|
|
Petition launched to save XP
Author: Gareth HalfacreePublished: 15th January 2008
A sight that you won't be seeing after June 2008 if Microsoft has its way.
You may remember that when Dell started pre-installing Vista on all their new home PCs the uproar from consumers was enough to convince the box builder to offer a choice of Vista or XP, at least on the most popular models in their range. InfoWorld is hoping to embrace and extend that success by taking on the beast itself: Microsoft.
Microsoft is due to end shipment of Windows XP in both retail and OEM formats on the 30th of June, despite strong popular demand for the previous-generation OS. After this time, system builders will be given until December 31st to shift remaining stocks of Windows XP. The reason is clear: the company is extremely keen to get people shifted onto its next-gen OS, Windows Vista.
InfoWorld believes that XP still has a place in the market, and I have to agree. Having used both Vista and XP on the same box, XP certainly feels nippier and has fewer surprises lurking behind shadowy corners. While an upgrade would obviously make Vista just as responsive as XP is, it's a fact that many of the bottom-end PCs sold by retailers such as Dell and HP just don't have the grunt to make Vista a viable option without adding additional memory and bumping the price away from the headline-grabbing loss-leader offers we see so often.
InfoWorld's aim is laudable, but perhaps a trifle optimistic: it's attempting to get Microsoft to agree to an indefinite extension to XP's shelf-life. In the site's own words, “Not for another six months or a year but indefinitely.”
As much as I'd like to see XP remain an option, especially at the budget end of the market, I think that Microsoft has too much riding on the success of Vista to allow it to happen. Still, with enough signatures anything is possible.
Tempted to sign, or should all the XP holdouts switch to something more suited to less powerful computers? Give us your thoughts over in the forums.
Related
Comments (92)
Compare over 250 mobile phones &
52,000 deals!
Compare over 100 broadband & mobile broadband deals online!
- Site Links:
- About
- Email Editor
- Newsletter
- Privacy
- RSS
- Score Guide
- Our Other Websites:
- Auto Express
- Channel Pro
- Computer Buyer
- Computer Shopper
- Den of Geek
All content © bit-tech.net 2000-2009
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited licensed by Felden
I myself had vista installed on my system from the day i bought it. Being primarily a gaming machine, i found the extra 5-10% or so FPS i was getting under XP worth sticking with it. For general productivity, and ease of use, i really like Vista's approach. Integrated search and the fact that window composition and overall display is using my graphics card more is making the expenditure of a high end GPU all the more worthwhile, but as mentioned above:
"many of the bottom-end PCs sold by retailers such as Dell and HP just don't have the grunt to make Vista a viable option without adding additional memory and bumping the price away from the headline-grabbing loss-leader offers we see so often."
which is why this machine will remain XP only for now, and Vista wil have to wait until my new machine is built towards the end of the year.
I can't see *that* many educational establishments or businesses doing the switch to Vista any time soon, most will only upgrade OS when included with new machines (well that's basically how it worked in my old IT job). It's just easier to keep everything the same, you don't want multiple operatating systems etc, especially if you have hundreds of machines to look after.
Well unless you have big budgets and a decent size IT department.
Vista is plainly terrible. I have to troubleshoot problems on windows machines from 95-vista and vista is by far and wide the worst of the lot. Its networking setup is a utter joke as is its speed. I've yet to see a single good reason why xp is worse than vista.
of yrs a new os will likely be on the market and vista will be nothing but a distant memory.
I think i figured out why. Cause when the idea for the new OS started, right around the time XP was released, these were complaints from ME previous that were posted. But since then there is an XP machine in just about every home now, so people have grown accustomed to the layout from before and now they change it based on feedback from 6 years ago and older.
But people really should go spend the $70 or so on 4GB of RAM. Not that it needs it (omg it uses more RAM! Well I should hope so, that's why I got more), but because it's so damn cheap right now that there's no reason not to do it.
Fact is nearly the entire population of the world will be run by M/ S at some point in the future, not the most encouraging idea for the rest of all humanity but thats the way it is.
