Facing the Windows XP apocalypse ?

[+Warwagon MVC]

Turning off the effects is just a placebo.

 

If you are talking about the fade effects and animations. In that case it's not placebo. The effects might add only millisecond delays but without them the OS feels much snappier. They are pretty much the very first thing I disable on any Windows XP , vista, 7 or 8 machine. In the case of Vista and 7 I do leave on the desktop composition or what ever it's called.. I leave on the transparency. 

[Rigby]

The point is there are distros and desktop environments that are designed to be run on older hardware. Lxubuntu, Puppy, DSL, Xubuntu, and lots more.

 

Sorry but that video is a load of FUD. I like how he disabled comments to keep anyone from refuting it. None of my Windows 7 systems behave that way.

 

Anyone can make a video using a crappy system and bad display drivers. It proves nothing.  http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=313886

[Hum]

They forgot the most important tip.

 

Clone the updated hard drive before you can get attacked by malware.

 

If you get an OS damaging virus, you can just swap drives, with few problems.

 

No hunting for Updates, or worrying about product activation.

 

Then you can zero out the drive, then 'reclone' the original drive.

 

And when your original drive goes bye-bye, you will be ready to repair your XP computer.

[simplezz]

I wouldn't exactly call a Core 2 Duo system modern hardware; those things are ancient. It probably has a very old video card too.

HD 5770.

Try your test again on an actual new PC. Windows XP does not properly support today's technologies very well, if at all.

Many new PC's won't run XP because OEM's don't provide driver support. And if by technologies, you're talking about DirectX, of course not. Microsoft purposely holds back features from older versions. Just look at internet explorer. Some people have hacked the latest DX on it though, which once again indicates the only thing holding it back is Microsoft.

[simplezz]

Sorry but that video is a load of FUD. I like how he disabled comments to keep anyone from refuting it. None of my Windows 7 systems behave that way.

Can you can provide video evidence to the contrary?

 

Anyone can make a video using a crappy system and bad display drivers. It proves nothing.  http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=313886

It's not going to be fixed. Microsoft completely removed hardware acceleration from Windows Vista. Now in Windows 7 they have reintroduced about 10 gdi functions with hardware acceleration (only with WDDM 1.1 drivers), but they are not enough to make the gui as fast as Windows XP is.

Microsoft already has two hardware accelerated GUI apis in Windows 7: Direct2D and WPF. The problem is 99% of Windows 7 gui is GDI/GDI+ based, and so does 99% of 3rd party applications.

[Max Norris]

The point is there are distros and desktop environments that are designed to be run on older hardware. Lxubuntu, Puppy, DSL, Xubuntu, and lots more.

Some of those yes. Some no. Anything based on Ubuntu for example will not run on some older processors. Got an old laptop with a Pentium M? You're boned, the kernel requires PAE support which that processor doesn't have. Well unless you stick with an older version of the OS, kind of the exact same boat you're in with XP. Puppy and DSL aside (which aren't exactly all that good...) most distros will be problematic and slow. Never mind you're still screwed if the thing has very little memory.. even if you're only using a LXDE or something as soon as you fire up anything remotely current you're going to kill off what memory it does have. Good luck getting a browser going with a reasonable semblance of performance for example. Old is old, just switching to a different OS isn't going to magically cure that. Well, unless you turn it into a GUI-less server, that'll work of course.

Not sure why you linked the video a second time.. same response as before. Also in the same boat with video drivers on Linux on a few of the junkers sitting here. Anything with an older ATI board for example? Boned. Well unless you want to use the open source drivers but you can kiss performance goodbye with that. (And to head off any speeches in advance, it's been well documented with benchmarks, even Linux oriented sites like Phoronix.)

[+Warwagon MVC]

I wouldn't exactly call a Core 2 Duo system modern hardware; those things are ancient.

 

I think a core 2 duo with 4GB of ram and an SSD running 7 or 8 would run just fine.

[Max Norris]

I think a core 2 duo with 4GB of ram and an SSD running 7 or 8 would run just fine.

The one C2D sitting here as a "random use workstation" only has 2GB and a regular mechanical SATA drive and it runs 7 quite well.. I wouldn't try to run a VM on it or anything obviously (2GB is still not a lot) but for the regular stuff, zero complaints.

