Comments on: Microsoft grants Windows XP a reprieve

System builders and resellers get extra time to obtain licenses for the discontinued XP for their systems.

[Maclover1]

I am a IT contractor for systems and since Vista has released I have worked for 3 large US corporations, that currently have over 400,000 desktop's in their environments. All 3 did a pilot test with Vista and all three pushed its adoption back to 2010.

Mind you all 3 have Enterprise agreements with MS, so they actually own Vista so its not the cost of the software. Its so many other things that people have listed. Hardware upgrades, not compatible with all of their software made in house or off the shelf like VPN software, and user training and support.

Vista will never see the light of day in these corporations.

[bschmidt25]

I think the issue is that XP running on new hardware literally won't be obsolete until Microsoft stops supporting it. For those that are buying systems now, it's essentially a 7 year old (mature) OS running on brand new hardware, so it's fast and stable at this point. There wasn't a whole lot of early adoption with XP either - 2000 Pro was good enough for most and was a huge improvement from 9x. But Microsoft essentially forced everyone's hand by cutting off support on 2000 and only distributing XP to OEMs. The reason there was not such an outcry last time was because XP could run on essentially the same hardware, unlike Vista which really requires 4 times as much memory and storage to run effectively. I agree with you that it's not the cost of Vista, it's the cost of having to do hardware upgrades for no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista. And at this point, most companies know that Windows 7 is right around the corner and is getting good reviews. There's really no reason to go to Vista, which in the end will likely only have been around for a little over 2 years and will probably be quickly abandoned by MS once 7 is released. That's definitely the story at my company. We are entitled to Vista and could do the upgrade at no cost if we wanted to. We even have the hardware to run it on and wouldn't have to upgrade anything. But there's just no compelling reason to now with Windows 7 on the way. We're planning on going to 7 when we refresh our hardware instead.

[jonytk]

Vista is the new Windows Millenium.
DOT
when they come with something good and when i upgrade my AMD athlon 3000 with 2Gb of ram from 2005, i'll change.

[ExWinUser]

Exactly!

[clsmithj]

Microsoft should have stopped with XP, better yet Windows 2000 which was even better OS than XP, I never had any issues with it. I never forget how my ATI Radeon X1950 Pro AGP card would not work at all on XP but worked perfectly fine under 2000 a OS that it didn't even support. Grant it I was using a 4X Mobo at the time that probably was too old for the card, but still the card worked without a charm in 2000 but in XP I kept getting the error that it could not start the device.

Redesigning it every 4-5 years, and forcing people to upgrade by stopping updates for previous releases is pointless.

I am convinced Microsoft had an ace team designing Windows 2000 and that team has all going to the waste side today.

/rant

[The_happy_switcher]

You apes are missing an important point: WIndows 7 IS Vista. The kernel is the same, they just turned off some of the annoying nag screens, improved driver support, tweaked boot time. It's still the same Vista Pig with a new shade of lipstick.

How long can Microsoft keep this bloatware going?

[Maclover1]

I agree. Windows 7 is 98% Vista. Its got more bug fixes, more performance tweaks, more drivers a few GUI changes and a NAME CHANGE.

Its like they finally have finished Vista (bugs/performance/drivers) and at the same time average hardware price/power has caught up enough to be reasonable. I mean you see desktop boxes at Best Buy with 5gigs or RAM in them(odd number??). Oh and they MUST ditch that name in hopes of getting rid of the stigma that went with it.

[JCPayne]

Poor microshaft, poor--poor-- microshaft. So tricking them into buying "Mojave" isn't working either???

Ohh Mojave! Yeah right!

[not2worried]

I would have bought a new PC this your IF it had XP.. I have tried Vista and hated it..
If it ain't broke... remake it till it is.

[Inconnux]

I have been using Windows since win 3.1 and NEVER have i hated a version of windows more than Vista. I spent a day trying to get Autocad 2007 and a 2yr old plot printer to work under Vista. Most of my home programs don't work under Vista as well. Even though I enjoy PC games I can do without DX10. Games that have been released 'vista only' have been major flops. I am worried that Windows 7 will be just as bad as Vista.

I have always been a HATER of apple products but If I don't have any options my next computer will be Mac. Microsoft has driven me to the competition.

[bluedecor]

Amen to that. I also think the Vista debacle has been a big boost to the open source/Linux camp.

[kyleclay]

I upgraded to Vista only to take it off 3 months later and clean install my XP. Vista was a pain for me and I saw no reason to have upgraded with the exception of my impulse to install the new OS. I think they rushed a new OS for profits when there was no significant reason with Vista to upgrade, they needed more. Once going back to XP, I felt foolish for installing Vista, I gave it a chance.

I have had it with PC's and Microsoft, I will be moving to MAC my next purchase. After I have purchased a couple of IPODs for myself and wife, which were my first experience with Apple, the physical quality and the operating quality of these devices are superior to any electronic I have owned which leads me to believe the computers will have the same. I am seeing more friends moving to MAC, each claims such superiority that they could not go back to PC or Microsoft, I'll give it a try and see.

[bluedecor]

Vista has brought an open source future one step closer. Before you go to Apple, check out the other options. I look to a future of open source software, and a continued backlash against crippling DRM laden apps that function as spyware for big corporations. The developing world is the next market for personal computing, and they haven't got the money to put up with MS silliness.

[istariphoenix2]

KEEP XP ALIVE!! Vista SUCKS, and here's why: 1) Incompatibility with GOBS of software ? or it works but not quite the same, 2) Confirmation prompt after confirmation prompt, 3) Programs magically crash under Vista and not XP, 4) Requirement to seek permission from some mysterious administrator, when - OH WAIT - I AM the administrator!!!, 5) DreamScene makes computer (albeit a darn good one) freeze, 6) Inability to install fonts in bulk, 7) Folder settings resetting on their own CONSTANTLY, 8) Graphics editing programs suddenly can't handle large images anymore, 9) Printers cannot be found, 10) Difficulty visualizing what folder or files are highlighted in Windows Explorer, 11) Switching between Windows Explorer windows takes forever sometimes, 12) Internet Explorer suddenly doesn?t remember passwords or prompt to save them, 13) Desktop search function takes forever and is too complicated, 14) PDF Printer suddenly doesn?t work, 15) Network connectivity is CONSTANTLY lost...need I say more!?!?!?!

[GHynson]

Who gives a flying rats @$$ is MS decides to pull XP.
You can still download copies of Win95 from torrents,..
MS will just lose the sell of XP when people will just Install
cracked copies of XP for free.

[lganimys]

I have been using Windows XP, Windows Vista (32 Bit) Business and UBuntu Linux 8.04.

All the above OS are being used for software development.

Most of the problems related to software compatibility is solved if you use Vista 32 instad of Vista 64. Definately it would be at the cost of technology improvements. I felt that Vista is much more secured compared to XP while using which, I had lots of virus/worms/malware related problems.

Many people talk cheap about Vista because it is a bit complicated for them to use. Vista had to go Linux style with respect to security to survive in the development Industry. Else the latest GUI Linux operating systems are really scoring quickly against MS products and may in near future gobble up >50% share in the market.

Yes. Vista needs lots of hardware resources to perform well. So does the versions of latest linux OS. If you want good graphics, effects and other utility feel, you need resources to ru n the same.

So, no need to get excited over what MS has done to Vista. Rather, we can choose what is right for us as several options are now available.

Ganesh Laxmanmurthy

[curtis41]

Our IT guru will not even try a new windows operating system until at least service pack 2 is available. It is a lot of work and expense to upgrade hundreds of systems. Unlike some university IT folks, he uses Windows and Mac, with equal facility. They still use Macs for all the medical illustration,m drafting and slide work, and PCs for most of the campus. Faculty can purchase whichever operating system and machines they want, and get either university system pricing, or highly discounted university bookstore pricing. From my non-ITS view, the more I use the Mac and Unix, the less I like the PC.

[rabrooks]

MS is trying so hard to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Just as initiatives like "one computer for every child" is starting to gain some, these idiots are already alienating the 3/4 of the world customer base before they get there. XP works, and is more than most users can master. I'm not gonna mention the MS Cert prgm... I can remember when 3.X, Win95 and NT all had a dedicated following simultanieously. Back then everyone was happy..

[potable]

I will admit that vista was a dog upon initial release, they have sinced cleaned it up considerably with sp1 and now my x64 config runs with no errors and runs alot faster than its 32 bit counterpart (and 32 bit xp as well). its pretty straight foward, if you are tying to install this os on an old computer (one you bought in 2002 or before) then yes vista will be a nightmare to install, even if you can get that far with it. it seems no matter what o/s fanboy's will cry and bemoan each others operating systems, the same as the intel and amd fanboy camps, you guys need to get out of the basement of your mothers house more often and get a grip with reality. vista x64 works fine for me, does what i want it to do, and so far since doing sp1 i have had no BSOD's or fatal exceptions. my only qualm with vista has to do with the mentality of ms itself, why release a 64 bit o/s that can address up to 16 gb of ram with a bug that only lets it see 2 gb of ram? took me a sec to find that patch and did the trick. they should include it with sp2 (beta).

[potable]

ps. my vista x64 rig boots quicker to desktop than xp ever did for me. my boot to desktop time was 38 seconds, which isnt shabby:D

my rig (been building my own for many years):
OS Vista Ultimate x64 SP1
CPU AMD Athlon64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6000+ 3.01 GHz
Motherboard ASUS CROSSHAIR AM2 NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI
Memory CORSAIR XMS2 4GB (PC2 6400) @ 800mhz
Graphics Card NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB DDR3
Sound Card SoundMAX Digital HD Audio 7.1 channel