Pondering Windows XP's demise

While Windows XP will soon become scarcer on PCs and drop entirely from retail shelves, the fact of the matter is that the software is going to be a mainstay--particularly in businesses--for some time.

Microsoft can wave its magic wand and force PC makers to stop offering the operating system, but corporations have a lot more leeway. Microsoft's influence is considerably less when it comes to convincing businesses to upgrade or swaying developers to write Vista-specific programs.

Still, the end of XP sales by big-name computer makers is an important symbolic step for Microsoft as it tries to convince even Vista's critics that the operating system is really the only Windows game in town.

It also helps Microsoft in the all-important numbers game. Vista actually has a fair amount of features that could be exploited by developers. Under the covers, the operating system has a new graphics engine, a peer-to-peer mechanism, and other features that really only come to light when developers start targeting them.

The problem is that, so far, there's been darn little Vista-specific software. The best examples I've been able to find in more than a year's time are a new version of Print Shop and a Vista-specific incarnation of Yahoo Messenger.

A new study says that Vista is still attracting very little developer attention, a point that underscores Microsoft's need to nudge the discussion away from Windows XP. For more on the subject, check out this video in which I discuss the matter with News.com colleague Charlie Cooper in our Daily Debrief video talking about that issue, as well as a report that Vista is still not attracting very many developers.

[ajbright]

As you say, businesses are not about to end their relationship with XP. And certainly not for Vista, which requires an activation server in order for it to keep working longer than 30 days.

For those that don't know, the activation system for Windows XP is slightly different for large customers. Well different as in there is no activation if you have the corporate version on CD and a valid corporate license key. The Dell / Gateway / HP / etc versions are even better, and don't even require a key as long as the right disk is used on the right make of PC.

But Vista has changed all that, because of the obvious. Torrent copies of the corporate version along with a key in a text file, means that no self-respecting techie would ever pay for Windows, even if they can't get hold of an original from work.

So no chance Vista will take over, but of course the computers sold by Dell, Gateway, et all still count as Vista sales (hence the reports that Vista is selling in millions, rather than the more accurate dozens). As the reporter notes, people just downgrade the PC to XP (as they're legally allowed to do) or have the manufacturer do it for them.

Now I've seen Windows 7. The good news is it comes with finger painting (you can use your fingers to smudge photos in a paint application). The bad news is the stupid ribbon 'feature' they inflicted on us in Office 2007 is present in everything.

Of course no version of Windows would be complete if it didn't require even more hardware resources, and while only marginally more than Vista, Windows 7 is no exception.

My own theory is that the cost of running a current Windows OS is so high now, in terms of hardware, that this could actually be enough to make Apple Macs seem like an affordable alternative. Yes I know, as astonishing as that sounds, an Apple product could actually make sense to buy from a financial point of view.

The thing is most people reading this will think I'm some sort of Apple fan boy, and the idiots amongst you will suggest desktop Linux as a viable alternative. Well that would be fine if it didn't require knowledge to keep it functional. Unfortunately these days, knowledge is the last thing you need to run a computer system - or explain to me why else Windows is still here?

But no, I think Linux is great, but it requires knowledge and most PC owners don't have it. They actually think Bill Gates is some sort of innovator, and that Windows is a good OS.

As for Apple, well don't get me wrong, I know Jesus Jobs is the biggest hypocrit of them all. His fan boyz think of him as some sort of rebel against 'the man'. Hardly. Everything Apple sell is overpriced tat with a glossy finish. Say 'iPod' to me, I dare you. 'Battery' will be the only reply I need. Or iPhone. Hmm, a phone that no one in Europe will buy because it's so outdated and doesn't offer the basic features they've been using for nearly 10 years. But because cell phone service in this country is so crap, no one here knows how bad the iPhone is.

So no, I'm no Apple fan. But I do see them as posing a viable alternative in the next couple years. I'm old enough to remember a time when Commodore owned 80-90% of the OS AND PC market (the Pet - not the C64 or Amiga). I remember the times before that, when no one could imagine a personal computer at all. Eras end, and hopefully Vista is the first step towards the end of Microsoft.

[Kev Orng]

I was with you until you used the term "Fan Boy"
Dismissing anyone as a "Fanboy" (of any stripe) is a sure sign of a person who is not open to other points of view.
I try to be open to others' opinions, but say "fanboy" to me and I'll go find an adult to talk to, thanks.

[BigOldNerd]

The worst thing M$ can force the big PC makers to do, is charge you for a copy of M$ Vista failure even if you have no intent of using it. Go to any of the big PC manufactures web sites and pick out one of their top of the line consumer PC or Laptop and call them up and explain to them your interested in buying one but you do not want M$ OS. They will explain to you that in order to purchase the system you have chosen, YOU MUST PAY M$ OS tax to buy it. The funny thing is that they are going to have to assemble the system you have chosen and they could easily drop a hard drive in that has no OS on it, but they will not do it. No matter how hard you try your going to pay THE M$ OS tax to get a system unless you build you own but that only applies to desktop. If you want a good laptop you going to pay that OS TAX to own one. Now I know I am a simple person but does anyone else smell something wrong with this.

[DaGeek9]

Calling people who recommend Linux over M$ because most do not have the tech knowledge is just sad. I have been doing computers since the old DOS days and I can tell you up front most people running any M$ product are lucky to find the on/off button. Linux has reached the point and even surpassed it for being the choice for PC. If your not a gamer and looking for that bleeding edge graphics then having any M$ OS is just a waste of money, time and resources. For your everyday uses Linux is so far ahead of M$ it is not even a debate anymore. Once the PC manufactures realized that M$ is dying a slow Vista death Linux will be the choice for your everyday computer.Just look how they are falling over each other trying to get Linux on the sub laptops. That scared M$ so much that they decided to let XP be installed on them and extended it's life so Linux would not dominate the sub laptop market. That alone tell you how much M$ fears Linux. So please do show your over zealous love for M$ and its bloated OS by calling Linux users and those who recommend it names that only apply to M$ Vista defenders.

[jmimperial]

Forcing people to move from xp to vista is extortion. Vista sucked from day 1 and it still does even after Visa SP1. Its not compatible with a lot of software or hardware and its expensive to run since it requires expensive high-end hardware. What's the logic in that?! Vista is the biggest mistake that microsoft made.

[rustypipes100]

Gotta agree with dageek9! I'm no internet genuis (that was on porpus) , but I can tell you that there are a bunch of FREE linux OS systems out there that work really well! Ubuntu is one that you can run the cd in conjunction with windows while you learn (at first it's a little weird). There are also many others! Check out "the best 46 freeware utilities" and get on Gizmo Richard's website. SCREW Jobs and Gates!!!!!!! The internet belongs to everyone!!! For us old timers with Alzheimer's it's the answer for what's coming. Vista is already being phased out! Windows7 will charge you for everything. If you want word, you pay separately for it, want to share photos? cough up the bucks! (at least that's the way I understand it .)

[Imalittleteapot]

Microsoft just doesn't get it. They don't understand what it is that people are trying to do with their computers. Let's look at this P2P thing built into Vista. Every major company with a P2P framework has made the following mistakes. They only worked on the local LAN, only worked with wireless devices nearby, needed you to setup your own bootstrap server, had nothing to do with actually sharing files or contacts, or some combination of. In other words they only peer you to someone that's close enough that you could just smack them in the face and say hey buddy I need that file. Meanwhile everyone else is using Gnutella and Bittorrent to share files all around the world. They still think they're inventing something new when they're farther behind than ever. Same thing with this Windows Live Mesh thing. Automatically sync your files no matter where you are! Apparently a desktop folder that accesses an FTP folder is too complicated for them to understand. They have to write this complicated Web 2.0 stuff to sync files in the day of laptops and mobile devices. This would have been great when computers felt like they weighed 300 pounds. Now people sync their files by just taking the computer with them. Share folders with family or friends? Why in the world would I want to do that? It's better if I don't share with my friends. If they get a file from me it kills my bandwidth. If my friend leeches it from some other place then I'm much better off. Would it not be best to share the URL instead? Even if I did want to share with my friends, doesn't Microsoft know people have been doing these things for many many years? Their new features are things that I'm already bored with. Come on. You would have to be an idiot to use Vista only features in your program. Even Microsoft isn't that crazy. How many programs has Microsoft both ported to .NET and made Vista only? Office? Outlook? Media Player? IE? Well at least Solitaire looks better right? So yeah C#, .NET, WPF. It's all really good stuff, but who's going to use it? Most of it was back ported to XP anyway.

[CharlesWDavis]

I am a House Call technician for our 1,000 + member club. None have used Ubuntu or any other Linux OS. Our members are all over age 55. They do receive pictures from their children and grandchildren. Vista's Windows Photo Gallery allows them to quickly resize and send images. They love it! They could care less about what makes it work (and it does!).

If you can't accept Vista, you won't accept Windows 7 either, it is just your nature.

[Kev Orng]

I don't think it's my nature. If Windows 7 is competently executed and plays well on the company network, I'll be delighted with it. Until then, or at least until Vista SP2, we'll maintain our working XP/OSX network with a few Vista machines causing problems on it.

[roddog63]

I too remember the DOS days and my Commodore 64. I use Vista for heavy photoshop, illustrator, Painter X, InDesign, Excel, SPSS, Mathematica, and Media Center OCUR recording. It works without a hitch. 5GB photoshop files, yes 5GB...no problem. This OS is every bit as good as XP, and in most areas even better. I recall so many crying how XP wasn't as good as 2000, which wasn't as good as 98, which wasn't as good as 95, which wasn't as good as 3.1. Yes, I know I missed ME, but that really did suck! At the end of the day its like Mr. Davis said above, its just your nature to not like the MS products.

Does it take more resources? Yes, if all the whiners would move on and stop crying for legacy hardware compatibility for their 13 year old scanner, DOS programs, and various other hardware and software from a decade ago, 64 bit OSs would be mainstream and we could get access to enough RAM that resources wouldn't be an issue. It takes resources to make an OS and the programs that run under it easy for the masses to use.

Current OSs have to break free of the legacy garbage hardware and move ahead at some point. MS does a tremendous job of making an OS that accomodates a wide array of hardware. Apple doesn't, linux doesn't.

If Vista's resource requirement is too big, its hardware requirements too expensive then use Vista Basic or Linux and get yourself a Pentium 4 or Athlon.

[Imalittleteapot]

Yes my office has some legacy hardware. Some computers with only 256 of ram. They work just fine though so no reason to spend money upgrading. However, since you're such a hardcore Vista supporter. You've really convinced me. We're totally willing to get rid of that old perfectly functioning hardware if you're willing to pay for it.

[Ronin317]

roddog63, you're being short-sighted.

See, the problem is that these "13 year old scanners" are still working, and there's no reason that people should be forced to go out and purchase a new scanner just because MS updated the OS. Some people and companies can't incur the infrastructure cost that changes in technology force for every piece of hardware and software on the cycles that manufacturers are trying to put in place.

To the point - MS, in their infinite wisdom (mind you I'm an MS shareholder and supporter), should create a driver tool that allows for old drivers to be transcoded to Vista and beyond. Either that or the companies need to revisit the drivers and continue to support the new OS versions by doing the same thing.

It really can't be that hard...the open source community seems to be able to transcode drivers for Linux and such without much of an issue, but MS can't? C'mon...

That said, I personally upgrade when I can, but some things that get a decent amount of use (part-time photog here) like a scanner, I have made a pretty significant investment in ($400), and shouldn't have to upgrade it every 3 years if the damn thing works perfectly fine.

[Kev Orng]

I'm not a Linux guy, but when you say Linux doesn't support a wide range of hardware, you're incorrect. Linux will run on just about any x86 machine you can pull out of your crawlspace, if you need it to. I can put it on a Core 2 Duo or on a 286.
You might be referring to peripherals, but I can't speak to that topic, I have no idea.