[Skyfrog]

Probably should clarify, I wasn't saying Windows 7 won't run on a Core 2 Duo, it will work fine. In fact I'm running it on a Pentium 4 with no issues at all. I was saying that it isn't exactly modern hardware and my original point was that Windows 7 is designed to support modern technologies, XP is not and will not run as efficiently on a new system as 7 will. As for that video, that's complete nonsense. No one uses there computer like that, why would you sit and rapidly resize windows? Even if there was a rational reason to do that, my Windows 7 system does not have any problem resizing windows or refreshing explorer. There is no flickering or delay at all. Some of the excuses people come up with for clinging to an old outdated OS are just silly.

[simplezz]

Some of those yes. Some no. Anything based on Ubuntu for example will not run on some older processors. Got an old laptop with a Pentium M? You're boned, the kernel requires PAE support which that processor doesn't have.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/930447/comments/84

And there's nothing stopping people from using non-buntu distros. Desktop environments like LXDE, Fluxbox, or XFCE can be installed on anything. You can even select your own kernel features with Gentoo.

Well unless you stick with an older version of the OS, kind of the exact same boat you're in with XP. Puppy and DSL aside (which aren't exactly all that good...) most distros will be problematic and slow. Never mind you're still screwed if the thing has very little memory..

From my experience memory isn't usually the main problem upgrading to 7 or 8, it's the graphics. If a machine only has 512mb, that will run fine in a DE like fluxbox, openbox, or LXDE. If it has more, it'll run fine in XFCE, MATE, etc.

even if you're only using a LXDE or something as soon as you fire up anything remotely current you're going to kill off what memory it does have. Good luck getting a browser going with a reasonable semblance of performance for example.

There are many lightweight browsers on Linux. Links -g is especially excellent. Dillo also runs well on my 512mb Raspberry PI. Or worst comes to worst, there are text based ones like links, elinks, lynx etc.

Old is old, just switching to a different OS isn't going to magically cure that. Well, unless you turn it into a GUI-less server, that'll work of course.

It won't stop the hardware being old, but it can extend the life of it significantly. Especially when the choice is between using an unsupported OS like XP or having to buy completely new hardware.

Not sure why you linked the video a second time.. same response as before.

Tut tut. You clearly didn't watch the second one ;) It's a different video. You should watch it, it's very.. informative and relevant to our discussion :D

Also in the same boat with video drivers on Linux on a few of the junkers sitting here. Anything with an older ATI board for example? Boned.

Actually that's the opposite for Linux open source drivers. The older models are better optimised. I found that out the hard way when I bought a new r9 270 and found that my 5770 had better FOSS drivers :/ I had to switch to the proprietary ones. Fortunately, the open drivers are getting better now.

Well unless you want to use the open source drivers but you can kiss performance goodbye with that. (And to head off any speeches in advance, it's been well documented with benchmarks, even Linux oriented sites like Phoronix.)

Well ATI doesn't support older chips anyway, so the only choice is the open source ones. However, if you look at Phoronix, you'll see that the open drivers have suppassed the proprietary ones in some categories such as 2d rendering, and on the older hardware. Specifically my 5770 does very well on the open drivers. I can run 3d games at good performance, and 2d is great. Even the DPM has improved massively lately.

[Xtreme2damax]

I think a core 2 duo with 4GB of ram and an SSD running 7 or 8 would run just fine.

 

I had to downgrade after my i7 board died. I bought a cheap Core2Duo E7500 off Amazon, installed it in an old LGA775 board I still had with two 2GB sticks of DDR3 ram and it works like a charm with Windows 7. Works just as good as XP would if not better, my Only gripe is I can only use one of my GTX 460's and it doesn't perform well with some games such as Team Fortress 2. Some one posted elsewhere they tried running Windows 7 on a VM with 768MB ram or lower and it ran fine. Windows 7 is not really much slower than XP was if at all, it feels smoother and faster than XP due to graphics acceleration supported by Aero/DWM in Vista and later Windows releases.

 

If you have modern hardware such as a Core2Duo or newer/better you shouldn't bother installing or using Windows XP if other options are accessible. Otherwise you will be sacrificing your system running at it's full potential,l namely you'll sacrifice enhancements offered in Vista and newer that offer better performance and increased productivity. You will also be sacrificing using up to date software and playing recent games. Most recent software and games are phasing out XP support due to moving exclusively to DX10/11 as supporting DX9 was holding development back because DX9 didn't support features that DX10/11 does and supporting both were causing issues in some cases. I've also read that XP lacks support for certain hardware such as Blu-Ray drives and I'm not sure if it's still possible to run XP on modern hardware that utilize UEFI instead of a bios.

[Max Norris]

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/930447/comments/84

Yea I know you can roll your own custom kernel.. but who typically wants to do that, never mind trying to get Grandma to do that over the phone? Sooner or later these sort of "cutoffs" are going to happen to other mainstream distros as well. A lot of people aren't upgrading because they're just comfortable with what they have and don't want to switch.. switching plus suggesting they tackle something like that too? That's not going to go over well.

 

You can even select your own kernel features with Gentoo.

Just gave Grandma a heart attack suggesting she tackles Gentoo.

 

From my experience memory isn't usually the main problem upgrading to 7 or 8, it's the graphics. If a machine only has 512mb, that will run fine in a DE like fluxbox, openbox, or LXDE. If it has more, it'll run fine in XFCE, MATE, etc.

Yes, if it has more it'll run anything. Many of these older machines do not however. (Which goes back to your original post about not spending money.) And just because it'll boot doesn't mean it'll be usable. Again, try loading up say Firefox or Chromium and OpenOffice at the same time... but yes, dinosaur graphic cards will be an issue as well.

 

There are many lightweight browsers on Linux. Links -g is especially excellent. Dillo also runs well on my 512mb Raspberry PI. Or worst comes to worst, there are text based ones like links, elinks, lynx etc.

Well yes, there's Lynx and such... but that's hardly a reasonable replacement now is it? It's like saying AwesomeWM is a 100% suitable replacement for the likes of KDE. Even posted a screenshot in the "Show us your browser layout" thread with it as a joke way back when.

 

Tut tut. You clearly didn't watch the second one ;) It's a different video. You should watch it, it's very.. informative and relevant to our discussion :D

Yes, I've seen it posted many times before. And my answer still stands.

 

Well ATI doesn't support older chips anyway, so the only choice is the open source ones.

On Linux yes. Still works on Windows. Older drivers obviously, but not left hanging in the breeze either. Not that either are ideal for anything current anyways, but still..

As far as benchmarks go, I'm looking at a open source vs Catalyst benchmark dated this year and it's still got a long way to catch up performance wise. I'll grant that it's improving, some tests even came reasonably close, but way too many of them are still quite behind, some showing a difference of 50% or more. That's pretty big. And to quote Phoronix:

"With the Radeon HD 7000 series graphics cards and newer on the RadeonSI Gallium3D driver, yesterday's results showed the performance is improving but still has a long ways to go. Users of the open-source Radeon Linux graphics driver are also still waiting on open-source OpenCL support to be in a good, working manner, OpenGL 4.x support, and a variety of other smaller work items found in Catalyst but not in the open-source driver."

[Dot Matrix]

Many new PC's won't run XP because OEM's don't provide driver support. And if by technologies, you're talking about DirectX, of course not. Microsoft purposely holds back features from older versions. Just look at internet explorer. Some people have hacked the latest DX on it though, which once again indicates the only thing holding it back is Microsoft.

You do realize that the latest DirectX includes technologies that XP can't handle at all? Microsoft would seriously need to overhaul XP underlying codebase to run DX10. It's not a matter of Microsoft holding back support, it really is a matter of XP not being able to run it. And those people that "hacked" support for it, weren't successful in the slightest. That project was laughable, at best.

 

Same story with IE9. IE9 included technologies that XP just can't support, again, without significant codebase overhauls.

[FloatingFatMan]

All this hardware argument is pointless.  Microsoft discontinued XP years ago, and soon will discontinue support.  You can either upgrade and stay supported, or stick with XP and end up getting bit-raped.

 

Your choice.

[The_Observer]

i know nz govt departments that are still on XP. They have waited to the very last minute to push out windows 7.  but not my govt dept. why were sorted a year ago!! 

[simplezz]

"With the Radeon HD 7000 series graphics cards and newer on the RadeonSI Gallium3D driver, yesterday's results showed the performance is improving but still has a long ways to go. Users of the open-source Radeon Linux graphics driver are also still waiting on open-source OpenCL support to be in a good, working manner, OpenGL 4.x support, and a variety of other smaller work items found in Catalyst but not in the open-source driver."

I thought we were talking about older hardware? the 7k is modern. I already noted that the FOSS drivers for them are lacking. I had that experience myself, where the drivers for my 5770 did better. FOSS drivers for older hardware are usually better optimised and stable due to the fact that they've been worked on longer and support more features. I couldn't get VAAPI (video acceleration) to work on r9 270 for example. The support is getting better but it's still sketchy. For now the proprietary drivers are still better.

If you look at r600 mesa/gallium3d/ati-dri/xf86-video-ati codebase it's very good right now. The 2d benchmarks indicate that it's superior to the proprietary drivers (catalyst).

[Max Norris]

I thought we were talking about older hardware? the 7k is modern.

It's really hard to find current benchmarks published for old hardware ;) If I post something from years ago, obviously that's no good as the drivers evolved since then. I can offer you benchmarks on current software with old hardware, but then that'll be considered biased or anecdotal. (Even though I do use Linux daily.)

If you look at r600 mesa/gallium3d/ati-dri/xf86-video-ati codebase it's very good right now. The 2d benchmarks indicate that it's superior to the proprietary drivers (catalyst).

Yes, 2D's fine. It's 3D where it falls apart. That's still just one thing though.. pretty graphics won't help your system if it's still unable to run the software in the first place.

[simplezz]

It's really hard to find current benchmarks published for old hardware ;) If I post something from years ago, obviously that's no good as the drivers evolved since then. I can offer you benchmarks on current software with old hardware, but then that'll be considered biased or anecdotal. (Even though I do use Linux daily.)

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_radeon_2014gallium&num=3

4870 is quite old. There are benchmarks for older hardware too on Phoronix.

Yes, 2D's fine. It's 3D where it falls apart. That's still just one thing though.. pretty graphics won't help your system if it's still unable to run the software in the first place.

Old XP machines are unlikely to run the latest and greatest anyway. And 3D on my 5770's FOSS driver is virtually the same as catalyst. Catalyst does have better DPM (dynamic power management) though.

[Boo Berry]

Coming soon: The XPocalypse.

[TAZMINATOR]

Coming soon: The XPocalypse.

 

[seta-san]

Really don't understand the furore about upgrading from XP. People didn't have this kind of issue upgrading from earlier versions of Windows, so why is XP so special?

 

It's a dinosaur, get over it and upgrade.

 

no previous OS has been more ingrained in our institutions. an operating system being so widely used for so long is unprecedented. Also never before have so many advancements in security been made. XP SP2 was a modest first step. Also alot of the reason why they are keeping the old OS is because they are reliant on internal web apps built around... IE6. That's horrible for the web.

[Xtreme2damax]

Gah.. unrelated to the topic being discussed but sometimes I wish this forum didn't have a time limit on editing posts. I'm very OCD and if I see something wrong in my post it bothers me if I can't go back to fix any errors, Noticed spelling and grammatical errors in my post. Damn sleep deprivation and barely being able to see the text on my screen without it appearing blurry, seems mah vision is going with me getting older. :(

[LimeMaster]

If you are talking about the fade effects and animations. In that case it's not placebo. The effects might add only millisecond delays but without them the OS feels much snappier. They are pretty much the very first thing I disable on any Windows XP , vista, 7 or 8 machine. In the case of Vista and 7 I do leave on the desktop composition or what ever it's called.. I leave on the transparency. 

It can actually make the performance worst if you disable the visual effects & animations:

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2013/03/27/10405554.aspx

 

Edit: Just noticed that you mentioned Desktop Composition and although that may be the main example used in the article, there are other things mentioned too!

[The Evil Overlord]

I have a love/hate relationship with XP, but I'm finding it interesting that I'm going to miss it.

 

Wasn't brilliant but it was waaay better than ME

[Raa]

I also don't get what the big uproar is.

 

XP suddenly won't bomb out and stop working...

 

Either upgrade to Windows 7 if you're on the internet, or leave it alone. End of story.