I have Vista and it`s a bit crashy crashy, it shouldn`t be hit and miss when you buy a product and if you pay full value for it you shouldn`t be bug testing the bloody thing for the next 2 years to get it to gold disc quality. I like the idea of vista and the visual frippery that makes it up.
So should Xp be discontinued? Yes the sooner it`s stopped and more and more people start getting used as guinea pigs the sooner my disc will be worth the money I paid for it.
and yep, some companies did a really bad job with the drivers (creative to just name one here).
but in the end vista is the future, xp is like agp, it should die, but prolly wont.
A big pile of steaming **** :D
Whether you like it or not, Vista is here to stay. It's just going to become more standardized just like XP has.
I couldn't disagree more. Who would want to "upgrade" to something that is slower and has virtually no noticeable changes aside a pretty interface and DX10? If the world liked Vista OEMs would not have gone back to offering XP after going Vista only at first. All the cool stuff that was supposed to make Vista awesome (WinFS for example) was scrapped, and in the end all you get is a sludgy and more annoying XP. Look at any Vista optimization guide, they all basically turn Vista into XP again...
Face it MS, you released something that sucks and no one wants. Stop trying to be Google and Apple, and make an OS that is actually revolutionary.
Have Vista installed since September, used it some in September and October, used it once in November and another time in December and havent used it at all in 2008.
Classify it as unreliable and a waste of money.
For everyone who says kill XP, Vista is best. Vista is not the best choice for all machines.
Couldn't get Titan Quest to work a few weeks back due to a missing .dll file. That I think is the major problem with Vista and Joe public, a game (especially one as recent as Titan Quest) should work out of the box without having to source files which were in DX9 and should still be in DX10 but has been removed by MS.
Those who want it to stay alive either use old software or don't have a modern enough system to cope with Vista.
The same happened when XP came out, people cried and said "but XP am work slower on my machinezors", but a year or so later most people upgraded and had no issues with speed and better software replaced the old software and life was good.
It's once again at that transition period.
Those who love XP will stick with it for a long time and fair enough, why buy a new OS if you don't NEED it. Those who buy new systems will have enough power for Vista and will probably either install it themselves, install an old XP that they already have if they want XP that much, or have Vista pre-installed and wont know the difference anyway.
I just wish people would stop fearing progression
I hate that expression.
Not even close. I mean, come on....ME didn't work for anyone :|:?
QFT, well said
Vista runs great with a high spec machine and 64bit with 4GB RAM is a dream. I've had no more issues with Vista than I had I first had with XP, far less in fact.
Businesses will continue to get support from MS as they have done for previous operating systems but eventually as machine life cycles go through Vista will also be the norm
Let's move on and stop moaning :(
QFT, installed since march 2007, yet to have any problems with it, other than some lacking drivers in the early days which are now resolved.
ByeBye XP B)
"But it won't work," I said. "I know it won't work. It will definitely not work. It absolutely won't work. No worky."
"Yes it will," they said.
So I went and bought a copy of XP. This is the mentality you're dealing with.
now i have to go change my pant /offtopic. IMO vista is better then xp but nowhere near as good as a decent linux distro
Half of it's processes are a waste, and an excuse to sell more hardware that you normally wouldn't need in the first place.
I'm in the boat of converting to unix/linux...it's worth learning a new OS.
All M$ has going for it now anyway is compatibility and popular games, which they pretty much have control over cause they have the money to basically make themselves the standard.
As for holding XP out, they should...at least until they're 100% sure Vista will keep going.
nothing against linux, but theres something it lacks, its called games. game developers should start making linux versions of their games.
and game developers will only start to develop linux native installers when more people start using linux
Also, I can use WINE to run some old (but good) games from pre-XP days (ahhh, Win95, the memories).
Anyway, I'm actually going to be using all three OS's on my new system (when I eventually get round to building it), XP, Vista and Linux. I am expecting problems with some older games on Vista (mainly because I'm going to be running Vista x64) so that's why I'm going to buy () XP and Vista for the new system (rather than transfer the old license over).
£143 for two OSs. Ridiculous! (only cos I'm going for OEM versions, I'd hate to see how much it would cost for Retail!!!)
Andy
Considering that my PC is running 100% (at the moment).
I just don’t see any valid reason(s) for me to upgrade to Vista.
I really think Vista looks good and I have used the Home edition and I was very impressed with it.
But, so what – it’s still no reason for me to “upgrade”.
Like most people, the day will come when I will go Vista, but until I feel the need to do it, I will remain using XP.
I remember when XP come out, I was one of the first people to stop using Win 98.
But then I had lots of reasons why I should go from Win 98 to XP, and I’m sure most of you know what I mean.
Also, if you want to get to a lot of settings on vista, its many many more clicks
For example, network connections - XP, Start -> network connections
Vista, Start -> networking -> interfaces (or something like that), configure connections (or something like that) - it takes far longer to get to the exact same menu on vista
But it definitely has some improvements over XP (like the search part)
However, my main gripe is MS's hard sell tactic
If users don't want Vista, Why is MS forcing it down your throat, they are giving you no choice
I don't understand why MS is doing this, they didn't do it with 98 when ME came out, they didn't do it with 2000 when XP came out
In the end, it all screams to me of "Our OS is a turd, but if we give users no other choice they will have to buy it"
What I would prefer MS to be "hard selling" would be 64bit...make the industry move to 64bit sa we cut all this faffing around with half and half
I'm with Kempez on this.
Oh, I'm sorry...we're talking about Windows. Yeah. Rah rah, go MS.
If anything, I'm with the guys who say kill off all the 32b versions. Period.
/goes back to the OSes he actually enjoys using.
64 bit (linux) all the way.
Andy
Also, who's forcing you on a new system? Buy no OS, download your favourite flavour of Linux, and install it. That way you'll have a full 64bit OS, 100% customizable to your needs, and at the price of... Well nothing...
Time, as always, will tell.
rumors have it that there will even be 32bit versions of the next windows os
So for now i'm very happy with my xp pro sp3 machine :)
If the rumours are true, it is definately a step backwards. Look at the memory requirements for computers in the last 3 years; in 2004, 512MB was standard. In 2007, 2GB is standard. therefore, applying (very) fuzzy logic to this argument, we'll be installing at least 8GB into our machines in 2010. How is a 32bit OS (and associated programs) going to address that memory?
Yet again, more Microsoft "innovation".
Andy
I may buy another XP OEM with my next upgrade, but two or three years from now I expect to be using a newer OS. XP was a hard act to follow, Vista hasn't got off to a good start, but the hardware will soon catch up.
2010 rolls around and the number will suddenly be redirected to an 090 number!
Andy
Yeah, because MS is the root of all evil... :(
I've other software that needs activation; I'm far more concerned that those smaller companies may go belly-up and leave me in the lurch.
When i was re-installing my PC i had to choose between vista x64 and XPx64 (both free through school) and chose XPx64 in the end, and haven't been upset really, plus Ive seen some of my programs saying "doesn't support vista x64"
Maybe that's just me, but i did talk to a lot of people to help me decide, and it was marginally in favour of XPx64 for better gaming performance
Really, I don't care what MS does. They lost me with Vista's new "features" and I made the switch to linux. Technically I am set up to dual boot to XPpro64, but doing so requires finding a different keyboard and it hasn't been worth it. Yeah, I miss gaming once in a while, and there are some new games I want to try, but so far it just hasn't seemed that important.
By the time games require vista I'll either get Cedega or Wine figured out, or I will go without.
I'm also carrying around linux CDs to hand out to whoever wants one.
In about 5 years, when everyone is using a console for games, we'll be wondering "what happened to Microsoft"? Esp. when the only thing that seems to keep people using Windows is the Windows games...
Andy
We 'spread the light' as well... :D
I really dont think that will be the case, Microsofts main focus & drive for MS Windows is the corporate market.
However, I do think that during the next 5 years, MS will face a lot more competition from different O/Ss, such as Linux and Mac.
Consumers will have choices to play games on various platforms.
I enjoy playing games on my PC, for me its better than a console.
Microsoft make their money, not in home systems, but in the business market.
So even regardless of games, Microsoft will still be there providing Operating Systems and Office related software to almost every business on the planet.
