Microsoft Worried About PCs Still Using Windows XP

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.

Win8 desktop works perfectly fine with mouse and keyboard... practically exactly the same as XP/Vista/7 once you install Classic Shell.

The Start page is fairly usable with a mouse and you can type applications' names instead of searching for icons to spare yourself the trouble of organizing the Start page in a way that makes sense, which is good enough if all you will be using for is find the icon so you can pin it on the taskbar. I'm guessing most people who hate the Start page with a passion haven't used it long enough to discover that you can simply type program/link names to filter the list, just like using Win7 Start menu's application search box instead of hunt-and-pecking their way through the icon ocean. That upgrades the Start menu from total nonsense to tolerable.
 
If it is just "tolerable" then I don't want any part of it still. :lol: Regardless, I cannot stand Metro on PC or phone. I seriously don't know what M$ was thinking when they designed that POS. It is about as boring and ugly of a UI as I have ever seen. I would rather look at Win 3.11 than look at Metro.
 


I use it fairly often as well.
 
I tried win8 when it came out and it was so bad I went back to Vista. I could not even get IE to work properly for video. Since that is what I use for computer quite a bit, it was not for me. I am the customer. If the product is useless to me it is probably useless to a lot of people. I am not loyal to horrid programming.
 
FYI As of April 2014 Microsoft will no longer support win xp users. However it is my intention to continue to use win xp since many programs specifically written for win xp legacy OS works and not very well with win 7 or Win 8. Also Win7 and Win8 OS environment mimicks users having IPAD like environment. As an atmospheric scientist and using statistical programs written for win xp, I will continue to use win xp beyond the end of support date. I plan to continue to use antivirus/antispyware and antimalware indefinetly.

The threats made to the public from anti malware and security threats is totally out of line with microsoft's end of support security updates. I have two hardware firewalls on my Main PC and Secondary Experimental Server/PC system. So far its done a nice job and in fact had been relatively clean even the last few years, I will continue to use win xp even beyond the end of support microsoft security updates.

Many companies in the medical, financial, scientific, government and educational communities are impacted by this end of support. Microsoft is totally insensitive to the 1000's of dollars that these customers have spent including 100's of dollars from me and other consumers over the 3 to 5 year period that developed many programs around win xp legacy os. Its interesting also that the medical and financial institutions have laws made by government which microsoft loves..that says now that win xp is ending support you must upgrade to the newer OS or else face fines. Next thing microsoft will pull is put a gun to our heads or else call us terrorists for defying orders from mircrosoft!

Why should I throw out MY PC and all my hardworking programs that were developed around the WIN XP and on top of that be threatened and terrorized about viruses and malware from microsoft.

Microsoft should continue to support win xp and the least they could do is come up with a polished win xp plus OS upgrade to support for newer hardware for PC applications for the industries,goverment, research and educational applications and the Tablet like OS's WIN7 and WIN8 for seperate for portable uses ie.. iphone, ipad etc.

Microsoft was so stupid not to think that way but they are just plain insensitive and arrogant!

Its not fair to end suport on what we have yet millions of users that still rely on win xp OS. 37% of users is an understatement for win xp I think it's biased low.

Its totally out of line with Microsoft to have threatening behavior and forcing people to give up what still works very well..

We have a major serious dilemma here!~ I am not giving up my hours of completed software development for those who threaten to send viruses to me.

Just remember those who stand to gain the most and those who stand to lose the most!

I am not buying anymore microsoft products!
 


I was wondering that.

Also


Why? Their EULA states 10 years of support from the date the software was first released to the public. Not only have they fulfilled this, they've actually supported it for 14 years...4 additional years absolutely free of charge. How many other companies have continued to support an OS for greater than 14 years, for free?
 


And how long should they support it? Forever?
It's been 14 years.
 
Microsoft's business model was to replace their OS every 18 months, but they instead have a track record of good OS releases (98, XP, 7,...) followed by bad (95, ME, Vista, 8...).

They fail to draw consumers to the new OS with better features using the "carrot" approach, but instead try to scare them using the "stick" approach. That's what this announcement is all about.

Business wants an OS that will work for years, like XP did. M$ did that by mistake with XP, and doesn't appreciate how many people stayed with them because of it.

If they had a real marketing department they would create great features that pull customers to the new release. Like the 64 bit capability does for some.

I personally will be putting more Linux OS in those old XP machines to meet the needs of the average user who just wants to safely surf the web and do email.
 


Sorry, doesn't work. I keep seeing this repeated, yet it always conveniently ignores Windows NT/2000. Also I'd argue that Windows 8 is not a bad OS. Takes about 30 seconds to disable the new Start menu/Metro that a lot of people don't like, and once Metro is disabled I completely fail to see how it's worse than Windows 7.
 


Will vista isn't horrible if it is run on decent hardware. But it isn't all that good
UAC was really screwed especially
 


Win NT/2k were business class reliable and they are what XP was built on. I still use Win2k on a special pc because it works.

Vista was sold on many pc's with only 1GB ram. It really needs 2GB minimum. UAC was needed for better security, but was poorly implemented.

As for Win8, it's a flop. Win 8.1 is a major rewrite (3.6GB OS update!) and I still have to add the Classic Shell to get the Start button it should have included.
 

Actually it was shipped with many systems with 512MB which obviously was unusable

 


There's no real reason to upgrade from 7 to 8. But 8.1 brings the direct option to boot directly into the Desktop instead of Metro.

Even with just 8 on my main system, I never see Metro unless I invoke it. On a dual monitor system, the primary monitor is Metro, and the secondary monitor is the desktop. A single click on the desktop side, and Metro is banished until I invoke it for some reason.
 
I have 3 desktops and a Laptop. Not worth the cost. :lol: I would have to do a technet subscription again like I did to get win 7. I cannot stand to look at metro for more than a few seconds without feeling ill. I seriously despise all forms of Metro.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom