good things must come to an end.

Dot Matrix said,

That have had SEVERAL YEARS to upgrade.


Seven years after Vista released, to be more exact, and this minimum is standard for most MS products BTW (two years of mainstream support plus five years of extended support).

Okay, dude.

I understand XP is still a large part of the market, and I personally won't deny that. But keeping support for it isn't always the answer.

There are people out there that are still using kitchen appliances and such things that are dozens of years old because they still work. However, if they do end up having a small problem with that appliance or something, what do you think would happen if they bring it to the store they got it from? They'd take one look at that old thing, and say go get a new one. The old one still works decently enough... but it's just old. Stale. Not as good anymore. If they want to go back home and keep using that old thing, more power to them. But they're not going to get manufacturer support.

Microsoft is doing the same exact thing. Windows XP is old, it's like using a years-old appliance. After a point, you just have to tell people, that thing is too old for us to even bother with anymore. The millions of people that still use it, they probably realize that computer is old. Even if they don't know there's Vista, 7, or 8 now available, they know they bought that computer years ago, and they haven't gotten rid of it because it still works when they need it.

The "it still works" mantra doesn't always apply in the world of technology. Windows XP uses a lot of old technology, and Microsoft did quite a bit to bring over it's new technologies back onto XP to satisfy those still using XP, but there's only so far you can go before it really becomes more effort than it's worth. Windows Vista has a lot of new interesting features and services, from a developer's perspective, that was never included in Windows XP, and they brought a lot of it over to XP, but they couldn't bring all of it because of how XP was built. When Windows 7 came along, it improved on those features and added new ones, some of which could be brought back to Vista and XP, but not all of it. With Windows 8, a lot of new features and services were again added, and while some of it probably will find/have already found it's way back to 7, there's only so much you can do.

Going back to my kitchen appliance analogy, a manufacturing company could keep making add-ons and parts to extend the life and usefulness of an old kitchen appliance... but after a while, they just can't anymore. That appliance is too old, it can only handle so much. We've reached and gone past that point with Windows XP already. Microsoft doesn't support Windows XP in a wide variety of it's latest products nowadays, partly because they want people off of it, but partly because Windows XP just... can't do it. It doesn't have the ability to do it. It wasn't built for this new technology, it was built for 2001 technology, and after having tacked on enough stuff, Microsoft couldn't continue.

Sure, Microsoft could continue supporting Windows XP, do a bit more to port back its new technologies and features onto the old OS, but then that becomes an issue of time, and ultimately money, because the amount of time it would take to continue forcing these old technologies to work with the relatively-ancient Windows XP code wouldn't be worth it, and it would waste time that could be spent working on new, more profitable projects.

TL;DR: You can't teach an old dog new tricks. Microsoft's realized this. If people want to keep that old dog around, good for them. But if they want new tricks, they'll need a new dog.

Dot Matrix said,

That have had SEVERAL YEARS to upgrade.


That won't make that number lower. Maybe people expect it to be OK to use an operating system for "several years"? What a concept...

techbeck said,
This is really quite simple. If MS never ended support for something, we would all still be on Windows 3.11. MS makes their money off of selling software. If no one upgrades, then MS would be out of business. XP will continue to function and work just fine. Just no more security updates. So it is not like businesses have to upgrade or their PCs will cease to function come April.

My work will continue to push out mainly Windows 7 and Windows 8 where we see fit. We have roughly 100 systems still on XP but those have special software that we need to test/upgrade to work in Windows 7+. So I doubt we will meet the April end of support date. But we will get there.

XP had a good run and will be forever seen as one of the best Windows releases. But all good things must come to an end.

This is exactly what I was saying, but stevan turned it to something supporting his claim somehow.

stevan said,

Except for one huge difference: You can still buy VCR's and Androids with Gingerbread on them.

I call BS on that. I haven't seen a VCR (Standalone or combo) on sale in Australia for years.

Windows XP is dead, get over it, move on and upgrade, it's that simple.

You keep harping on about malware like a fool, when you fail to realise that Microsoft has made leaps and bounds in terms of protecting Windows users against a lot of the issues that plague Windows XP, yet you seem hell bent on keeping your grandma or mum, or whoever it was (Don't really care, your strawman arguments don't warrant revising your dribble) on the most insecure, actively supported version of Windows. Take for example a couple of the recent major security issues Microsoft announced, none of them affected Windows Vista+ because of the major developments and improvements they made to Windows which negate these attack vectors.

You then actually state that Windows 7 "simply works", which to me goes right against your reasons for not upgrading (Especially when you chuck in a few ignorant rants about Windows 8, but that's no the point of the discussion).

