is XP SP3 still a good OS for today's computing?

By Nguyen07
in Microsoft (Windows)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

XerXis

Posted
Posted

And how do you know that? If the majority of Windows users and businesses are still on XP, Microsoft isn't going to drop support any time soon. Just look at IE6. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news :D

They still support ie6 because it came together with windows xp. Once windows xp support ends (which will be in 2014), ie6 support is also finished.

Proficient

Flawed

Posted
Posted

I wouldn't. There's zero advantages to it, you lose all of the benefits of 7, and more importantly, if your device shipped with Vista/7, it's unlikely that drivers for a lot of its hardware are even available for XP, especially so if it shipped with 64bit flavours of Vista/7.

There aren't many vista/7 only drivers yet. And if a system does, I would complain to the company about it.

Grand Master

sc302 Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

The cost is astronomical in some cases. Let say that a business uses the cheap $100 OEM licenses (hopefully they are using volume licenses because you would have to imput all key codes for oem, just using this as a nice round number). You are looking at 10 million to upgrade those 100,000 plus lets say a person can oversee 30 installs a day that is 3333 days for one person to be able to do that, well if 60 people can do 30 a day that is 555 days that 60 people would be out doing upgrades, lets double that 120 people could oversee 30 installs each and be finished in 28 days (about 2 working months taking weekends off). 120 peole working 8 hour days for say 15 an hr for 28 days straight which is an added $403,200 on top of the 10 million plus the year for r&d for the new os, now multiply that by every 2 years that a new os is due to come out. For a business it is easier to write that off in x amount of years, 5.4 million is a bit to chew per year for technology upgrades. If the techs are imaging 1 by 1, you are looking at an average mean of 4-6 per person per day, not 30 and that is if there is nothing to do other than copy the old user profile and push it to the new computer.

Edit: Businesses work by offsetting cost across years, if those years come too frequently, their profit margins deteriorate. After a certain dollar amount it becomes a capital expendature. These capital expendatures depreciate over a few years, some take 5-10 years to completely depreciate, generally when there is no value left in the item a new one will be purchased. This is how OS upgrades are seen in large businesses, it isn't a 1 or 2 computer deal, it is a whole site upgrade. Recently we had a pretty high on the food chain user request that her office version get upgraded to the latest version, we said we have no problems with that but to be compatible with everyone else and at the same revision we would have to upgrade everyone....needless to say she was denied by the owner to upgrade 500 users to the latest version of office so she could be the cool guy, the version that the company is running hasn't depreciated enough.

Grand Master

amon91

Posted
Posted

Software/hardware support is the key here. As long as that's available (which won't be for much longer), XP will remain a usable OS for a while. As many have pointed out here, due to its cost, many companies will just end up stretching the life of their software/hardware (or anything really) as much as they can.

Grand Master

Nick H. Supervisor

Posted
  • Supervisor
Posted

Some might call it an [up]grade. It certainly was for vista. And in terms of performance and resource efficiency, it's an upgrade too.

But we're not talking about Vista and XP.

Windows 7 -> Windows XP does not equal an upgrade. If you can show me a system running Windows 7, then the same machine running Windows XP, and you're able to point out that it's better in performance and resource efficiency then maybe I'll be swayed slightly.

I run Windows XP at home and at work. My machine at work is decent enough to run Windows 7, but due to company standardisation it doesn't yet. My computer at home isn't powerful enough to run Windows 7, so I've still got it running XP.

The OP's laptop falls in to the same category as my work machine, in that it is powerful enough to run Windows 7. However, unlike my work machine the OP isn't restricted by work standards. He shouldn't downgrade to Windows XP, simple as.

Proficient

Flawed

Posted
Posted

But we're not talking about Vista and XP.

I'm talking about Vista and 7.

Windows 7 -> Windows XP does not equal an upgrade. If you can show me a system running Windows 7, then the same machine running Windows XP, and you're able to point out that it's better in performance and resource efficiency then maybe I'll be swayed slightly.

Just look at the memory and disk access performance logs. XP wins hands down. Uses less then half the memory, and disk access is significantly less frequent too.

Grand Master

Charisma Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

I'm just laughing at all the people who are like "SUPPORT WILL SO TOTALLY BE ENDED IN 2014". Sure, it might, but that's exactly what everyone said about the last two deadlines Microsoft had in their sights. They are going to have a hard time converting enough of their established base to get away with that. I don't see why they can't support both anyway--they should be happy to have not one, but two of the most popular OS's running out there. Let those who want to/can convert to 7 do so, but it doesn't mean there isn't a use for XP at least for the time being. In short, can't we all just get along? ;)

  • Hum and Denis W.
  • Like 2
Grand Master

Rudy

Posted
Posted

The cost is astronomical in some cases. Let say that a business uses the cheap $100 OEM licenses (hopefully they are using volume licenses because you would have to imput all key codes for oem, just using this as a nice round number). You are looking at 10 million to upgrade those 100,000 plus lets say a person can oversee 30 installs a day that is 3333 days for one person to be able to do that, well if 60 people can do 30 a day that is 555 days that 60 people would be out doing upgrades, lets double that 120 people could oversee 30 installs each and be finished in 28 days (about 2 working months taking weekends off). 120 peole working 8 hour days for say 15 an hr for 28 days straight which is an added $403,200 on top of the 10 million plus the year for r&d for the new os, now multiply that by every 2 years that a new os is due to come out. For a business it is easier to write that off in x amount of years, 5.4 million is a bit to chew per year for technology upgrades. If the techs are imaging 1 by 1, you are looking at an average mean of 4-6 per person per day, not 30 and that is if there is nothing to do other than copy the old user profile and push it to the new computer.

Edit: Businesses work by offsetting cost across years, if those years come too frequently, their profit margins deteriorate. After a certain dollar amount it becomes a capital expendature. These capital expendatures depreciate over a few years, some take 5-10 years to completely depreciate, generally when there is no value left in the item a new one will be purchased. This is how OS upgrades are seen in large businesses, it isn't a 1 or 2 computer deal, it is a whole site upgrade. Recently we had a pretty high on the food chain user request that her office version get upgraded to the latest version, we said we have no problems with that but to be compatible with everyone else and at the same revision we would have to upgrade everyone....needless to say she was denied by the owner to upgrade 500 users to the latest version of office so she could be the cool guy, the version that the company is running hasn't depreciated enough.

Plus you didn't add the cost of a business making sure all their software are compatible with the new version of Windows. At my work we have many many applications that needs to be tested and some of them even need to be updated so they'll run properly....and that's expensive and probably a good reason why we're still running XP

Grand Master

XerXis

Posted
Posted

Only when it first came out. It hasn't shipped with XP for years.

So?

? The engineering point of view on IE6 starts as an operating systems supplier. Dropping support for IE6 is not an option because we committed to supporting the IE included with Windows for the lifespan of the product. We keep our commitments. Many people expect what they originally got with their operating system to keep working whatever release cadence particular subsystems have.

?

As engineers, we want people to upgrade to the latest version. We make it as easy as possible for them to upgrade. Ultimately, the choice to upgrade belongs to the person responsible for the PC."

source: http://blogs.sitepoint.com/2009/08/18/microsoft-support-ie6-2014/

IE6 support is tied to windows XP support, and that's the only reason for microsoft still supporting it

Grand Master

xendrome

Posted
Posted

Just look at the memory and disk access performance logs. XP wins hands down. Uses less then half the memory, and disk access is significantly less frequent too.

The fact that you pointed out that XP uses half the memory of Windows 7 invalidates any argument you have in this matter, since clearly you have not educated yourself on the memory usage and management in Windows 7, nor the aspect of Superfetch.

Don't take this as an attack, I am just saying you seem to be mis-informed.

Proficient

Flawed

Posted
Posted

So?

source: http://blogs.sitepoint.com/2009/08/18/microsoft-support-ie6-2014/

IE6 support is tied to windows XP support, and that's the only reason for microsoft still supporting it

So if no one was using it, they would still be supporting it? It has nothing to do with the large number of businesses which have enterprise applications tied to it then...

Grand Master

notuptome2004

Posted
Posted

I'm talking about Vista and 7.

Just look at the memory and disk access performance logs. XP wins hands down. Uses less then half the memory, and disk access is significantly less frequent too.

\

That dont mean Crap because windows 7 is more efficient at how Memory is managed then windows XP ever was and can be who gives a crap if XP shows it only uses 300mb of 2gb of ram or more it just means your ram is being wasted and just sitting ther providing you with no Performance benefit at all, While windows 7 is able to use your ram to boost performance and manage it better then XP can and allocate ram to programs that request it or need it .......................

Oh and if you run your system down to the last damn drop of ram Windows 7 wont well in my case wont Freez and or slow down and or BSOD or Restart while XP would Restart or Freez or slow toa crawl before freezing or BSODing

XP is made and based on 11 year old technologies and Code bases the Memory Management system is over 11 years old

Proficient

Flawed

Posted
Posted

The fact that you pointed out that XP uses half the memory of Windows 7 invalidates any argument you have in this matter, since clearly you have not educated yourself on the memory usage and management in Windows 7, nor the aspect of Superfetch.

Don't take this as an attack, I am just saying you seem to be mis-informed.

Okay. Disable the superfetch service then check again. It still uses more than double the memory of XP. I've tested it before. It has nothing to do with superfetch. The base OS is simply bloated and inefficient.

Grand Master

Charisma Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

\

That dont mean Crap because windows 7 is more efficient at how Memory is managed then windows XP ever was and can be who gives a crap if XP shows it only uses 300mb of 2gb of ram or more it just means your ram is being wasted and just sitting ther providing you with no Performance benefit at all, While windows 7 is able to use your ram to boost performance and manage it better then XP can and allocate ram to programs that request it or need it .......................

Oh and if you run your system down to the last damn drop of ram Windows 7 wont well in my case wont Freez and or slow down and or BSOD or Restart while XP would Restart or Freez or slow toa crawl before freezing or BSODing

XP is made and based on 11 year old technologies and Code bases the Memory Management system is over 11 years old

One thing I have to point out too is that it depends on what you're doing with it. I've taxed my XP system pretty hard at times, and have never caused it to freeze or BSOD. I got a blue screen exactly once, when I was playing around with drivers. Sure, it slows down under a heavy load--any computer will--but if your XP machine was having that many problems, it doesn't mean it's a problem with the OS. That's like a bad driver blaming the car for all his accidents.

Grand Master

Nick H. Supervisor

Posted
  • Supervisor
Posted

Okay. Disable the superfetch service then check again. It still uses more than double the memory of XP. I've tested it before. It has nothing to do with superfetch. The base OS is simply bloated and inefficient.

I think you're losing both the point and this fight. First we were discussing performance and resource efficiency, now we're just talking about how much RAM each OS uses? Fine, XP uses less RAM than Windows 7. Does that make it overall a faster, more efficient and reliable Operating System on today's machines? No.

I'll point it out again. I like XP. I still use XP. But due to my circumstances, I fall in to a minority category for now. There is no need for Windows XP on the OP's machine.

Proficient

Flawed

Posted
Posted

That dont mean Crap

I disagree. It's a base indicator of system efficiency.

because windows 7 is more efficient at how Memory is managed then windows XP ever was

Really? Please elaborate. If you are talking about superfetch, then disable the service and take a look at the memory again. I'll give you a clue, it's not superfetch eating all that memory.

who gives a crap if XP shows it only uses 300mb of 2gb of ram or more it just means your ram is being wasted and just sitting ther providing you with no Performance benefit at all.

So consuming system memory in order to compensate for poor OS performance is a species of efficiency?

While windows 7 is able to use your ram to boost performance and manage it better then XP can and allocate ram to programs that request it or need it .......................

So you are saying all programs will load/run faster because of this? Funny, I noticed this myself...

Oh and if you run your system down to the last damn drop of ram Windows 7 wont well in my case wont Freez and or slow down and or BSOD or Restart while XP would Restart or Freez or slow toa crawl before freezing or BSODing

Both XP and 7 use swao space, so there is no BSOD's to speak of except for the usual ones windows regularly spits out.

XP is made and based on 11 year old technologies and Code bases the Memory Management system is over 11 years old

And yet, it's more efficient than it's modern counterpart. What does that say about Microsoft software? What will Windows 8's recommended specs be? 4gb of ram?

Proficient

Flawed

Posted
Posted

I think you're losing both the point and this fight. First we were discussing performance and resource efficiency, now we're just talking about how much RAM each OS uses?

Others were trying to dispute the memory argument, so I clarified my position on the matter. What else would you suggest?

Fine, XP uses less RAM than Windows 7

Tell that to the others who are disputing it ;)

Does that make it overall a faster, more efficient and reliable Operating System on today's machines? No.

In and of itself no, but in conjunction with other things such as disk access and cpu usage, it's certainly more efficient with machine resources. In terms of reliability, XP is much more mature, and thus is more stable and reliable. In addition, it has better software support/compatibility. Overall, it's a more attractive proposition when choosing a windows OS for the majority of users at least.

I'll point it out again. I like XP. I still use XP. But due to my circumstances, I fall in to a minority category for now. There is no need for Windows XP on the OP's machine.

There's no need to run Windows 7 on it either. In fact there's no need to run any specific OS. That's the beauty of choice.

Mentor

Xtreme2damax

Posted
Posted

Now I know you haven't used 7. Most stable Windows version out there. It's a year and a half old, and has a SP already. It's tried and true. No reason not to be using it now.

Agreed, even the beta/rc builds were just as stable, if not more stable than XP. Windows 7 is by far the most stable OS, even when it was in it's infancy and continues to be a stable OS.

Grand Master

ceminess

Posted
Posted

Others were trying to dispute the memory argument, so I clarified my position on the matter. What else would you suggest?

Tell that to the others who are disputing it ;)

In and of itself no, but in conjunction with other things such as disk access and cpu usage, it's certainly more efficient with machine resources. In terms of reliability, XP is much more mature, and thus is more stable and reliable. In addition, it has better software support/compatibility. Overall, it's a more attractive proposition when choosing a windows OS for the majority of users at least.

There's no need to run Windows 7 on it either. In fact there's no need to run any specific OS. That's the beauty of choice.

WOW... just...wow

Grand Master

MtnDewCodeRedFreak

Posted
Posted

Ugh this is BS. If you are so sure about running XP on today's hardware, then why not you try running Windows 3.1 or 95 (not the OSR 1/2.x) on your "most modern PC ever"?

*lends ear, hears silence*

Quite frankly, MS really should have abandoned XP after Vista is released and NOT extend XP support after SP2 (but noooo due to the so-called tech "pundits" that cling to XP ... quite pathetic).

As for the case of IE9 on XP, this is falling on deaf ears. MS is not going to listen, because IE9 uses hardware acceleration, a feature available only on Vista and above. XP uses the CPU to render graphics, which is a 2000-2001 technology. Vista from 2006 and ahead uses the graphics card to render the GUI, which in fact puts the burden OFF the CPU. A big fat "Duh" moment.

This XP and Vista/7 thing has been discussed ad nauseam already. Face it, XP is old. End of discussion, period, case closed.

Veteran

Frylock86

Posted
Posted

Ugh this is BS. If you are so sure about running XP on today's hardware, then why not you try running Windows 3.1 or 95 (not the OSR 1/2.x) on your "most modern PC ever"?

*lends ear, hears silence*

Quite frankly, MS really should have abandoned XP after Vista is released and NOT extend XP support after SP2 (but noooo due to the so-called tech "pundits" that cling to XP ... quite pathetic).

As for the case of IE9 on XP, this is falling on deaf ears. MS is not going to listen, because IE9 uses hardware acceleration, a feature available only on Vista and above. XP uses the CPU to render graphics, which is a 2000-2001 technology. Vista from 2006 and ahead uses the graphics card to render the GUI, which in fact puts the burden OFF the CPU. A big fat "Duh" moment.

Face it, XP is old. End of discussion, period, case closed.

QFT.

Rookie

AntiLuddite

Posted
Posted

XP is a pathetic, fugly, ancient, insecure, unproductive and completely unusable OS. Here are a few reasons why XP is so pathetic compared to Windows 7:

1. XP has a horrible and incredibly fugly UI. Every time I look at the pathetic XP UI, I feel sick.

2. XP is a usability nightmare. It has a pathetic search system compared to Windows 7. There are no breadcrumb bars, no stacks, no libraries, no start menu search. The list goes on and on.

3. XP is the most insecure OS of ALL time. 99.9% of the security issues of the world are because of XP.

4. XP has pathetic memory management. With any system with over 1 GB RAM, XP is horribly inefficient. It can't handle that RAM at all. On the other hand Windows 7 utilizes the extra RAM for increasing performance.

5. XP can't handle 4GB RAM. Don't mention XP 64-bit as it has NO driver support at all, and is horribly instable.

6. XP has PATHETIC driver support. NO NEW PC's bought in the last 2 years has drivers for XP. On the other hand Windows 7 has excellent driver support.

7. XP has PATHETIC performance issues. Use XP for more than a couple of months, and the system gets almost unusably slow. Try to run 3 or 4 memory intensive programs simultaneously, and the system will crash/BSOD immediately.

Because of those reasons, XP has been COMPLETELY dead in the developed world.

1. XP now has only 40% market share according to Wikipedia. Vista/7 combined has much more than that. At current rate, by the end of 2011 it will fall below 25%.

2. XP has less than 35% market share in the developed world like North America, Europe and Oceania. Windows 7 is the SINGLE MOST POPULAR OS in these countries.

3. XP has about 87% market share in CHINA where 99% of systems run on pirated OS.

4. XP is dead as dodo in EVERY CIVILISED country in the world.

5. Windows 7 is the FASTEST SELLING OS in the history of computing with over 300 MILLION COPIES sold within first 15 months of release.

Because of these reasons only clueless people will decide to run XP in 2011. Windows 7 FTW. Microsoft FTW.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • JBL BAR 800 5.1.2 Dolby Atmos soundbar is an amazing deal today

      By hellowalkman · Posted

      JBL BAR 800 5.1.2 Dolby Atmos soundbar is an amazing deal today by Sayan Sen This Amazon Prime Day 2026 sales so far we have had a couple of nice deals related to sound and audio. First we have the Sennheiser HD 600 at its lowest ever price of just $225. Next we also have the Beats Studio Pro at its lowest price ever at just $150. However perhaps you prefer your gear to sound great on a larger scale, like throughout the room. In that case an all-in-one soundbar system can help and currently JBL's BAR 800 is a great deal for sure as it's up for grabs at just $600 (purchase link under the specs table down below). One thing that should be appreciated a lot about these JBL soundbars is their spec sheet and the frequency response data it provides. The firm is honest about it as JBL confirms the subwoofer is able to go down to 35 Hz at -6dB or F6. This means it should be covering 40Hz and up very well, where most of the bass lies. You miss out on a lot of sub-bass but that is to be expected given the price point and the subwoofer driver size. Speaking of which, it is a 10-inch driver and promises a max output power of 300 watts at 1% THD (total harmonic distortion). JBL also claims the system will provide you with a "True Dolby Atmos" experience. The surround speakers are wireless and battery-powered which means setting them up should be really convenient. The technical specs of the JBL BAR 800 are given in the table below: Specification Value Channel Configuration 5.1.2-channel soundbar system Dolby Atmos Yes, with 2 up-firing drivers Total System Power Output 720 W Soundbar Power Output 340 W Surround Speaker Power Output 2 × 40 W Subwoofer Power Output 300 W Soundbar Drivers 3 × 46×90 mm racetrack drivers, 3 × 20 mm tweeters, 2 × 70 mm up-firing full-range drivers Surround Speaker Drivers 1 × 46×90 mm racetrack driver (each speaker) Subwoofer Driver 10-inch (260 mm) wireless subwoofer Frequency Response 35 Hz – 20 kHz (-6 dB) Audio Inputs Optical, Bluetooth, Chromecast built-in, AirPlay, Alexa Multi-Room Music (MRM), USB* HDMI Inputs 1 HDMI video input HDMI Output 1 HDMI eARC output HDCP Version 2.3 HDR Pass-Through HDR10, Dolby Vision Bluetooth Version 5.0 Wi-Fi Version 6, 6E Streaming Services Chromecast built-in, Apple AirPlay, Alexa MRM Get it at the link below: JBL Bar 800-5.1.2-Channel Dolby Atmos soundbar with Detachable Surround Speakers (Black): $599.85 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US with Prime) Prime subscription can be cancelled within three business days. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Microsoft releases PowerToys v0.100.1, fixes a bug that made remapped keys misbehave

      By Ivan Jenic · Posted

      Microsoft releases PowerToys v0.100.1, fixes a bug that made remapped keys misbehave by Ivan Jenic Microsoft just released PowerToys v0.100.1, a patch update that addresses several stability and behavior issues found in v0.100.0. The v0.100.0 patch was a significant update for PowerToys, as it introduced all sorts of new features and additions, such as a rebuilt Shortcut Guide, a Command Palette Extension Gallery, webcam overlay support in ZoomIt, and more. However, the v0.100.0 version also introduced some bugs and stability issues. And now, Microsoft is addressing these issues in the new patch. The most impactful fix in this release perhaps is in Keyboard Manager, where remapped modifier keys were being delivered as system-key events, causing unexpected behavior in apps. The clearest example of this was Alt-to-Backspace remaps, deleting whole words instead of a single character. So, if you thought there was an issue with your keyboard, Microsoft just confirmed that it was PowerToys. Beyond the Keyboard Manager fix, v0.100.1 also addresses several other issues. It fixes a bug with Power Display that was preventing monitors from waking from standby correctly. Additionally, the new update patches Quick Access crashes on launch, and resolves a Shortcut Guide crash that occurred when switching between sidebar sections. Here’s the full changelog: Color Picker Fixed a bug where the main Color Picker window could appear inside the zoomed-in picker view Command Palette Fixed Run history initialization in AOT builds Fixed a bug where the Performance Monitor dock item could show ??? after restart Fixed the Hibernate command using the Sleep icon Limited the "pin to dock" dialog to displays where the dock is enabled Keyboard Manager Fixed modifier keys remapped to non-modifier keys being delivered as system-key events, which caused unexpected behavior in apps such as Alt-to-Backspace deleting whole words Power Display Fixed a bug where selecting On in the monitor power-state control did not wake a monitor from standby Fixed built-in display detection and brightness control on dual-GPU laptops where the internal panel is driven by the discrete GPU PowerToys Run Fixed VS Code Workspaces discovery after VS Code moved recently opened workspace data to shared storage Quick Access Fixed Quick Access flyout crashes caused by unhandled XAML exceptions during launch or page navigation Shortcut Guide Fixed a crash when navigating between Shortcut Guide sidebar sections Fixed number-key rendering in shortcut manifests and added a Postman shortcut manifest Updated bundled shortcut manifests to use the literal number-key token so number keys render correctly across apps ZoomIt Fixed a race condition in audio initialization for ZoomIt video recording You can download PowerToys v0.100.1 from the official GitHub releases page.
    • OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2

      By Copernic · Posted

      OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2 by Razvan Serea OBS Studio is software designed for capturing, compositing, encoding, recording, and streaming video content, efficiently. It is the re-write of the widely used Open Broadcaster Software, to allow even more features and multi-platform support. OBS Studio supports multiple sources, including media files, games, web pages, application windows, webcams, your desktop, microphone and more. OBS Studio Features: High performance real time video/audio capturing and mixing, with unlimited scenes you can switch between seamlessly via custom transitions. Live streaming to Twitch, YouTube, Periscope, Mixer, GoodGame, DailyMotion, Hitbox, VK and any other RTMP server Filters for video sources such as image masking, color correction, chroma/color keying, and more. x264, H.264 and AAC for your live streams and video recordings Intel Quick Sync Video (QSV) and NVIDIA NVENC support Intuitive audio mixer with per-source filters such as noise gate, noise suppression, and gain. Take full control with VST plugin support. GPU-based game capture for high performance game streaming Unlimited number of scenes and sources Number of different and customizable transitions for when you switch between scenes Hotkeys for almost any action such as start or stop your stream or recording, push-to-talk, fast mute of any audio source, show or hide any video source, switch between scenes,and much more Live preview of any changes on your scenes and sources using Studio Mode before pushing them to your stream where your viewers will see those changes DirectShow capture device support (webcams, capture cards, etc) Powerful and easy to use configuration options. Add new Sources, duplicate existing ones, and adjust their properties effortlessly. Streamlined Settings panel for quickly configuring your broadcasts and recordings. Switch between different profiles with ease. Light and dark themes available to fit your environment. …and many other features. For free. At all. OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2 changelog: Beta 2 Changes Fixed a CI deployment issue. There are no application changes since Beta 1. 32.2 New Features Replaced add source dropdown with new dialog [Warchamp7] Improved FPS selector UX [jcm93] Added missing file support for filters [exeldro] Added ability for plugins to set custom icons for new source types [cg2121] Included .webp files when adding a directory to Image Slide Show source [TarunCore] Added copy paste functions to frontend API [exeldro] Added filter to compose SDR into HDR [jpark37] Added delete as a hotkey to delete sources on macOS [PatTheMav] Added dynamic bitrate support to multitrack video [lexano-ivs] 32.2 Changes Forced Intel-based installations to update to Apple Silicon version on macOS [PatTheMav] This change means that OBS Studio versions built for Intel-based Macs but running on Apple Silicon Macs will automatically update to OBS Studio built for Apple Silicon Macs. If an installation was using third-party plugins, those plugins will no longer load until replaced with Apple Silicon versions. Fixed audio mixer state getting out of sync when changing settings via websockets or plugins [Warchamp7] Added theming for checked QToolButtons [glikely] Improved OpenGL performance slightly on low-end machines [kkartaltepe] Set minimum size for color source to 1 pixel [exeldro] Added minimum width to spinboxes [Warchamp7] Disallowed overwriting the crash handler [sebastian-s-beckmann] Applied process mitigation policies for Windows [notr1ch] Adjusted description of multitrack video [jhnbwrs] Changed new capture devices to use fallback frame rate by default [PatTheMav] Improved DLL loading behavior on Windows [notr1ch] Limited multitrack video config to Custom service [PatTheMav] 32.2 Bug Fixes Fixed OAuth and dock state save corruption [PatTheMav] Fixed group bounds not resizing when removing items [howellrl] Fixed canvas mixes not being restored after video reset [dsaedtler] Fixed some erroneous crashes during shutdown [Warchamp7] Fixed display capture sometimes capturing black after a duplicator failure [ThrowTop] Fixed color of controls dock output buttons in System theme [shiina424] Fixed virtual camera reset failures [stephematician] Fixed potential crash when user discards changes in the settings window [suogesi] Fixed incorrect return value in virtualcam filter [xtfo] Fixed source toolbar buttons not working after dragging a source into a group [Warchamp7] Fixed properties hint icon spacing [Warchamp7] Fixed potential crash when a video device reconnects on macOS [jcm93] Fixed an issue where PipeWire could fail on NVIDIA GPUs [hoshinolina] Fixed obs_canvas_get_video_info returning incorrect framerate [dsaedtler] 32.2 Deprecations Deprecated obs_properties_add_button [sebastian-s-beckmann] Download: OBS Studio 32.2.0 Beta 2 | Portable | ARM64 | ~200.0 MB (Open Source) View: OBS Studio Homepage | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Microsoft is building an AI datacenter that "uses less water than a fast food restaurant"

      By Slugsie · Posted

      Is a fast food restaurant a good metric to compare against?
    • Grand Theft Auto VI pricing revealed alongside Ultimate Edition and pre-loading details

      By LoneWolfSL · Posted

      Grand Theft Auto VI pricing revealed alongside Ultimate Edition and pre-loading details by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Last week, Rockstar revealed Grand Theft Auto VI pre-orders will be starting soon, and just a day ahead of that, now the studio has announced the official pricing for the highly anticipated game. This has been a hotly debated topic among fans and industry veterans for a long time, considering the game is expected to be the biggest entertainment product launch ever. The confirmed pricing for the Grand Theft Auto VI standard edition is $79.99, which Rockstar says gives access to the "single-player experience set in the biggest, most immersive evolution of the series yet." This follows what most of our readers thought would happen with the pricing too. At the same time, a $99.99 Grand Theft Auto VI: Ultimate Edition has been confirmed as well, which lands with "an exclusive collection of premium vehicles, weapons, apparel, and action threaded across all aspects of Jason and Lucia’s story." Pre-ordering will also give fans extra bonuses, including a Vintage Vice City Pack of cosmetic items as well as a free month of GTA+. Head to the official website of the game here to check out all the cosmetic rewards the Ultimate Edition and pre-orders bring. Interestingly, the studio does not mention Grand Theft Auto VI multiplayer at all in today's announcement. Perhaps this will arrive later, following the campaign launch, or the studio is keeping that reveal for a later date. Digital pre-orders for Grand Theft Auto VI will begin on June 25, 2026, at midnight local time across regions for Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5. The title is slated to launch on November 19 on those same platforms. Pre-loading for Grand Theft Auto VI will kick off on November 12, giving players a week to get the game ready on their consoles. As for the physical edition, Take-Two has confirmed that this will be available without a disc, with the box only containing a download code inside. This will be purchasable starting November 12, giving players who take this route time to pre-load the title as well.

  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      OHI Accounting earned a badge
      One Year In
    • First Post
      Almohandis earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      DaviKar went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      474
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      122
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Xenon
      72
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!