Sorry double post
1) Microsoft are making it mandatory, and they released it too early. I might sympathise if they kept giving us the choice until they had Vista running as well as XP, but as things stand it's like being force-fed a half-cooked meal.
2) Versions. They release about 6 different versions of Vista, and don't even explain properly how they differ: when choosing, one must simply wade through that nauseatingly vague sales-marketing language they use, which makes every version sound like sugar-coated gold and fails to elaborate on why there's a £300 price difference between the lowest and the highest.
Take it back and serve it when it's hot, Microsoft, and give us a proper menu while you're there.
At first I wasn't sure, it just appeared to be XP with a shiny new coat.
Once I managed to track down drivers for sound, which due to HP/Compaq's complete lack of support for anything but a brand new product made this a task and a half, all is now well.
Ohh, and you have to switch off the confirmation thingie that pop's up asking you to verify every damned thing you do. Switched off after I found it hiding in the User account section.
The sidebar feels part of the system, not just an add on, as does the live task-bar preview (which I don't really use)
Overall I'm liking it so far, networking was easy, as was setting up wifi.
Even mapping network drives was easier, as when you go to type in the network address it remembers your previously entered values from a drop down list and you just need to change one letter.
It's these very small changes that make a difference.
I like the breadcrumb view, but I do miss the UP button. Why not give us both?
I booted back into XP after a week of exclusively using Vista and XP felt old, not slow but just dated.
I'm still getting used to Vista, and if it continues to impress I'll be adding it to my main PC.
good point, i should be able to just take a quick glance at it and be able to pick the one thats right for me.
Throw in the security aspect of a Linux system, the ease of use, the possibility to have diskless thin clients booting off a common central image, centralised file storage and the lack of any Client Access Licenses for the mailserver, intranet server, print server etc etc, then you can see why Linux becomes so much more attractive. Throw in ISO standard document formats and the jobs a winner.
Andy
imo other then home basic, there all pretty much the same
They much preffer to have a standardised system, that has all the software they need available on that OS, unfortunatly Linux doesn't offer that solution.
Open Office was too late on the scene to make a difference and "the possibility to have diskless thin clients booting off a common central image, centralised file storage and the lack of any Client Access Licenses for the mailserver, intranet server, print server etc etc" cuts no ice with the typists.
You have no idea how much new features there is in Vista. And interesting things you can do with it to increase your productivity, and stop searching for your apps, delete/cut/move/etc... a group of files, and more.
They are small features, that are not worth marketing for, but when you add them all up, it makes Vista very interesting.I recommend using the 64-bit Vista, as it seams to lack of a LOT of bugs reported, including the lack of network issues.
On yo your second point. There is nothing revolutionary in Mac OS X. Most things were stolen from Longhorn, and even THEN these are just little features... including instant search. That is NOT revolutionary. What is revolutionary can only be found in some movie... Minority Report? And that is not going to work, as it would be too different, and people won't adopt it.
nah, its not just you, organizing files so you can find them ftw.
job done... i don't get it either!
Oh stop banging the MS drum! It's hurting my ears. (Faintly heard "Come and join us, come and join us" in the style of Ken Dodd :) )
Face it, MS didn't innovate, they copied, just like they have done all along. How you expect me to believe that an OS can "increase productivity" is beyond me. Factor in the relearning of the interface and the increased processor overhead, the playing around with the, frankly, useless Aero interface, and you have a productivity drop, not an increase.
In my personal experience, I have only met one person who likes Vista, and then only because they use FSX and can see an improvement over FS2004 on XP.
As with all things though, you use what you like. I like Linux (although I have to use Windows in work, but that is changing:D) I find ti works well for me. Most people like XP, some like Vista. It all depends on what you like and what you prefer to use.
Andy
Feel free to flame away, I like a frank and open discussion.;)
Oh, and this isn't a personal attack on you, Goodbytes, it is for every $OS fanboi out there who thinks that $OS is the dogs dangly bits and doesn't care about anything else.
But neither have the killing blow to Microsofts DirectX, so people who play PC games will never be able to fully leave Windows.
Andy
But its very popular in the professional market (which, as far as i know, doesnt use D3D)