Is Microsoft playing a dangeous game of chicken with the internet? (XP)

[Cerb]

A: Remember those basic XP boxes that run this nuclear facility that were supposed to be isolated?

B: You mean the ones everyone watches Youporn on? ***points to example***

A: #!@#!!!!!!!!

Except that it will be the middle-aged lady checking her Church's activity schedule that will infect them. :|

 

[pmv]

What I'm wondering is - is there any possibility MS will end up extending the extended support period for Windows 7?
If Windows 8 continues to fail to take off, won't 7 be in the same position as XP was with respect to Vista?

Bugs me that if I go for 7 now there's only 6 years support left (but if I choose 8, then I get 3 more years, but have to deal with metro).

 

[cubby1223]

That holds back everyone. People are free to run what they choose, but officially supporting antiques drags the rest of us down with them. MS would be wasting time developing for outdated technology, and the rest of us would be dragged down by the lowest common denominator.

Anyone running XP deserves what they get. If they're chained by outdated proprietary software, they got exactly what they bought. Maybe next time they'll choose more carefully. If they're poor, there's numerous modern, safe, and gratis replacements to choose from. There's no reason to run XP, and they've already been coddled too long.

Eh.

I for one will be holding out with XP for as long as I can. I have very sensitive eyes, I can tell when a crt monitor is set to 60hz from far across a room. It took me four different lcd monitor purchases before I found one that didn't cause me headaches. The newer versions of Windows handle font shading differently than XP did, and it causes strain on my eyes to the point where I cannot work on a computer with newer than XP versions for more than a half hour at a time.

The only decision Microsoft made that drags down other people to the lowest common denominator, is refusing to update Internet Explorer beyond version 8.

The other solution is to just have the option for the old interface on the new OS's. Instead of supporting two completely different operating systems, they support two graphical interfaces on the same OS.

I have one client who still runs a Windows 95 machine, another still runs a MS-DOS machine because it is a massive expense to pull software out of their company software (the creators of the software are out of business) and into a new software. Such software was purchased and used because that software was the best option available at the time. Web-based services were not available.

I don't expect Microsoft to continue updating MS-DOS, but I just hate attitudes like yours that say everyone who doesn't upgrade are stupid morons hurting you.

If you are willing to pay the expenses and expend the labor to move data from one software to another for clients of mine, I'm more than happy to put you to work so we're not dragging you down anymore!

 

[Cerb]

Font smoothing was unchanged from XP through 7. Cleartype was added in XP, and can be adjusted or turned off in XP, Vista, and 7.

You can also go back to a pre-XP UI with a few mouse clicks, through 7.

Keeping the old OS for special software on well-managed PCs, not internet connected, is fine. It's all the other ones that will be problems.

 

[John Connor]

Bugs me that if I go for 7 now there's only 6 years support left (but if I choose 8, then I get 3 more years, but have to deal with metro).

For Windows 8 you don't have to deal with metro if you install Startisback.

 

[ViRGE]

What I'm wondering is - is there any possibility MS will end up extending the extended support period for Windows 7?
If Windows 8 continues to fail to take off, won't 7 be in the same position as XP was with respect to Vista?

We won't know for sure until we get there, but I for one would not be the least bit surprised if Windows 7 received an extended support phase. Windows 7 is in a good place for long term usage; it supports UEFI, x86-64, proper security separation (user/admin via UAC), a robust patching mechanism, modern security technologies (NX, ASLR, etc), WDDM, most power control technologies, and the list goes on.

Unlike XP it's not a half-baked security nightmare, which means it will hold up far better.

 

[nemesismk2]

What I'm wondering is - is there any possibility MS will end up extending the extended support period for Windows 7?
If Windows 8 continues to fail to take off, won't 7 be in the same position as XP was with respect to Vista?

Bugs me that if I go for 7 now there's only 6 years support left (but if I choose 8, then I get 3 more years, but have to deal with metro).

I don't think that Microsoft will extend support for Windows 7 because they want everyone to move to Windows 8 if they want to or not.

 

[Mem]

I don't think that Microsoft will extend support for Windows 7 because they want everyone to move to Windows 8 if they want to or not.

Probably by then we will be on Win9 etc ,end of the day its not a big deal since every OS regardless gets phased out sooner or later and they all have a timeline ,plenty of choices out there anyway,I can never understand anybody that gets dedicated or hooked to a particular OS.

 

[Ketchup]

I have been watching this thread since VL started it, and I think it would be good at this point to put things into perspective.

The percent of Microsoft that actually goes into Windows OS's:

http://www.tannerhelland.com/4993/microsoft-money-updated-2013/

And the percent of Windows computers still on XP:

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Wind...8-Percent-of-Computers-Worldwide-411806.shtml

In my mind, they should continue what they are doing: continue supporting XP for a fee, just possibly making it more widely known that they do, and the "problem" should rectify itself. I don't see a company continuing to work to support an OS that has 18% of 25% of their business for nothing.

 

[tamm]

The bar graph showcases that W7 is the next XP. W8 has been on the market for a while, but its got ground to cover.

Office is their most profitable avenue of revenue.

The only thing I wonder is how will the subscription based Office (365 I believe) will affect their source of revenue.

 

[Ketchup]

The bar graph showcases that W7 is the next XP. W8 has been on the market for a while, but its got ground to cover.

Office is their most profitable avenue of revenue.

The only thing I wonder is how will the subscription based Office (365 I believe) will affect their source of revenue.

Yes, I would hope (and maybe they do as well) that Office 365 is going to push those numbers even higher. I know where I work we will be switching over quite soon, and the prep work for the conversion is already under way.

 

[ViRGE]

In my mind, they should continue what they are doing: continue supporting XP for a fee, just possibly making it more widely known that they do, and the "problem" should rectify itself.

The problem with that is that everyone would pirate the updates rather than paying a fee, especially since you can't really put effective DRM on Windows updates. Technically this is even a problem now with MS's paid XP support for enterprises, but that's a small group and it would be easy to figure out who the leaker is (versus a larger public program).

 

[glugglug]

Once, with OLE. But, OLE could have been implemented without OS-level features, they just happened to have said features in the OS, so it was their hammer for that nail.

And in some ways, even that was a huge step backwards. The best version of MS Word for a VERY long time was Word 4.0a for the Mac. Oddly, version 4.0a was written before the first Mac was actually sold (the splash screen says copyright April 10, 1983). It fit on a single-sided 400KB floppy, and feature-wise, I think it is actually a complete super-set of Word 6.0 which came out in 1993 which is when they did a cross compile and started using OLE in all versions, which came out almost 10 years later bloated it to 20MB, and made it run substantially slower on modern PCs and Macs at the time than 4.0a did on a 16MHz 68000 (let alone a more modern Mac). Unlike 6.0 and later versions, Word 4.0a through 5.1 on the Mac feature a built in equation editor which can be operated completely with keyboard-only. There are key shortcuts for literally everything, so you never need to click on the toolbar for it, ever.

 

[nemesismk2]

Probably by then we will be on Win9 etc ,end of the day its not a big deal since every OS regardless gets phased out sooner or later and they all have a timeline ,plenty of choices out there anyway,I can never understand anybody that gets dedicated or hooked to a particular OS.

I use Windows 7, Windows XP and Ubuntu 12.04 but if given a choice out of the 3 I would just use Ubuntu.

 

[88keys]

For some of us, there is no alternative other than to run XP, especially in the industrial software world. Vista was never supported by most packages and many are just starting to get up to speed with Windows 7. Very few, if any, support Windows 8 so XP it is, with or without updates. At some point, might just have to stick a laptop or two back with XP on it (for legacy products) and move to Windows 7 though (Win 8 is out of the question for a long time if ever).

I've noticed that when dealing with higher end recording equipment for PCs that the manufacturers have a way of not supporting future OSes . I have a friend of mine who runs a Windows 98 box just for an Ensoniq product called PARIS.

I'll be in the same boat pretty soon as I've recently acquired an Aardvark Pro Q10. Officially it only supports Windows XP SP1, however people have gotten it to work on SP3 just fine. Unfortunately that is not the case with Windows Vista and beyond. This device cost $2,000 new back in 2001 which was when XP came out.

In all likelihood, I'm gonna throw together some ITX budget rig with a SSD and put XP on it and block all internet connections to it via my router.

What I'm wondering is - is there any possibility MS will end up extending the extended support period for Windows 7?
If Windows 8 continues to fail to take off, won't 7 be in the same position as XP was with respect to Vista?

Bugs me that if I go for 7 now there's only 6 years support left (but if I choose 8, then I get 3 more years, but have to deal with metro).

I hope. Windows 8 without a touchscreen is atrocious, and touchscreens on a desktop are just clunky and awkward to use.

The problem with that is that everyone would pirate the updates rather than paying a fee, especially since you can't really put effective DRM on Windows updates. Technically this is even a problem now with MS's paid XP support for enterprises, but that's a small group and it would be easy to figure out who the leaker is (versus a larger public program).

This. I remember a site back in the day called windiz updates. Not that I ever used it of course, but yeah they would pirate Windows XP updates for people with failed activations....


But I do agree with the general consensus that nobody really needs XP for general purposes. If your PC can't run anything better, you could probably spend as little as $100 on a Windows Vista/7 capable PC.

As for myself. I plan on running 7 at least until extended support ends or until M$ fixes Windows 8, or makes it better with 9.

Since windows 98, I feel like Microsoft OSes are like Star Trek movies, every other one is garbage. Hopefully the trend continues.

Windows 98/se
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Windows 8

(Win2K wasn't really intended for consumers)

 

[88keys]

If you want to run XP past the expiration date, you could migrate to Windows XP x64 which will be supported until January 2016.

But chances are if you have a 64 bit CPU, you're system should at least be capable of running Windows 7, though I'm not too sure about the socket 754 chips (Early Athlon 64)

I remember trying x64 XP years ago, and I recall having some problems with drivers. I don't remember when it was nor do I recall what service pack I was on (if any), so maybe the got their problems straightened out by now.

Also worth mentioning, you'll have support for +3GB of RAM.

 

[Matt1970]

If you want to run XP past the expiration date, you could migrate to Windows XP x64 which will be supported until January 2016.

But chances are if you have a 64 bit CPU, you're system should at least be capable of running Windows 7, though I'm not too sure about the socket 754 chips (Early Athlon 64)

I remember trying x64 XP years ago, and I recall having some problems with drivers. I don't remember when it was nor do I recall what service pack I was on (if any), so maybe the got their problems straightened out by now.

Also worth mentioning, you'll have support for +3GB of RAM.

Yes, there are a lot of compatibility issues with XP 64. I don't think you can get .NET Framework 4 so anything requiring that is out the window, excuse the pun.

 

[88keys]

Honestly for those types who are running old as dirt PCs and/or have very very basic needs, it would be nice if M$ made a barebones version of their OS. I know they have starter packs, but that still has alot of bloat. I'm just talking about basic driver support, basic GUI, basic everything (Think Windows 2K or prior). This way they can be current and receive updates as needed while still running their old hardware.

It obviously won't solve driver compatibility issues with older devices for legacy OSes, but I think it would still be nice.

Although it probably wouldn't be very profitable for M$ to do something like that.

 

[Raduque]

I started using Vista during the betas, and completely switched to it when it hit retail. I haven't looked back. I'm running 7 on my desktop and 8.1 on my laptop.

I say kill XP, kill it till it's dead, burn the body and scatter the ashes so it can't come back.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Windows 9 will come in at least three separate SKUs.

One for mobile devices like tablets and phones compatible on ARM. Metro only.

One for consumers. Metro + desktop hybrid.

One for enterprise. Desktop focused, will likely be compatible with Metro apps but as proper windowed apps.

 

[88keys]

I'll be patient and wait for Windows 9x

 

[escrow4]

Turn Windows into a subscription model already. I'm getting tired of paying $200 or so every time for at least 2 OEM copies. Make a flat fee of $100 a year for a few licences (say 3-5) and chuck in Office 365 for good measure. And no, $100 a year is not a huge amount, that is what $2 a week? Then you'll always have an up to date OS with all the latest stuff and you won't have to worry about a zombie OS that just won't die.

 

[pmv]

I'll be patient and wait for Windows 9x

At the present rate, when will MS manage to cycle round product names to get back to windows 95 again? (That is, to get through another 87 versions of windows).

 

[Cerb]

At the present rate, when will MS manage to cycle round product names to get back to windows 95 again? (That is, to get through another 87 versions of windows).

I'll put $5 on 2025!

 

[88keys]

Turn Windows into a subscription model already. I'm getting tired of paying $200 or so every time for at least 2 OEM copies. Make a flat fee of $100 a year for a few licences (say 3-5) and chuck in Office 365 for good measure. And no, $100 a year is not a huge amount, that is what $2 a week? Then you'll always have an up to date OS with all the latest stuff and you won't have to worry about a zombie OS that just won't die.

But I can just buy Windows 8 Home Premium for $100, and I'll have mainstream support til 2018.

At the present rate, when will MS manage to cycle round product names to get back to windows 95 again? (That is, to get through another 87 versions of windows).

They'll have to adopt Mozilla's product cycle model lol.

Although M$ doesn't seem to be too consistent when it comes to product naming. First it was digits, then it was years, then it was letters and names, and now we're back to sequential digits again.

The first 3 major releases were Windows 1, 2, and 3. And then came Windows 95, 98, and 2000 (if you count that). Following that came Windows ME, XP, Vista. And now we're back to Windows 7, 8 and 9.

Perhaps the Windows OS after 9 will be Windows 2017 or something.