Windows XP market share climbs again as customers dig their heels in

[Torn Mind]

I saw that post too and it doesn't make for good reading. there are some people on other forums that think they are 100% safe because their windows 7/8 can't be effected by viruses which we all know they can be as much as windows xp. I will not even mention denial of service attacks or bot networks which windows xp systems are well known to be used for.

I doubt 100% safe is even possible.

I have yet to have my Windows 8 malware disaster, but I had one for Windows 7, and I needed to run Combofix to get rid of it. Don't know how it got there, probably a website with malware; the symptoms still remain; I can't download things through Internet explorer anymore and Firefox needed an about:config entry changed. XP and its predecessor Windows 2000 though, was certainly not a matter of if, but how soon, and how much. Dialers, IE pages, and spyware all over the place.

 

[Mem]

That is an incredibly rude response. My aunt, who lost her husband, was denied insurance, was hit by a drunk driver and who is on disability, has an older XP Pro system. it works absolutely fine. She does not need a new computer. She does not need a new OS.

And she could never afford either anyway.

So just **** her then, right? There are plenty of people just like her who are going to be left out in the cold. Those who can afford to upgrade should. But there are a hell of a lot of people who simply cannot buy a new computer or afford to spend $100 on an O.S. that is too big and bloated for an old system.

And my aunt's XP came with her system, so thanks for falsely accusing her of piracy.

Sorry!!!! I did not mean to be rude,my point is there are options,personally I've given away newish systems to charity for free (Church) that I did not need,my mum's PC I upgraded (obviously for free)to Win7 from XP and that is an old PC too(pentium 4).

End of the day there are alternatives,so not like you are 100% stuck on XP,also XP users have had plenty of time to change or upgrade,I believe XP was released in 2001 that's not far off 15 years.

My point is if you stay on XP don't expect support forever,sooner or later you will have to make a decision one way or another,infact that goes for any OS.

And my aunt's XP came with her system, so thanks for falsely accusing her of piracy

I did not accuse her,I was making reference(yes I should of been clearer) to pirated XP operating systems out there ie a comment a member made about some business companies using pirated XP ( previous post in this thread),I also believe XP is the most pirated OS Windows wise,yes there are legit users out there on XP like your aunt, unfortunately still too many pirated users out there as well.

I was going to install Linux on my mum's XP PC and show her how to use it,she only surfs,skype,online shopping and a few crossword games,all things Linux can do but she is quite happy with Win7 and her Android tablet.

 

[Torn Mind]

Less than 1 GB of RAM is not enough for Win7. But Win 7 runs BETTER on older hardware that can handle it than XP with all of its service packs, and there are plenty of anecdotes supporting this. I personally found that 1.2 GB of RAM is the bare minimum to have a ok but slightly laggy experience on a Pentium 4 with crappy VIA integrated graphics. Granted, the hard drive might have also played a role(500 GB notebook HDD vs ancient 20 GB 3.5" IDE drive). XP's benefit is that is has a lot of compatibility and it is Windows, but has its flaws too, security being a major one.

 

[Matt_Stevens]

Pretty much all PC's in Vietnam are from pirated XP and Vista software. I've been there three times in 8 years and it's an eye opener. No doubt it is everywhere.

 

[Mem]

Pretty much all PC's in Vietnam are from pirated XP and Vista software. I've been there three times in 8 years and it's an eye opener. No doubt it is everywhere.

Don't forget China,http://www.neowin.net/news/ballmer-9-out-of-10-copies-of-windows-in-china-is-pirated

Ballmer raised some concerns with Hu, discussing how only 1 in every 10 copies of Windows in China is legit. Microsoft estimates that 90% of China uses some form of pirated software on their computer, with over half of the countries residents still using Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 - a claim which is backed up by StatsCounter.com.

 

[alkemyst]

People are still hanging on to XP due to old machines. I supported these kinds of types many times in the past at a rate of almost $50-100 bucks per month each due to virii that infected their computers.

Most finally decide to update and re-learn.

 

[alkemyst]

This. I don't know why people think it will suddenly be less secure.

Heck, who says windows 7 and 8 are secure, if they were, they would not be having to release patches all the time.

You would think that by this time Microsoft would finally have a fully secure code base but they continue to introduce new exploits all the time. I almost wonder if it's somehow on purpose, perhaps these exploits act as backdoors but the minute a hacker figures it out they patch it and create a new backdoor. Not saying it's that, but it could be. Just seems absurd that a handful of highly trained devs who do it as their day job can't code something to be secure once and for all.

I don't think you understand even overseers for security on our platforms have been hacked. Some of the major ones (like even give you a secure key to insert), have been exploited.

The whole world attacks Windows.

 

[alkemyst]

That is an incredibly rude response. My aunt, who lost her husband, was denied insurance, was hit by a drunk driver and who is on disability, has an older XP Pro system. it works absolutely fine. She does not need a new computer. She does not need a new OS.

And she could never afford either anyway.

So just **** her then, right? There are plenty of people just like her who are going to be left out in the cold. Those who can afford to upgrade should. But there are a hell of a lot of people who simply cannot buy a new computer or afford to spend $100 on an O.S. that is too big and bloated for an old system.

And my aunt's XP came with her system, so thanks for falsely accusing her of piracy.

XP is not going to just stop working.

I just came off two major surgeries and then tore my bicep under Workman's Comp that just decided it's in their best interest to just pay about $2500 to the loss rather than a $20k+ surgery. I can't make the world pay for my mishap.

I will say if your family has a ton of problems, it's better to move out of the USA at times or realign yourself within it.

 

[boomhower]

We are in a bind at work over this. We have several notebooks with XP that are to old to be upgraded and we don't have the money to replace them. They run a state owned software that are requiring Vista or newer once XP goes EOF. Not sure what we are going to do...

 

[VirtualLarry]

But Win 7 runs BETTER on older hardware that can handle it than XP with all of its service packs, and there are plenty of anecdotes supporting this.

This is true!

 

[alkemyst]

We are in a bind at work over this. We have several notebooks with XP that are to old to be upgraded and we don't have the money to replace them. They run a state owned software that are requiring Vista or newer once XP goes EOF. Not sure what we are going to do...

VM's if really needed.

 

[alkemyst]

This is true!

I agree the XP vs 7 thing is a matter of dealing with change.

I loved going XP to 7.

I wish I loved going from 7 to 8 as much.

It's a progress though.

 

[R0H1T]

Less than 1 GB of RAM is not enough for Win7. But Win 7 runs BETTER on older hardware that can handle it than XP with all of its service packs, and there are plenty of anecdotes supporting this. I personally found that 1.2 GB of RAM is the bare minimum to have a ok but slightly laggy experience on a Pentium 4 with crappy VIA integrated graphics. Granted, the hard drive might have also played a role(500 GB notebook HDD vs ancient 20 GB 3.5" IDE drive). XP's benefit is that is has a lot of compatibility and it is Windows, but has its flaws too, security being a major one.

I don't think that's necessarily true, Aero itself requires at least 1GB RAM to be turned ON at all times & that it takes up most of the resources/background activity, which isn't true in case of XP, not to mention all the extra services that are turned ON by default eat up a bunch of RAM as well.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I sincerely hope that the other thread talking about a potentially-free or reduced-cost Win 8.1 "with Bing!" turns out to be true. It would be a real boost to all of those XP users out there to be able to upgrade to MS's latest OS for "peanuts". That is, assuming that the reason some people don't want to move off of XP is costs.

 

[mikeymikec]

I don't think that's necessarily true, Aero itself requires at least 1GB RAM to be turned ON at all times & that it takes up most of the resources/background activity, which isn't true in case of XP, not to mention all the extra services that are turned ON by default eat up a bunch of RAM as well.

Yes, I'd have to see it to believe it as well. The only way I could imagine it could be true is, "a clean new Win7 install performs better on x old hardware than an abused, full-of-crap XP install".

I sincerely hope that the other thread talking about a potentially-free or reduced-cost Win 8.1 "with Bing!" turns out to be true. It would be a real boost to all of those XP users out there to be able to upgrade to MS's latest OS for "peanuts". That is, assuming that the reason some people don't want to move off of XP is costs.

It'll just be Windows with an even larger dose of lock-in and restriction. That's a sure-fire way of annoying people.

 

[nemesismk2]

i deleted something

 

[Insert_Nickname]

It's not me you have to convince but XP users here .

Oh, I know. I just wanted to add my 2c worth of opinion on XP's safety record (or lack thereof)...

Less than 1 GB of RAM is not enough for Win7. But Win 7 runs BETTER on older hardware that can handle it than XP with all of its service packs, and there are plenty of anecdotes supporting this. I personally found that 1.2 GB of RAM is the bare minimum to have a ok but slightly laggy experience on a Pentium 4 with crappy VIA integrated graphics. Granted, the hard drive might have also played a role (500 GB notebook HDD vs ancient 20 GB 3.5" IDE drive). XP's benefit is that is has a lot of compatibility and it is Windows, but has its flaws too, security being a major one.

There's your problem. VIA's P4 chipsets always had **** poor performance and the IGP has really crappy drivers. Not to mention that ancient HDD is murdering performance, no matter how much RAM you put in...

 

[bruceb]

It is costly to upgrade. For me, it means a newer desktop computer with at least an I-3, but if I decided to, it would probably be with an I-7. May as well get top of the line unit. But the big issue, is a lot of software on my computer will not install on Windows 7 or 8 without getting the latest version. And some of those you cannot update without buying the whole program (like Adobe Photoshop) or Adobe Acrobat Pro all over again. And those programs are not cheap. Same with MS Office ... old version will not install and I am not even sure if Office 2007 (legit) will even install on Win 7 or 8

 

[pmv]

That is an incredibly rude response. My aunt, who lost her husband, was denied insurance, was hit by a drunk driver and who is on disability, has an older XP Pro system. it works absolutely fine. She does not need a new computer. She does not need a new OS.

And she could never afford either anyway.

So just **** her then, right? There are plenty of people just like her who are going to be left out in the cold. Those who can afford to upgrade should. But there are a hell of a lot of people who simply cannot buy a new computer or afford to spend $100 on an O.S. that is too big and bloated for an old system.

And my aunt's XP came with her system, so thanks for falsely accusing her of piracy.

A couple of elderly relatives who can't justify forking out for a new PC or even just Windows 7/8 seem to be getting on fine with Linux now.
Obviously it very much depends on what your aunt uses the PC for.

The expense and hassle of upgrading OSs is indeed a complete pain, but I do think its just an unavoidable fact of modern life - the economics of the software and hardware industry pretty much mean it can't be otherwise. No private company is going to provide free support for a product that needs constant fixing to stay usable, forever.

The only counter-trend being that at least open-source stuff is good enough to put a 'floor' under things, in that its at least possible to do the basic stuff without constantly spending on upgrades. I think that's quite a fortunate thing.

 

[boomhower]

VM's if really needed.

These are old core duo systems in the cars. Really going to have to replace them, don't see much other choice in it.

 

[ninaholic37]

Complete crap(with respect to you),they are either too cheap to upgrade either software or hardware ie a newer Windows OS like Win7 or can't be bothered to use Linux(freebie and superior to XP in many ways) providing they don't need Windows based software.

End of the day it's their choice and fault if they want to stay on a dead OS like XP,and yes I have used them all including Linux distros.

I'll take Win8 or even Vista over XP any time.

I could also argue how many of those XP users using pirated version of XP?..I bet too many to mention.

Money aside, isn't buying a new computer all the time (when you don't need one) bad for the environment? You have to manufacture the plastics/materials/etc. which I believe takes a lot more energy than what you would save over time by using the newer machine instead. You're sort of encouraging pollution from factories and the accumulation of garbage on our planet for minimal "luxury" gain, I think.

 

[Mem]

Money aside, isn't buying a new computer all the time (when you don't need one) bad for the environment? You have to manufacture the plastics/materials/etc. which I believe takes a more energy than what you would save over time by using the newer machine. Even if could get a new computer for free, you're sort of encouraging pollution and the accumulation of garbage on our planet for minimal "luxury" gain, I think.

I don't buy a new computer all the time,normally have left over bits which can make up a working PC,my current PC is three plus years old already.

I'm also one of those guys that switches his PC off every night or when I don't use it,I also recycle a lot of waste(paper,plastic from food stuff etc) for the garbage men,using low energy light bulbs in my house and do my bit in conservation for the environment and landscape(volunteer),so with respect if more people were like me we would not be wasting a lot of stuff around the world(we can always do a bit more ).


So quite the opposite of your statement,infact still using my old Nvidia 560Ti video card(my latest video card).

I upgrade when I need to rather then keeping up with "Joneses".

 

[alkemyst]

The amount of memory something is using <> how fast or decent it will run.

Advances in memory management and multi-core access as well as other efficiencies.

 

[glugglug]

One way to get rid of the nag screen will be to run Windows 2000, which is basically XP without the stupid screen space wasting skin.

Or run Windows 98 with NTFSDOS for supporting modern disk sizes sanely. With fewer background services it might in fact be safer than XP.

 

[postmortemIA]

I'm keeping it in my dual boot scheme. Reason? got plenty of older games that use HW sound (EAX etc.) that has been disabled by MS in vista and later.