Happy Birthday! Windows XP is 10 Years Old Today

Status
Not open for further replies.

pug_s

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2003
363
9
18,815
21
[citation][nom]mindless728[/nom]and it should have lost support the moment that Windows 7 came out[/citation]

You would think, but Windows XP is a fairly stable and usable OS compared to Microsoft's predecessors.
 

mavroxur

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2009
1,490
0
19,460
58
[citation][nom]mindless728[/nom]and it should have lost support the moment that Windows 7 came out[/citation]


Unfortunately, several software companies have yet to update their products to support Windows Vista/7. And due to that lack of support, corporate America has held on to Windows XP. We have *several* very expensive apps at work used in various departments that just flat out will NOT work with Vista/7, which forces us to maintain XP in various areas. It's not that we want to support XP, but we're forced to because there's no upgrade option with those particular vendors yet.
 

igot1forya

Distinguished
Jun 27, 2008
590
0
18,980
0
Some day we will upgrade from XP to 7 here at work.
I've had a budget meeting where I pitched Windows 7 to our CFO... then the question comes up on where Microsoft extended support to 4/8/2014... now I'm stuck with XP until the 2013 budget year.

Why Microsoft!?!? Why?!?!? If you keep extending support, venders wont have any reason to develop support for Windows 7! ARG!!!
 

southernshark

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2009
1,014
4
19,295
1
[citation][nom]Igot1forya[/nom]Some day we will upgrade from XP to 7 here at work. I've had a budget meeting where I pitched Windows 7 to our CFO... then the question comes up on where Microsoft extended support to 4/8/2014... now I'm stuck with XP until the 2013 budget year.Why Microsoft!?!? Why?!?!? If you keep extending support, venders wont have any reason to develop support for Windows 7! ARG!!![/citation]

I wouldn't upgrade to Windows 7 either.... Windows 8 is coming out next year. You would be better off holding off until then.
 
Windows ME sucked. That is why Windows XP didn't sell well right out of the gate. People were skeptical that the new OS would be any good. (Plus no one made drivers for it.)

Vista also sucks. Just like Windows ME techs didn't like it due to excessive issues so most companies did NOT implement Windows Vista but Windows 7 is similar but more relyable, plus Windows Vista drivers are (for the most part) compatible with Windows 7, so no waiting for drivers to be made for your hardware to work.

While trying to upgrade to Windows 7 I got to a point where I couldn't even get Windows Vista to boot. It was a dual boot OS and XP worked fine. In the end I just wiped the Windows Vista drive and did a fresh install of Windows 7. I grabbed the windows vista disk and slapped it on my knee hard enough to make it shatter then threw it in the trash because that is what is was.
 

lassik

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2010
63
0
18,630
0
XP is an amazing OS and has aged very well over the years.
I think Win 7 could have been the same if it wasn't for Win 8 coming out next year, but that's M$ for you.

Happy birthday XP!
 

jacobdrj

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2005
1,475
0
19,310
5
I never 'liked' XP. Always more clunky than either 98 or 2000. Just as stable as 2000, but more sluggish on hardware available until around 2004. I didn't upgrade until my hardware choices basically de-supported 2000/98. I never liked the activation scheme they introduced (Windows Vista's and 7's activation scheme of any disk, 1 key, makes much more sense than loosing the media, but still having a now worthless COA). Driver installation was a pain. So were SPs. Loved the 'partially supported' XP SP3 thing, with incompatibility for AMD chips, even from Microsoft Updates, that auto-downloaded it... The only thing worse than XP was that Vista was such a resource HOG that it make XP seem downright spiffy, despite Vista being much easier to install, with better auto driver support, even though Vista also lacked a lot of legacy support...

I am so happy with 7. I can't wait for XP to die. I love that even old old systems and underpowered netbooks work better with W7 than they EVER did with XP... Even with a gig of RAM and a 60GB HDD...

I celebrate XP independence day... Do you?
 

mchuf

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2010
204
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]mindless728[/nom]and it should have lost support the moment that Windows 7 came out[/citation]

Right, and piss off countless vendors and customers. Good thinking there!
 

mchuf

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2010
204
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]lassik[/nom]XP is an amazing OS and has aged very well over the years.I think Win 7 could have been the same if it wasn't for Win 8 coming out next year, but that's M$ for you.Happy birthday XP![/citation]
Win 8 will bomb. It gives very few reasons to switch from Win 7. Most couldn't care less about ARM or touch screen support and most people have only just switched from XP. This is why ME and Vista both failed, very little reason to switch from a stable and viable os just because a new and shiny os is released.
 

NuclearShadow

Distinguished
Sep 20, 2007
1,535
0
19,810
5
XP still makes tons of sense for people who just use a computer or laptop for minor tasks. For these people upgrading to 7 will only use more system resources and slow their PC's down. This is the crowd that still uses XP when it comes to non business purposes. XP is a solid OS that I believe will be remembered favorably by most. I think it will take Windows 8 to finally make it no longer a impressive % still using it.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
[citation][nom]pug_s[/nom]You would think, but Windows XP is a fairly stable and usable OS compared to Microsoft's predecessors.[/citation]

Actually, most people find it less stable, slower, and more resource intensive than Windows 2000. NT 4.0 was also very stable.
 

Marco925

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2008
967
0
18,990
1
[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]Vista was like AMD's bulldozer.[/citation]
Except that AMD's Bulldozer is selling really well and still has performance levels of around a 2500k in many benchmarks?
 

reggieray

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2010
454
0
18,780
0
XP is still needed for old legacy games. They can be had for next to nothing at places like Amazon.com and many are still really good.
 

jacobdrj

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2005
1,475
0
19,310
5
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]XP still makes tons of sense for people who just use a computer or laptop for minor tasks. For these people upgrading to 7 will only use more system resources and slow their PC's down. This is the crowd that still uses XP when it comes to non business purposes. XP is a solid OS that I believe will be remembered favorably by most. I think it will take Windows 8 to finally make it no longer a impressive % still using it.[/citation]
Not true. I often tell people to upgrade even old systems from XP to W7 for a performance gain. Everything from old P4's to Atom netbooks...
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]Actually, most people find it less stable, slower, and more resource intensive than Windows 2000. NT 4.0 was also very stable.[/citation]
So true... I hated having to switch to XP from 2K... 2K ran stable. Not to say that 2K didn't have it's own issues: It wasn't a very secure OS...
[citation][nom]reggieray[/nom]XP is still needed for old legacy games. They can be had for next to nothing at places like Amazon.com and many are still really good.[/citation]
Sad, but true... Hell, you need a DOS emulator to play the truly great games... Things like C&C, Warcraft, and Tie Fighter (never did work right in Windows).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY