Windows XP Death Clock Doesn't Work on XP

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
F'n Stupid is what it is. But at the same time typical M$. M$ is doing everything they can to spread the hate on XP. Ive turned off updates on my machine a long time ago. All they do is screw up my older hardware and software. Oh well, maybe a blessing in disguise.
 
How much money in man hours would have been spent making this desktop gadget? This is seriously depressing.... They could have used that money to actually make something that is not copying from someone else... or anything worth while......

I hate it that when you use the open file dialogue, programming in .net, that you can't specify what kind of view you want (details, icons etc), and how you want to order it... and even if you can't do that, the fact that the OS does not remember what the user chooses is worse...

They could have used that money fixing that, rather than something that is so utterly pointless it's not even funny, it's depressing...
 
This is such a colossal waste of resources that it suits an April Fools joke. Microsoft just took too long to release the thing.

[citation][nom]jrabbit2[/nom]win7 start menu is so much better, why would you want the xp menu is beyond me. maybe you should learn how to use the win7 start menu. learn to adapt to the advancements in technology.[/citation]
When I think about it, the only thing about the Win 7 start menu that is really any better is the search, which is taken from Vista. Everything else is eye candy.
 
[citation][nom]jrabbit2[/nom]win7 start menu is so much better, why would you want the xp menu is beyond me. maybe you should learn how to use the win7 start menu. learn to adapt to the advancements in technology.[/citation]
First, its not a "start" menu anymore... just a "windows button" menu, second: Who seriously uses the thing? One thing I learned from the disappearance of the classic menu is that even if it was better than the new one, using none at all was much faster!

and Of course, XP must go now...
 
XP, much like 98, is a stable rock solid OS. I will probably be using it well into 2014... although by that time, I should be good enough to switch over entirely to Linux.
 
[citation][nom]ginnai[/nom]XP, much like 98, is a stable rock solid OS. I will probably be using it well into 2014... although by that time, I should be good enough to switch over entirely to Linux.[/citation]

and win7 isn't? then go back to use your 98, better yet, go back to use DOS, its bl00dy stable right? dumb%%$#%$s
 
Yes, let's get XP's classic start menu AND the file search (where I can choose the options) into W7. XP, but not W7 supports some of my favorite hardware and software - and I am not replacing perfectly good stuff to use W7.
 
These guys screwed up Windows Explorer starting with Vista. Despite numerous complaints on their own support boards Microsoft refuses to acknowledge the problem let alone create a fix. I like WinXP's interface AND SPEED and but for the fact that it does not support newer hardware, I'd stick with it.

Hey Microsoft, stop screwing with the GUI and work on making the OS as stable and fast as possible! If I wanted a MAC, I'd buy a MAC.
 
It's funny to read all the cattle that do what Microsoft wants, without really thinking.

I'm sure there are people that like Windows 7, but the reality remains, it doesn't do anything that Windows XP doesn't. Except it does it slower, and it does it with greater memory usage.

At the end of the day, people don't really care too much about the OS, but about the applications it runs. There are big advantages in support and development with one OS, instead of constantly coming out with new ones. Every change has the possibility of causing problems, so that's why a lot of places want to stay on XP. It does everything they need, runs faster, and runs without potential compatibility issues. It's why even service packs have to wait a while; SP2 broke a lot of stuff.

Also, the cattle that keep saying XP is very old forget that SP2 was a huge change from SP1; much bigger than going from Windows 2000 to Windows XP was.

So, there are reasons for people to like both. My biggest issue with all of it is, the short life spans of the OS. Windows 7 will be replaced fairly soon, with Windows 8, and so on. It's not so hard for the unemployed folks here who love Microsoft, but when you're supporting so many different OS's, it becomes more difficult.

But, Microsoft does this to make money, not to make people's lives easier. The world really needs a stable OS platform, not changes every two years that have the potential to break something. A longer life span would still allow innovation (although, Microsoft has a genetic defect that prevents this from happening, but fortunately they CAN copy other's innovations), while still not creating a support nightmare as they keep adding more. We'll soon have four OS's to support, with all their little differences. What a pain.
 
There is a good reasons why so many use XP even after all these years.
Can anyone here argue a valid point on why a casual or non-gamer who doesn't use any hardware intense programs needs to upgrade from a very stable OS that works for them?

[citation][nom]amdfangirl[/nom]Please grammar already.[/citation]

Marry me?
 
[citation][nom]jrabbit2[/nom]people who whine about the menu are people who havent learned to either 1)type 2)shutup[/citation]
I work with Windows XP and Windows 7 side by side, with the same keyboard and mouse, synergy software in between them. I type 70 WPM at native language and about 65 WPM at English. And I still like the classic start menu. It all depends on the situation, because when I got both hands at the keyboard it's easier to " 'win', type, enter " and have all in, as opposed to when using " 'win', R, type " and be limited to what can run from the run box; But most of the time I have one hand at the keyboard and the other at the mouse. And I really would rather have the cascade menu rather than everything opening in the same box. I like the choice to have it how I prefer. MS can't support both ways and made a decision to drop one and force users to get accustomed to the other. It's their choice, their product. It's my money when I put new hardware together and chose the OS to put in. There are many reasons supporting and against each OS, start menu being one of the smaller ones. I will keep criticizing anything that I know it can be made better so it can satisfy me as a customer. This is not a case of voting with my money in the classic sense (no Mac, no Linux), as my old computers are not thrown away and the OS re-used to the new one. My old computers go down the "family line" till they are too outdated to even bother. So, new computers go with new OS, the OS of choice based on benefits and what I consider defects.
 
still using XP in classic mode on my work computer...also still using a 32" CRT monitor with QXGA resolution...beats 1080p without even trying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom