Windows XP allowed to live again

Vimes

Vimes

Vimes

Soldato
Joined
15 Oct 2005
Posts
6,850
Location
Earth, for now
Microsoft has given yet another reprieve to its seasoned Windows XP operating system.
The cut off date for PC makers to obtain licenses for the software was 31 January 2009.
But now Microsoft has put in place a scheme that will allow the hardware firms to get hold of XP licences until 30 May 2009.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7795302.stm

Looks like Windows XP has just come short by one month of being Microsoft's longest offered operating system, having 89 months of desktop licence availability against MS Dos 6's 90 months.

As XP has had quite a few reprieves already who knows if it will be extended any further, especially if Windows 7 gets delayed.
 
I'd imagine the real push will happen when Windows 7 is released, and until that happens they'll just keep extending it. Not a major issue for them really - they still make money :)
 
crunchee said:
Thats because vista's not really an improvement from XP for many to want to switch
Click to expand...

5 posts then vista bashing!!!

record??

Serious note is xp is going for ages with companys not really wanting to pay for new stuff every 3 years (so Ms can milk the support charges...)

But anyway ill keep my pro vistaness to my self...
 
I liked XP. I switched to Vista for a few reasons, but it wasn't because I wanted a new OS.

Having used Vista for 24 hours now I have to say I love it so far.

I'm temporarily using a single core A64 3500+, and even with that and 4GB of memory it's reasonably fast. I can't wait to get a quad in and see it fly.

I was a little peeved off with the Dreamscape wallpapers, they use 80% of my CPU to run the high definition ones. I'm a little unhappy that there wasn't a way to shift this to the graphics card. However that's a wmv, perhaps an mpeg will be faster. Having said that though, I'd probably get bored of it eventually anyway and go back to no wallpaper.

I honestly think though that there's a lot of unfair bad vibes directed at Vista. I was expecting something much worse than I got.
 
(Not commenting on pre-SP1 Vista...)

I have it installed (dual booting) on my MacBook, and quite frankly I think it's a pretty good OS when you configure IMO some bad choices by Microsoft.

UAC - I left it on for a while and it wasn't too bad, then I turned it off, and it was a breath of fresh air!

The sheer amount of unnecessary services - Windows Search/Windows Defender (Use KIS)/Tablet PC Input Service when i'm not even using a flippin' tablet PC!

The "click-happy" nature of the OS - This one can't be changed, but you just seem to have to go clicking everywhere to find the same thing that took 2 or 3 clicks in XP.

Having 4 versions?! - Home & Pro is more than enough!

Apart from some minor tweaking there's nothing at all wrong with Vista. The reason why it was generally slated is because all they appear to have done is slap Aero (which is just eye candy for eye candy's sake) on top of XP, nag the hell out of you with UAC, up the PC requirements and bloat the thing out a bit.

Which, you have to admit, is partially true :p Windows 7 though appears, on the information i've read, to have rectified at least most of the issues. Which is making me really looking forward to the public beta :)
 
The searchable start menu and search bar on all windows (especially useful in the control panel) is worth it alone in my opinion :).

But saying that I also use the run dialog an awful lot for navigating folders and opening things.
 
I personally think it has more to do with the current trend of netbook laptops which are far better suited to xp than the more resource hungry vista. With the sale of these types of laptops being sold xp is perfect for them, as it is a fully fledged OS not like CE, I love linux but your average user is going to be happy buying a laptop with it installed. So XP is the perfect choice really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom