September 27, 2007 4:56 PM PDT

Microsoft extends Windows XP's stay

Microsoft extends Windows XP's stay
Related Stories

The XP alternative for Vista PCs

September 21, 2007
Bowing to pressure from customers and computer makers, Microsoft plans to keep Windows XP around a little longer.

Large PC manufacturers were slated to have to stop selling XP after January 31. However, they have successfully lobbied Microsoft to allow them to continue selling PCs with all flavors of Windows XP preloaded until June 30, a further five months. Microsoft also plans to keep XP on retail shelves longer and will allow computer makers in emerging markets to build machines with Windows XP Starter Edition until June 2010.

The move indicates the continued demand for the older operating system, some nine months after Windows Vista hit store shelves.

In recent weeks, several PC makers launched programs that allow new PC buyers to more easily "downgrade" their Vista Business and Vista Ultimate machines to Windows XP. Fujitsu, which was among those lobbying for the change, has started including an XP restore disc in the box with all of its laptops running Vista Business.

"This allows the installed base of Windows XP users more time to manage the transition to Vista, which is important for some smaller companies with limited resources," Paul Moore, senior director of mobile product marketing for Fujitsu, said in a statement.

Dell also said it support's Microsoft's decision.

"We believe the additional time will help some customers to prepare for the transition from XP to Vista," the company said in a statement.

Microsoft, for its part, sought to downplay the impact of the move, disagreeing with the notion that there is still strong demand for XP.

"We wouldn't term it strong," said Kevin Kutz, a director in Microsoft's Windows Client unit. "We would describe this as accommodating a certain element who needs more time."

Kutz said Microsoft had seen similar demand patterns with past releases and noted that in the past, old operating systems remained available for around 18 months after the release of a new operating system.

"While Windows Vista sales are still going strong...we recognize there are some customers that need more time," Kutz said.

See more CNET content tagged:
PC company, computer company, Microsoft Windows Vista, Fujitsu, Microsoft Corp.

90 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
Support?
How long will they support the XP lineup?
Posted by csmccoy (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
XP Support will continue...
until at least 2009 for mainstream support. Extended support will last until 2014. For more info, go to:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&#38;C2=1173&#38;x=8&#38;y=11" target="_newWindow">http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-us&#38;C2=1173&#38;x=8&#38;y=11</a>
Posted by thenet411 (415 comments )
Link Flag
Who's Microsoft kidding?
They released an albatross of an OS and now can't easily move
customers to it.

So customers continue to use an archaic XP that is showing its age
vs other OS such as OS X.
Posted by MaLvaDo39 (365 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Another one
Would be nice if we could have a simple discussion of a topic that is important to those of us in the industry supporting large scale OS changes without another ******* "macatic" chiming in with the usual MAC is great routine. Go run your little toy and leave the people who work in the real world alone.
PS how's your $500 iphone doing??
Posted by Sir Limey (43 comments )
Link Flag
OS X
But OS-X will not run on Windows machines or normal PCs and I don't want the hassle of a MAC. Been there and don't want to go there again.
Posted by ramudd (32 comments )
Link Flag
OS X is not an enterprise OS and Apple....
Wants it that way. How many tools has Apple released to manage an OS X infrastructure other than one server product. I don't see desktop management anywhere in the lineup.

Don't get me wrong I like Mac's OS X but it is not an Enterprise OS because Apple is shooting for the consumer.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Link Flag
Windows XP Extended Stay...
Am helping to get a new business off the ground by helping them get their PC/laptops setup &#38; configured. Checking all the vendor websites to see what the cost of new boxes with XP Pro or even Home or Media Center would run. Found exactly 0!!! All I could find was Vista this...Vista that. Was not even a way to choose Vista or XP.

Guess I will need to have them have me purchase an OEM copy for the two systems they need &#38; configure them for XP as soon as I can get my hands on them. Guess will get that copy of Ghost to go with it... at least another $100 or more.

Let's see...their needs are modest...so about $500 a machine...$100X2 for OEM copy of XP &#38; 1 copy of Symantic's Ghost...to about another $100. Hope Microsoft loves that extra $200 &#38; Steve Ballmer can buy some more chairs to throw around.
Posted by furball123A (124 comments )
Reply Link Flag
ROI
Perhaps it's time to review current info on other OS's 'return on
investment' analysis. Spending a little more on a good machine
with a solid OS now may be worthwhile over time. I really don't see
why companies think they're going to get a whole lot of value out
of purchasing these stripped down machines prone to viruses,
spyware and other problems. Makes for a healthy IT industry that's
for sure.
Posted by edgedesign (290 comments )
Link Flag
You need to keep looking -
You need to keep looking - many sites and vendors are still selling XP preloaded on PCs. Its easier and easier to find every day. Click on the small business link on Dells Website and you will see XP as a choice
Posted by Silver_2000 (51 comments )
Link Flag
Ghost
Acronis True Image is around $30
Posted by amc4 (1 comment )
Link Flag
Try these....
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&#38;cs=04&#38;kc=6W300&#38;l=en&#38;oc=brcb2ci&#38;s=bsd" target="_newWindow">http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&#38;cs=04&#38;kc=6W300&#38;l=en&#38;oc=brcb2ci&#38;s=bsd</a>

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/vostronb_1500?c=us&#38;cs=04&#38;l=en&#38;s=bsd&#38;~tab=bundlestab" target="_newWindow">http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/vostronb_1500?c=us&#38;cs=04&#38;l=en&#38;s=bsd&#38;~tab=bundlestab</a>

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/" target="_newWindow">http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/</a>
Posted by Maclover1 (440 comments )
Link Flag
They're out there...
...you just have to keep looking. A lot of online vendors are still offering XP systems for sale, but some - like Dell - don't splash it across their front page. Best Buy's business site (bestbuybusiness.com) has some for sale. You may also want to try some of the sales search engines like MySimon or Froogle.
Posted by devbost (82 comments )
Link Flag
Good move!
I'm glad to see that MS listened to its customers and kept XP around a bit longer--after all, they're not exactly losing money if they're still selling licenses to it, are they?

Vista is a nice OS but let us be frank--we would all like to see XP around a bit longer b/c MOST of us only upgrade when buying a new PC. I don't really see the point of buying an OS upgrade b/c in another year or two, I'm probably going to buy a new PC with it pre-loaded.

MS knows that the Vista Upgrade is really not going to have the impact that business customers (who buy new PCs) will have; it is the demand that businesses and corporations will put on them, not the average Wal*Mart consumer. The consumer can buy whatever they want, however they want, and need not worry about compatibility and downtime like a corporation.

How long did Windows 2000 stick around for? My god, I thought it would never die... Besides, MS was never going to kill off XP but just the sale of new licenses--support is scheduled to last until 2016, I last heard.

Lastly, talk about a successful product--XP really has staying power when you consider the demand for this 6yr old OS.

Bugs, Viruses, and Spyware are common place, but then again you can't have 95% desktop market share and not have 95% of the bugs/viruses/spyware.
Posted by close5828 (230 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Incorrect facts, wrong conclusion.
&gt; but then again you can't have 95% desktop
&gt; market share and not have 95% of the
&gt; bugs/viruses/spyware

You are a victim of MS FUD. If that was true it would also apply to the server market. Take web servers, where MS has an insignificant share, yet produce the most spectacular worms and hacks.
Posted by Microsoft_Facts (109 comments )
Link Flag
95% != 95%
&gt; you can't have 95% desktop market share and not have 95%
&gt; of the bugs/viruses/spyware.

As of 2005, Windows and it's varients had 99.5% of the known
viruses. If you take Amiga out of the picture it was basically
100%.

As an aside, the Amiga had a miniscule market share back then,
and yet an extraordinarily high number of viruses. This
contradicts the assertion that small market share means that no
one will write viruses for a platform. That statistic alone
suggests that there might be another reason no one writes
viruses for Mac or Linux. Could it be that they are inherently
more secure?

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus_statistics" target="_newWindow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus_statistics</a>
Posted by Mystigo (183 comments )
Link Flag
Windows XP extension
It is too late, I bought a MacBook. and I love it.
Posted by redkitty (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Who's Microsoft trying to fool?
This is not to allow for people to adapt for the change to Vista. It's to allow time for Microsoft to fix all the problems with Vista. To allow more time for applications to be developed that are Vista compatible. It's simple marketing and money-making strategy for Microsoft while trying to downplay the real fact.
Posted by MendedAxe (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Longer Sales = Money-Making?
I might seem a bit slow, but do explain how microsoft realizing that XP sales need more time, means they are going to make more money? "Marketing" a <u>new</u> product, means completly discontuning the old one. Look at Cars/Roomba/movies/software in general (Apple OSX, Invision Power Board, Norton AV, HTML 4.0, etc).
Each (with the exception of HTML) all have SHORT, if any, sale time of previous versions. Microsoft is about the only company I can think of that keeps supporting old products, like Office and Windows. Mozilla did keep updates to 1.5 series for awhile, but still ended it much shorter than one might expect, and 2.0 still had 3 major flaws at that time, one which effected 1.5, and was the last patch to 1.5.0.x series.

You did get one part right... " To allow more time for applications to be developed that are Vista compatible." Though most programs are Vista compatable out of the box, some major ones do require some fixing (PS CS2 in x64, AV apps, etc). But note that drivers haven't been as much as an issue as we'd expect.
Posted by timber2005 (720 comments )
Link Flag
Vista is a non-starter for health care providers
90% of my work is providing IT services to health care providers. There are numerous reasons why this industry isn't even thinking about Vista anytime in the near future. Many are show-stoppers on their own.

Privacy concerns; it is worrisome enough dealing with the new privacy regulations of HIPAA. Now Microsoft is insisting that it farm even more private data from PCs? It doesn't bode well with this industry.

DRM; Many hospitals have implemented PACS systems (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picture_archiving_and_communication_system" target="_newWindow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picture_archiving_and_communication_system</a>) Are doctors and technicians going to allow Microsoft to degrade CRT, XRay, MRI, etc images if they look to be pirated movies because they may not be properly digitally signed or something? No health care provider I know of is going to take the chance.

Higher initial costs, higher cost of ownership, higher hardware requirements. Health care costs are high enough, why would any sane provider add to IT costs for a product that offers them nothing in return?

Practice management software vendor support; not a single software vendor that I am aware of is supporting Vista. About 25% of them will say "A few customers were able to make our app run on Vista, but we won't support it."

If Microsoft had a clue they would scrap Vista now, like they did with Windows ME, and start over. Maybe if they listened to what customers need and want they would have better luck. But all Microsoft cares about is jamming it to you and me, anything to maintain the monopoly via predatory practices ultimately harmful to consumers.
Posted by Microsoft_Facts (109 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You got that right...
Kudos on your comments.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Link Flag
I use Vista but this makes good points
Sorry Microsoft. In there defence however Vista really isn't all that bad for a new OS. You'll see, once the "Ravers" settle down and SP1 comes out things will change
Posted by Dango517 (199 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Agreed
Agreed very much so. XP wasn't viewed as "decent" when it arrived. Look at it now. People don't want to leave its blue startbar shores.
Posted by timber2005 (720 comments )
Link Flag
It is going to take more then 5 months
To get Vista ready for home use, and double whatever that takes to get it acceptable to business.


MS needs to stop selling Vista.
Posted by The_Decider (3097 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Very precise estimates
Care to share the project plan for these 5 months with us, or are you just talking crap as usual.
Posted by NickH (127 comments )
Link Flag
Microsoft extends Windows XP's stay
Is anyone surprised? Vista is a chrome plated turd.
Posted by The_happy_switcher (2175 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Bang for the $
If Vista and the forthcoming Server platform had more bang for the $, the adoption rate would better greater. If businesses and end users have to wait for SP1 to get to stable OS, why rush to deploy?

Since Win 3.x, each upgrade has been painful for business and end users of windows. Either face the new found "does my device work anymore" driver hell or buy new systems. Not to mention man hours for deployment.

While this looks good on MS balance sheets... it doesn't always look good for the rest of the business world. Or end users lost time and/or $.

Compare this cost to say the cost of Linux. Where is the bang for the $ MS?
Posted by igwt (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
MS is alienating Enterprises. Linux & Mac options
A forced move to Vista would signal the end of MS desktop dominance. Not overnight but over time.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Link Flag
Only 5 months...?!?
Unless Microsoft has a completely new OS waiting in the wings to
replace Vista we're going to be seeing a lot of XP for years to
come..!
Posted by imacpwr (456 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I agree
This is the first of many 'extensions'.

Other then a few ignorant fanboys, MS has had to apply pressure to try and raise the Vista adoption rate.

That alone should tell them to stop selling this piece of crap until it is ready.
Posted by The_Decider (3097 comments )
Link Flag
They might...
also consider a new pricing model.
Posted by J_Satch (571 comments )
Link Flag
There are other alternatives...
Although Vista has it's problems, I think it's high time that Microsoft needs to scale back on price. As another posted, the ROI is a little too out of reach.

I've already weighed the options, and have decided to use Macintosh systems. Clearly, an option that is a lot more viable at this time, and perhaps in the near future, for more of the masses.
Posted by AMPerez (33 comments )
Reply Link Flag
RE: OTHER ALTERNATIVES?
How is OS X an alternative to Windows? Consumers are NOT going to switch to an operating system that doesn't have widely available apps for it or that is completely incompatible with thier current apps.

Gamers are not going to switch either because the widely available games (with very few exceptions) do not run on anything other than Windows. Dual booting OS X and XP/Vista doesn't count as "a Mac can do that" because those games don't run on OS X natively. Booting in to Windows on a Mac to play games or use other applications does not make sense. If you have to boot in to another OS just to use something then you (not directly at you) should have stayed with your previous OS.

Mac's and *nix boxes will never have a chance to be any real competition to Microsoft or as an alternative to Windows until the commercial developers start building cross platform software. That's not going to happen when the "alternatives" have 5% or less of the market.

"Although Vista has it's problems, I think it's high time that Microsoft needs to scale back on price."

I totally agree but, I also think (as many do) that it's high time Microsoft does a total rewrite of the OS and say to hell with backwards compatability and gives us something COMPLETELY brand new and not 20+ years of the same crap.
Posted by MisterCobra (10 comments )
Link Flag
Mac viable
The OS X is great price is reasonable, cost of Apple hardware double the windows based machines,
cost of rewriting all the apps to run on Apple astronomical. If you can show me some figures to basck up that statement I'll change too
Posted by Sir Limey (43 comments )
Link Flag
"the additional time"
"the additional time will help some customers to prepare for the transition from XP to Vista"

In our case, the steps necessary to run Vista were the same necessary to move to a non-Windows platform. Macs and Linux pcs are now just as compatible with our business as XP.

We're buying new computers, but very few of them run Windows.
Posted by rcrusoe (1305 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Changes
Moving from DOS to Win98SE took about as much as changing from DOS to Linux would have, had I made the jump all at once.

I fully expect MS to have messed around with the command names, location in tool bars, etc that switching from 98SE to about anything would be easier than switching from 98SE to VISTA would, especially considering all the other programs that go along with the change and all the stupid bells and whistles in the default installations.
Posted by Phillep_H (497 comments )
Link Flag
Umm....Microsoft....
That "element" you where talking about there...

Umm... I believe that was the majority of your customer base.

Umm... I think you ought to listen to them!

I am a Vista user as well as an XP user. I really believe you should start reading the CNet articles also. You could learn something there. Such as a whole bunch of an element that would still like to be your customers. That is if you would only get their thinking right.

I heard a rumor that Vista was designed to turn customers off from using PC based operating systems. That they would come to prefer your Web Based initiatives coming up in the near future... Is their some truth to that? If so I am one who's going to be really turned off. Period!
Posted by Ted Miller (305 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Show-Stoppers - Not If You Are a Lawyer
Microsoft won't bother fixing the technology. They'll get HIPAA amended, first, and when people start dying they'll be able to point at something their lawyers goosed through an appropriations bill, smiling at their wit and diligence.
Posted by Sumatra-Bosch (526 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Show-Stoppers - Vista vs. XP's launch
XP was a non-starter at first for technical reasons. Eventually, with SP2, most of the bugs are finally fixed now as MS tried to retire the product.

With Vista, the "show stoppers" are not technical, instead for reasons due to MS's business decisions. Audio/video not playable unless MS gives you the OK. This list goes on, but perhaps the technical problems that due exist would be eased if it wasn't for the big brother tactics of MS in the operating system.
Posted by Microsoft_Facts (109 comments )
Reply Link Flag
If it smells like...
Vista is Microsoft's gift to the hardware vendors, requiring almost all computers to be upgraded or new purchases made. It is Win ME without the BSOD. How could MS be so stubborn and ignorant in claiming that extending the XP offering is just an accommodation? Somebody fire Ballmer. Please.
Posted by 247mark (51 comments )
Reply Link Flag
If I buy a licence to use something that doesn't work
Remind me what the point is in buying a Vista licence is again.

To get something that requires causes major additional
expenditure to get it to work or to get something that works.

I don't go out and buy a dog licence that forces me to upgrade
my dog.
Posted by Newspeak finder (79 comments )
Reply Link Flag
IT'S TIME FOR A MAC!
I sick of Microsoft making these changes just to force people to purchase software they don't need. I can do everything I want to do with Windows XP, so why should I change if I don't want to and don't have to? Soon they won't support XP and I'll be forced to buy vista or a machine that has it pre-loaded. If I have to buy another machine, I swear it will be a Mac!
Posted by NURREDIN (19 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You and few million other PC users!
I see more and more PC users expressing your same sentiments - one of them is me. However, after a year of using my wife's Mac and comparing it to my Toshiba Satellites performance, I have to admit that the Mac is far from problem free - or even more user friendly. There have been a number of serious hardware and software issues - not the same ones as with my PC - but different. I think that pretty much sums up my comparison between PC and Macs. If it wasn't for MS arrogance and manipulation of its customer base with Vista - I wouldn't say there was a significant advantage in switching to Mac. for general use (not just graphics). However, there is the arrogance and customer coercion with Vista and as such I will own a Mac before I ever own Vista.
Posted by duggerdm (103 comments )
Link Flag
Ya Right!
A month ago, I was handed over a used Macbook at work. My experience with it has been disappointing. I think Steve jobs has over-simplified everything.

A classic example is single button on touchpad. Imagine on a sunday morning you are sitting in your bed, using your laptop with a coffee mug in hand. You are going through some pictures you took yesterday with your digital camera. You see a video clip and you want to play it in VLC player instead of quicktime. Ofcourse, you can CTRL + click to open the context menu, but you have coffee in your hand (I could have given a better example, but people would report it as offensive). You see the problem here with Mac?

Another example: This actually happened to me.
Yesterday, I wanted to browse through the pictures on my digital camera and copy a few of them before I gave the camera to a friend. On a Windows machine, I would hook up my camera and it will show in My Computer. I can see files, select and copy the ones I want, delete the others... pretty simple. On a Mac however, I could not find the camera anywhere except in iPhoto. The only option it gave me was to download all the photos. I am sorry, but I not want all 2000 of them... Anyways, I had to wait for 15 minutes for it to download everything and delete the unwanted ones.

Anyways, I am going to install XP (unless I get my hands on Vista) on this Macbook and live happily ever after!
Posted by cary1 (924 comments )
Link Flag
iMac got iReturned
Wake me up when Apple figures out what Quality Control is...three Macbooks later, I'm done w/ their garbage.

Gee, wait...there's a whole website dedicated to these issues...it's called www.appledefects.com .

iPod is the only thing that Jobs managed to squeeze out of his iSphincter and get right.
Posted by close5828 (230 comments )
Link Flag
What, like 2014?
Support for XP will go for quite some time. MS just doesn't want to keep selling new OEM copies.

If your sick of changes and alterations forcing you to buy new (or upgrade) software, stay away from Apple. They offer a very narrow window of support for older systems. Far shorter then MS
Posted by catch23 (436 comments )
Link Flag
High Rejection Rate
This isn't an argument of Linux and Mac OS (although these are
your only real alternatives at this time), this is a comparison of
Windows XP vs. Vista.

Windows users are not jumping on the Vista bandwagon.

Windows OEMs are asking not to have to load Vista.

Windows OEM presidents are making public derogatoy
statements against Vista.

Windows users and competent IT people should be exploring
alternatives as part of their long term due diligence as their
upgrade cycles approach.

And that isn't fanboy talk. That's business. (Let me qualify that?
it's smart business.)
Posted by ppgreat (1128 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Tech in the Field
My customers are at home businesses and home users. They do not have the inclination to go to Vista. If I switch my own software to Vista, I can't get a clear view on their software structure.

There are still people out there using Windows 98!
And ME!

I don't understand why Microsoft would want to actually DISCONTINUE Windows the way they are saying. It would be unfair to people who are already up and going on Windows. They should leave the program in place because the reason my customers won't switch is they don't trust Microsoft anymore.

They screwed up Windows with their upgrades so many times and so many people have lost data and have paid to recover from crashes that Microsoft never reinbursed. You see, Microsoft USES THE GENERAL PUBLIC as their laboratory. It's cheaper than having an R&#38;D department.

Nobody wants Vista until it's been out there about 2 years and the kinks have been worked out.

That's what I am running into.
Posted by Blulady (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Poor customer service.
What I don't understand is why Microsoft doesn't know why we love XP.

If they only knew that "5 months more shelf life" really translates into "5 months more to buy the OS that's compatible with most everything, and if you have to buy a computer in 6 months your SOL," maybe they would understand.

The auto industry doesn't say "Get the hell out of your car, it's time to buy a new one." Instead, another market came forward and parts are generally available to fix up cars for 25 years or more.

What Microsoft *needs* to do is release the OS to the open source community after they abandon making profits on it. Sure, it may expose patented technology, but it isn't like they're using anything that works in Vista.
Posted by ps2goat (8 comments )
Reply Link Flag
When Will MSFT Start Disabling XP Through Windows Update ?
It's only a matter of time until Ballmer and the wrecking crew get restless and decide they have to mug the customers again. Easy to imagine waking up one morning and announcing, "Sell Vista! Make XP go bye-bye! Bye-bye!" and issuing an order to organize a forced migration plan through Windows Update. MSFT will use the security rationale, of course, like a mobster pistol-whipping a donut store owner for a little "protection premium" to make sure the business stays safe. . . Who knows. Maybe Ballmer already gave the order and is in a conference room right now, chuckling to himself, gnawing on the edge of a conference table, his eyes darting around the room wildly like a crazed hyena waiting for something to die so he can again feast.
Posted by Sumatra-Bosch (526 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Mac OS X : The Way Forward
Same Here Mac Tiger is the way forward cant wait for Leopard !
Posted by pstevek (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.