Windows XP's last hurrah

The mere fact that Microsoft will stop widespread sale of Windows XP at the end of the day has been a topic here and elsewhere for months.

So, rather than rehash things (though you can click here for a recap), I thought I would take a look at the Windows landscape.

The most immediate question is, with Windows XP moving off the stage, just where is Windows Vista?

On the plus side, the newer operating system has sold 140 million copies, according to Microsoft. But, as I've been saying for some time, that is largely a factor of how many people have wanted a new PC in the past 18 months, as opposed to an indicator of pure demand.

However, businesses, which get to choose which operating system they run, have overwhelmingly stuck with XP. Just a tiny fraction of corporate machines are running Vista, with some companies not planning any companywide Vista deployment at all.

Windows XP remains popular with consumers as well. So, if businesses and consumers all like XP, why on earth would Microsoft stop selling it?

There are a couple of reasons. For one, XP is now seven years old. Even with a major security enhancement (XP Service Pack 2), the company benefits from shifting things to the more secure Windows Vista.

It is also critical for Microsoft to build the install base of Vista as quickly as it can. That's because developers won't really start building applications that are Vista-dependent until it occupies a large percentage of machines in active use. Even with 140 million Vista copies sold, there are still extremely few programs that really harness the features of Vista.

After waiting as long as it could, Microsoft has also started talking about what comes after Vista. In an exclusive interview with CNET News.com last month, development head Steven Sinofsky said Windows 7 will use the same drivers as Vista and largely aim to preserve compatibility rather than introduce major changes, as Vista did.

At the "D: All Things Digital" conference, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer showed off one aspect of Windows 7: its ability to use multitouch input to enable the same kinds of gestures found in Apple's iPhone or Microsoft's Surface computer.

Some argue, though, that it is time to stop slapping new paint on top of Windows, instead rebuilding it from the ground up. Although there is an enormous and unmatched number of programs written for the operating system, preserving all those decades of compatibility is a crutch that has made it harder and harder to innovate, or even update the software.

The New York Times posted an interesting piece on this subject over the weekend. It points to a number of projects inside Microsoft suggesting that it, too, is thinking about other operating-system approaches.

They are things that News.com has covered in the past, ranging from Microsoft Research's Singularity project to the slimmed-down MinWin kernel that the Windows team developed but apparently is not using in Windows 7.

The point raised in the Times piece is an important one, though. With Linux-based computers starting to make inroads at the low end, and Apple continuing to gain share at the high end, can Microsoft really afford to do business as usual?

Steve Ballmer has vowed that it will never again be five years between Windows releases. I think it is important to note, though, that even assuming no delays in Windows 7, it will be three years between its release and that of Vista--and that's for a release that doesn't make significant changes under the hood.

It appears to me, anyway, that making major changes to Windows has become an increasingly difficult proposition. Perhaps, at some point, Microsoft will have to consider what Apple has done three times with the Macintosh--make major changes under the hood, and use some sort of compatibility layer to maintain its ties to the past.

What do you think?

[tashman]

Microsoft will now be able to count all of those business' who want XP as Vista users even if businesses do the "downgrade" These will still count towards Vista sales and will pump up the numbers. In a year we will hear how the sales of Vista have skyrocketed however it won't be the true numbers as microsoft will never share how many of those copies of Vista are not even running and never will.

What a shame. In a country built on the idea of strength and desire, we now have companies removing products people want. What happen to the time when products where built to last, it use to be that an old longtooth product that could still attract buyers was sought after.

Now it's all about short term goals, share price and a quick buck. I'll tell you what don't be surprised when we wake up one day and find out nobody cares, and we are not leading the world anymore in anything.

tim

[phurley]

Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.
John Adams, Letter, April 15, 1814

[Mr. Dee]

Microsoft does not need to rewrite Windows, they can clean it up, just like they did for example with the release Windows XP Professional x64 where they removed things like AppleTalk, POSIX compliance and NetBEUI. You must remember just like Linux or Unix, NT was designed in mind to be a portable OS, in fact during its development it was specifically targeted at different platforms such as PowerPC, Alpha, MIPs, the Intel processor it targeted had to be emulated. So I would revise your analysis before dooming Windows. A lot of the work over years has been targeted at componentising much of Windows where vital components like the Network Stack, graphics don't create lots of dependencies. Rumors are much of the built apps for instance will be optional in Windows 7. Vista's only regret is, it made necessary architectural changes for security sake and took a long time to reach market. Microsoft could even move legacy compatibility to a virtualized stack where old apps work normally on newer versions of Windows without a hitch.

[The_Decider]

Mr Dee Dee Dee, Your comments are so off base. Vista is such a mess that it is impossible to clean it up even in the slightest. Only regret? Those security improvements are half-assed roadblocks, not serious security enhancements. What about the dozens of features that other OS's have had for years and even decades that had to be pulled from Vista so it could be released only a few years late?

[Penguinisto]

How exactly does one remove POSIX compliancy w/o the OS imploding nowadays, d'ya figure? (yes, I am laughing. At you, not with you). Also, it sure looks like it'd be fun trying to hit a Windows share without NetBEUI (even NBT stands for "NetBEUI over TCP/IP"). Microsoft stopped supporting Alpha, PPC, Sparc, and MIPS... back in the NT 4.0 days. They ditched that code when Win2k came out.

[The_Decider]

140 million? Really? If the true number of copies of Vista installed and running is even 25% that I would be shocked. Those numbers are skewed to hide the failure of Vista. A business buys 1000 machines and upgrades to XP, MS counts that as 1000 Vista "sales".

[Penguinisto]

I think Microsoft will become a victim of its own hubris. They're stuck with not being able to do anything major to Windows (lest compatibility break), but at the same time Vista has shown that they're increasingly unable to keep up. Apple went through its teething troubles years ago. Linux never really had any to speak of - the 2.2 to 2.4 kernel shift is the only thing I can think of that even comes close. In Apple and Linux' cases, the transition was eased by either an architecture that could handle it (Linux) or by a combination of virtualization (Apple's "Classic" and Carbon) and a ton of work with developers and the community to make it happen. Microsoft has no such luxuries, and to be honest, its their own fault. They foolishly decided to rely on Moore's Law to continue to save them, and Vista has shown that they cannot possibly keep within the curve with NT's ever-increasing bloat. MinWin may save them, if MSFT is smart enough to stop treating their Research division as some sort of Gulag, but MinWin doesn't really have all that much in it, and will likely suffer its own compatibility troubles. A BSD-like core with a re-worked Windows API atop it could save them, but again, it would mean losing a lot of the control that Microsoft craves, and would require years of additional work that they cannot afford to spend... so no go there.

[The_Decider]

The amusing part is that one of the few competent people at MS(Michael Howard) has been pushing the idea that backwards compatibility is a bad thing, especially security. MS has been ignoring him at their peril for at least 6 years now. The fact that MS is a marketing company and all architectural decisions are made by the marketing department is starting to be obvious, even to people who don't really understand operating systems and software. This hubris has painted them into a corner they can not get out of. Which is fine, MS has no real place in the future of IT and we are all better for it.

[DrtyDogg]

Get a room you two.

[Minty-Linux]

You nailed it. Good comment.

[yacahuma]

I really dont care. Xp will be my last MS OS. I will used it till my machine dies and new machines simply have no drivers for it. My last laptop came with Vista. It lasted 3 days(why? just one example: unzipping a file in vista took 1 min 28 sec. It took XP 30 secs for the same file on the same machine). It took me a bit , but I found all XP drivers( after gateway support told me they could not help me).

It will be nice If you could simply run a program on the OS of your choice. Unfortunately ,Java failed us all. Even today, java apps just dont run the same way a normal app run on windows. So much for good intentions.

Ms will not change thee way they build their OS. There is simply no reason for them to do it. If it was me, I will not do it either. You got a bunch of people, that just dont know any better buying machines at cotsco and wallmart. All they think , is that is the ,machine is new it should be good. These are the same people that have no idea firefox exists(They will use explorer till the day they die), Apple is a fruit and Linux is some kind of sickness.

Microsoft is counting on ignorance. And since most people are...

[The_Decider]

"java apps just dont run the same way a normal app run on windows" What is that supposed to mean? A run lots of java apps and they run just like any other desktop app.

[Nazaka2008]

When MS release Vista after I run the long lane with Windows XP, I find that it is time to stop running with MS family members. I shift to Linux and I am happy, after all it is free.

[macca2380]

i dont worry anymore about windows i have lunux madriva and its free and its great

[Ted Miller]

Do you know about the "smbus" driver? I believe it int the intel chipset drivers? It is the one driver I cannot find to complete an XP downgrade (Really it's an upgrade from Vista). It's sad that computer companies continue to kiss Microsofts ass instead of it's customers. Real sad indeed!

[blsith]

A - most companies do not rush to get a new OS. They typically wait until 1-2 service packs are out, and then usually phase it in with equipment refreshes. The company I'm at now had windows 2000 machines in the office until just a couple of years ago. It's not just the OS cost, but the downtime for the personel doing an OS upgrade that isn't "needed".

B - Vista is to XP what 2000 was to NT4. I know a lot of companies that skipped 2000 Workstation completely because of the cycles involved.

The question is will DirectX 10 take off anytime soon (since XP doesn't support it). that will be the kicker. A report I read recently was equating Blizzard's intake of cash to be similar to an "Iron Man" release every month to the movie industry. Games sell platforms, when the games are good. If Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, Half-Life 2 Episode 3 or Portal 2 have DX10 specific versions (or are exclusively DX10), they will move units of Vista out the door.

[The_Decider]

The top people writing game engines have little interest in DX10, at best. More and more games are also supporting openGL, which makes it easy to run them flawlessly in wine, which mean the underlying OS isn't relevant. If MS wants to try and force Vista upgrades via DX10, they can try and it will be amusing watching them fail. If MS wants DX10 to take off they will have to support it on XP, or better yet make it cross-platform.

[Penguinisto]

Err, most corps don't rush to get an new OS because of their buying cycles... Vista came out 6 years after XP, and offers no (as in: Zero) compelling reasons to buy it.

[tsmgroup2]

Come on now, folks. What are you all worried about? Just go to Ubuntu and d/l their OS, d/l wine into it and follow along and support the codeweaver's company. They can be your backbone. If anyone needs help with a fresh install or upgrade, give me a hoot, note, or visit...
You'll never regret the switch, and you still get to follow all the rest online too!!!

[The_Decider]

Please do not recommend Ubuntu, it is a lackluster Linux distro. Ubuntu is 100% hype, 0% substance. Get a real distro such as openSuSE 11. Speaking of Wine, if people want to boost the performance of their games linux + wine is what the doctor ordered! On my system(3.0 duo core wolfdale, 2 gb corsiar RAM and 1 Geforce 8800 GT run WoW with settings maxed out in Windows XP at 70 FPS and around 180 ms latency. That is with the most up to date hardware drivers. The same machine with the same WoW settings in openSUSE 11 runs at 130 ms latency and 180 FPS, yes 180 FPS.

[Penguinisto]

Actually, the best advice I can give is to ask the user to look around a bit. If they want to spend little-or-no money, are willing to take a little bit of time to learn a new OS, and want maximum freedom, go for Linux (the specific distro isn't really a point of contention w/ me - Ubuntu for basic stuff, OpenSuSE for maximum Windows app compatibility, and Fedora for those who like to experiment a lot). Otherwise, if the user has a bit of cash to spend, and wants a machine that will last them a long time without being stuck on an upgrade treadmill, go for a Mac.

[macca2380]

hi great ive left windows too now have mandriva and its great took awhile to get use of it
but no troubles great more should think an bout it and it free have a good day

[dhrizzo]

If the user base really wants Windows XP to be continued all they have to do is speak from their wallets. Buy your next PC with Linux. If we all started this trend, Microsoft would be forced to recognize that we want XP instead of Vista. I have not seen anything in Vista that made it better than XP. In fact the opposite is true. Vista requires more hardware and delivers a less robust user experience than XP. Vista is piled high with CRAP, eye candy and no real security benefits. Simply making the user the fall guy for any action that allows someone to damage the PC by making the user wade through countless nag screens is not real security. Instead it is blame shifting. It's not our fault you okayed that action. Yes I okayed that action, because you made me click ok to so many nag screens each time I wanted to do something I should have been able to do, that I became de-sensitized to them.
Give us a break, most of us do not need protection from ourselves, and those who do will manage to screw up despite of Microsoft's efforts.

[buddesatva]

The difference between home and business users is small. I want my software to run without having to re-purchase. Vista is a product that exists to make money. I have yet to hear of a feature or function that Vista has that would induce me to change. If I end up having to install Vista and re-purchase and re-install software I will be peeved, but I will still get paid and that is why I come to work.

[Penguinisto]

Err, it's bigger than you think. Home users don't have to buy or manage CALs, they don't have to manage AD, RIS, SMS, IIS (MSFT's version of Apache), or a whole host of other services that must operate 24/7 in a business environment of any decent size.

[dhrizzo]

If the user base really wants Windows XP to be continued all they have to do is speak from their wallets. Buy your next PC with Linux. If we all started this trend, Microsoft would be forced to recognize that we want XP instead of Vista. I have not seen anything in Vista that made it better than XP. In fact the opposite is true. Vista requires more hardware and delivers a less robust user experience than XP. Vista is piled high with CRAP, eye candy and no real security benefits. Simply making the user the fall guy for any action that allows someone to damage the PC by making the user wade through countless nag screens is not real security. Instead it is blame shifting. It's not our fault you okayed that action. Yes I okayed that action, because you made me click ok to so many nag screens each time I wanted to do something I should have been able to do, that I became de-sensitized to them.
Give us a break, most of us do not need protection from ourselves, and those who do will manage to screw up despite of Microsoft's efforts.

[cloud9ine]

Lucky me. My Thinkpad was getting a little buggy, and all I had to do was reboot and press the blue button (Thanks Lenovo + IBM) and restore it to factory fresh, with all the drivers. I could even pick and choose every extra utility in the install, and in 30 mins I had my system with XP and took another 5 min to download and install SP3 on top of it. Every program I use happens to be free and available online so when I remember I don't have it, I install it.

It just gives me great comfort to know that I will be able to keep doing this until my T60 or its HDD dies, at which point, I will get a new system, with only linux on it, and see if I can survive.

[dhrizzo]

If the user base really wants Windows XP to be continued all they have to do is speak from their wallets. Buy your next PC with Linux. If we all started this trend, Microsoft would be forced to recognize that we want XP instead of Vista. I have not seen anything in Vista that made it better than XP. In fact the opposite is true. Vista requires more hardware and delivers a less robust user experience than XP. Vista is piled high with CRAP, eye candy and no real security benefits. Simply making the user the fall guy for any action that allows someone to damage the PC by making the user wade through countless nag screens is not real security. Instead it is blame shifting. It's not our fault you okayed that action. Yes I okayed that action, because you made me click ok to so many nag screens each time I wanted to do something I should have been able to do, that I became de-sensitized to them.
Give us a break, most of us do not need protection from ourselves, and those who do will manage to screw up despite of Microsoft's efforts.

[sk43999]

>

I did! In fact, my last 4 PCs all came with Linux preinstalled (and it would have been 5 if IBM had offered built-in ethernet on their Caldera Linux X20 models.) But what message did I send? I have no use for XP (having never used it except to test out an eee PC at Best Buy.)

[cloud9ine]

Lucky me. My Thinkpad was getting a little buggy, and all I had to do was reboot and press the blue button (Thanks Lenovo + IBM) and restore it to factory fresh, with all the drivers. I could even pick and choose every extra utility in the install, and in 30 mins I had my system with XP and took another 5 min to download and install SP3 on top of it. Every program I use happens to be free and available online so when I remember I don't have it, I install it.

It just gives me great comfort to know that I will be able to keep doing this until my T60 or its HDD dies, at which point, I will get a new system, with only linux on it, and see if I can survive.

[jer2eydevil88]

I use Vista x64 Ultimate on my custom built Intel Q600 powered computer, and I like using it on here. I bought Vista on launch day and believe it got a lot of very deserved criticism especially with how they worked with third party developers to get drive support ready. That was a year and a half ago now and things have really changed.

Vista is still slower than XP and Mac OS X at certain things, on the other hand it is far more secure than XP and for the average user thats a good thing. If you work mostly with copying large files on your computer then Vista is not right for you, they improved this with SP1 but its still about half the speed of XP. If you work with lots of little documents, many pictures, or are just looking for an email and word processing machine then you will find it hard to dislike Vista with its integrated search capabilities.

Vista's new interface and many changes from XP will make users uncomfortable with it at first (see people hate change) but since driver development has caught up and SP1 fixed some major bugs I feel Vista is finally out of paid beta and is ready for Microsoft to start selling it as a retail product (this assuming you also consider the first year Microsoft releases something a paid beta).

[jarra64]

tsmgroup2 -

Unless Ubuntu has the full Adobe suite I think I would regret it very much....

[JGrubbs]

It could if Adobe would release it. Now that Max OS X is a true UNIX OS there is no reason why Adobe can't release a Linux version of their suite. If more users demand Linux software, then then software developers will release the ports.

[Mikep_]

Can someone tell my WHY microsoft keep doing this (putting out products that are worse than their predessors)? I sent my new Vista back for an XP and my company recently changed to Word and Excel 2007, which has no advantage or efficiency, that I can find and a number of useful features have been removed. There must be a reason they would want to degrade their product. Someone must have asked them this, what is their response?

[rcrusoe]

Most of our managers are using or have requested Macs so their "hand me downs" should easily take care of our PC needs for the next few years. Most of our employees that have to run Windows programs use thin clients connected to Windows Terminal Servers. We're lucky, we won't need Vista.

[clweaver]

Quit bashing Vista. If it wasn't for Vista and all the preceding resource hogs from MS, I couldn't afford to buy the hardware I need to run Linux. Compared to just 10 years ago it's just fantastic; I buy $300.00 PCs with gigantic storage and huge amounts of RAM, and a fast CPU or two. These babies scream! If it wasn't for MS, we would still be paying a dollar a kilobyte for RAM, $1000.00 for a CD burner, and $500.00 for a 20 meg drive. There would be no DVD readers, much less burners and a 266 MHz processor would be standard. Cheer MS on, and encourage everyone (else) to go out and buy Vista, buy.

[Penguinisto]

ROTFL! I love your perspective. :)

[zeroplane]

So what?

Really I mean anyone can buy a copy of XP on ebay or the other 100 or so "resellers" selling OEM copies. The real rub will be when Micro$oft disables the ability to activate XP, I predict wares copied version use (the ones with the activation code hacked) to skyrocket.

What about service packs and bug fixes you may ask?

Well there are many forward thinking people who just don't trust Micro$oft. See there are lots of websites and FTP servers that provide "backup" copies of the network installation version of said service packs, bug fixes, and security fixes. Just in case Micro$oft looses the patches and service packs for say (forcing you to use Vista).

To be honest, none of this really bothers me too much I plan to be on either a mac or linux or mac/linux platform soon. When wine or a stripped down version of XP emulated for the touch applications I can't get ported or wininized.

[bloomer3333]

I AM JUST A NON-LITERATE TYPE THAT TAKES YEARS TO LEARN HOW TO USE MS'S NEW GIZMO'S. AS A (EVEN IF SELF-EMPLOYED) BUSINESSMAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS CRITICAL FOR MS TO BUILD THE INSTALLED-BASE OF VISTA USERS ASAP. BUT I THINK I AM AMONG A LEGION OF XP USERS THAT DOES NOT NEED ANYTHING THAT VISTA OFFERS. ESPECIALLY THE DRUDGERY OF HAVING TO LEARN (YET ONCE AGAIN!!!) ANOTHER OS. SO WHY CANNOT MS JUST CONTINUE TO OFFER XP-PRO ALONGSIDE VISTA --- AND ALLOW THE CUSTOMER TO CHOOSE? OVER TIME, MOST USERS WILL PROBABLY GRADUATE TO VISTA ANYWAY. BUT FORCING US ANTIDILIVIANS TO GO THERE AGAINST OUR WILL WHEN WE WANT TO UPGRADE TO A NEW, FASTER, COMPUTER IS ANYTHING BUT "CUSTOMER SENSITIVE."
WHY CANNOT MS

It is also critical for Microsoft to build the install base of Vista as quickly as it can. That's because developers won't really start building applications that are Vista-dependent until it occupies a large percentage of machines in active use. Even with 140 million Vista copies sold, there are still extremely few programs that really harness the features of Vista.