If you were competent with computers, then you would be upgrading mum or grandma or whoever off Windows XP and onto something that's had at least 7 years of progress behind it (Windows 7), to not only help them from most nasties that appear on the Internet and general computing strife (Enter UAC for example), but to also ensure that they are not left behind when support finally does end, and so they can utilise modern technologies that work out of the box with Windows, rather than ham fisting them into Windows XP.

If there are people so ignorant that even after the many extensions Microsoft gave it to their support, after all the leeway, they still choose to stick with Windows XP, an OS that really isn't secure at all by modern standards, then tough sh*t to them, let them suffer.

In 12 years we went from DOS 4.1 to Windows XP; think of all the progress that entails. While the change hasn't been quite as drastic, from Windows XP to now, there has also been a lot of progress made in terms of Windows and computing generally, so clinging on to ancient software really is just stupid. Could you imagine people carrying on like this when DOS' support ended in 2000? Nope.

By continuing to support Windows XP, Microsoft is also holding back the progress of computing generally. IE6 needs to die, everyone knows it, and one of the best ways is to kill the last product that supports it. If you extend Windows XP, you extend IE6, and continue to drag the web down with it. You're also continuing to anchor computing generally into the past, because it does not support a lot of modern things OOTB, and in terms of security, it's a joke. After Microsoft kills it, other companies will soon follow, and then instead of everyone wasting resources on deadwood, they can finally focus more heavily in modern technologies.

Switching to MacOS rather than Windows 7 doesn't make any sense either. If you're fed up with the problems with Windows XP, perhaps it's time to join the rest of us in the present with a modern operating system, either Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.

Ideas Man said,

I call BS on that. I haven't seen a VCR (Standalone or combo) on sale in Australia for years.

Windows XP is dead, get over it, move on and upgrade, it's that simple.

You keep harping on about malware like a fool, when you fail to realise that Microsoft has made leaps and bounds in terms of protecting Windows users against a lot of the issues that plague Windows XP, yet you seem hell bent on keeping your grandma or mum, or whoever it was (Don't really care, your strawman arguments don't warrant revising your dribble) on the most insecure, actively supported version of Windows. Take for example a couple of the recent major security issues Microsoft announced, none of them affected Windows Vista+ because of the major developments and improvements they made to Windows which negate these attack vectors.

You then actually state that Windows 7 "simply works", which to me goes right against your reasons for not upgrading (Especially when you chuck in a few ignorant rants about Windows 8, but that's no the point of the discussion).

If you were competent with computers, then you would be upgrading mum or grandma or whoever off Windows XP and onto something that's had at least 7 years of progress behind it (Windows 7), to not only help them from most nasties that appear on the Internet and general computing strife (Enter UAC for example), but to also ensure that they are not left behind when support finally does end, and so they can utilise modern technologies that work out of the box with Windows, rather than ham fisting them into Windows XP.

If there are people so ignorant that even after the many extensions Microsoft gave it to their support, after all the leeway, they still choose to stick with Windows XP, an OS that really isn't secure at all by modern standards, then tough sh*t to them, let them suffer.

In 12 years we went from DOS 4.1 to Windows XP; think of all the progress that entails. While the change hasn't been quite as drastic, from Windows XP to now, there has also been a lot of progress made in terms of Windows and computing generally, so clinging on to ancient software really is just stupid. Could you imagine people carrying on like this when DOS' support ended in 2000? Nope.

By continuing to support Windows XP, Microsoft is also holding back the progress of computing generally. IE6 needs to die, everyone knows it, and one of the best ways is to kill the last product that supports it. If you extend Windows XP, you extend IE6, and continue to drag the web down with it. You're also continuing to anchor computing generally into the past, because it does not support a lot of modern things OOTB, and in terms of security, it's a joke. After Microsoft kills it, other companies will soon follow, and then instead of everyone wasting resources on deadwood, they can finally focus more heavily in modern technologies.

Switching to MacOS rather than Windows 7 doesn't make any sense either. If you're fed up with the problems with Windows XP, perhaps it's time to join the rest of us in the present with a modern operating system, either Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.

You do such a great job by showing that only on Neowin can a bunch of fanboys take the case behind supporting an operating system hundreds millions of people still use, and spin it in a negative way.

In my case, I'm not arguing the fact that millions of people still use it. When I was beginning work on my current software project, I was originally going to support Windows XP ("30%?! I don't want to leave out that many potential customers!"). However, I ended up dropping it because there were technologies in Windows Vista and later that I couldn't get in Windows XP. Another one of my projects, a lot of people wanted it ported back to Windows XP (it was one of the biggest requests I got) and I simply couldn't because XP (or Vista for that matter) doesn't have the technologies that project required.

I won't deny lot of users or businesses still use it, because they had no reason to upgrade, and personally, I dislike that about the corporate mindset, but what can I do? I'm just a lone developer doing my own stuff. Like I said in my first post, if they're happy with what they have, more power to them. I simply can't use Windows XP anymore because it doesn't have the ability to have the things I need to make my products successful, and Microsoft is feeling the same way.

About your other comment that I can't seem to find now... I can't find VCRs anywhere here in a retail store. Sure, I'm not in the biggest of American cities, but I still think that may count for a tiny bit of something lol. I was rather surprised to find a single case of floppy disks that I needed for my old Windows 95 computer in a retail chain a few years ago. If I had an issue with those floppies, though, I'm sure the people at the store there would say I'm out of luck. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be able to find someone somewhere else that couldn't solve my issue, and in the same way, some products are still going to support Windows XP after the cut-off date, such as Google Chrome.

And if Microsoft had implemented a system in Windows XP like Google has in Android, again, things may be different. Because of a service Google has installed on all Android 1.6 and later phones, Google can update certain parts of the OS, such as the keyboard and text-to-speech, no matter what phone you have. It's a smart system that keeps people on those now-old OSes still going with relatively up-to-date stuff (although it does have some people in the open-source community upset because these updates are closed-source). However, in the same sense, there are more and more apps now-a-days that are dropping support for Android 2.* - 3.*. Despite Google's updates and it's compatibility packs it has available, those old OSes just don't have everything that is available in 4.0 and there's nothing that no one can do about it now that it's out the door.

Edited by JaykeBird, Dec 2 2013, 9:44pm :

stevan said,

You do such a great job by showing that only on Neowin can a bunch of fanboys take the case behind supporting an operating system hundreds millions of people still use, and spin it in a negative way.

Ok instead of stopping to support XP, what should Microsoft do? And for how long?

Microsoft created a monster by making Windows XP. Its the OS that wont go away. Microsoft is going to take drastic measures very soon, perhaps making Windows XP pcs shutdown every hour that says update to a newer Windows OS!

Atomic Wanderer Chicken said,
Microsoft created a monster by making Windows XP. Its the OS that wont go away.

Wouldn't it be sort of amusing if XP were to once again become the most-used operating system in the world (due to W7 users switching to 8.1)?

CSheep said,
Wouldn't it be sort of amusing if XP were to once again become the most-used operating system in the world (due to W7 users switching to 8.1)?

If all the Win7 users were to upgrade to 8.1, wouldn't that mean 8.1 would be the most used....?

Max Norris said,

If all the Win7 users were to upgrade to 8.1, wouldn't that mean 8.1 would be the most used....?

Well, yeah. I was really more thinking of the percentage of users on 7 changing from 46% to let's say 28%, and maybe XP going from 31 to 29% in the same timeframe. Unrealistic, I know. If anything, 7 is gaining users at the moment

I have funny feeling with all the refurbished PCs and also new PCs that come with Windows 7, and taking into account how unpopular Windows 8 is so far, Microsoft might have another Vista and XP on their hands. I know a lot of schools and business who transitioned to Windows 7 recently. Windows 8 isn't bad, but it takes a lot of time to get used to, which a lot of folks don't want to have to do.

Atomic Wanderer Chicken said,
Microsoft created a monster by making Windows XP. Its the OS that wont go away.

funny. most current xp & win 7 users probably see win egg in the same light. pretty sad situation for the windows plaftorm.

Max Norris said,

If all the Win7 users were to upgrade to 8.1, wouldn't that mean 8.1 would be the most used....?
Dammit stop using logic, it's making my brain hurt

Atomic Wanderer Chicken said,
Microsoft created a monster by making Windows XP. Its the OS that wont go away. Microsoft is going to take drastic measures very soon, perhaps making Windows XP pcs shutdown every hour that says update to a newer Windows OS!

The problem with that, or any measures like that, is the precedent they set. "If MS did it with XP, what says they won't in the future..." Won't exactly inspire confidence in their products if their intentions with an OS doesn't align with yours.

Atomic Wanderer Chicken said,
Microsoft created a monster by making Windows XP. Its the OS that wont go away. Microsoft is going to take drastic measures very soon, perhaps making Windows XP pcs shutdown every hour that says update to a newer Windows OS!

Correction!

MS created a monster by making Windows XP so dang good!!

Hasn't helped that they now have 3 decent OS's out at same time and then turned around and made Windows 8 so dang stupid!

cork1958 said,

Hasn't helped that they now have 3 decent OS's out at same time

Microsoft's biggest competition has always been itself, and here it is in action. Windows and Office don't need to compete with MacOS or any of those other garbage office suites, they need to compete with themselves, which, evidentially, is harder than it probably should be (Well, Windows XP and Office XP/2003 anyway).

Atomic Wanderer Chicken said,
taking into account how unpopular Windows 8 is so far

You do understand that Windows 8 accounts for somewhere around 150 million PCs? This must be a new definition of "unpopular". With Mac languishing around half of that it must mean Apple are "despised".