Windows XP - the OS that refuses to pass quietly into the night

[HEXUS]

Microsoft's Windows XP may already be over six years old, yet, thanks to low-cost systems such as ASUS' Eee PC, Microsoft plans to continue offering its ageing OS through to 2010, and maybe later.

Read more.

[SiM]

That's great news!!!

There will probably be an SP4 too then

[tiggerai]

oh thank goodness for that!

I love XP as it just works and I'm loathed to upgrade to Vista when I still have licences I can use.

[directhex]

kill it with flame

[Biscuit]

With the widespread of these low cost low power mediocre performance machines, it really suprises me that there hasnt been a proper attempt from Microsoft to introduce an OP sys that sits inbetween the windows mobile and full blown operating systems with the focus on power saving.

[dangel]

They don't need to bother now though - all they do is extend sales of XP for low-end pcs until such time as seven is ready and they can offer a credible alternative for low resource systems (or b: low resource systems gain a lot more power [e.g. atom] without er.. drawing more.. power)

[Funkstar]

I think this goes to show what a good job MS did with XP. OK it took them a couple fo service packs, but really, it is an extremely capable OS.

[[GSV]Trig]

Still waiting for sp3, we got an eta for that yet?

[dangel]

I think this goes to show what a good job MS did with XP. OK it took them a couple fo service packs, but really, it is an extremely capable OS.

More than that - XP was really 2000 version 2 - so it took them a major OS version, then a minor one and then the service packs for it. People like to compare Vista and XP (and in some senses thats quite right) but in reality 2000 and Vista are more comparable as they're both major OS versions (i.e. a radical change in architecture) - NT 5 and NT 6 respectively (XP is NT 5.1).

Think about it this way: Vista is rock solid. No, really - it's IMHO the most solid MAJOR OS to come from MS - period. Those who remember 2k's introduction (or even XP) will remember quite a bit of pain being involved. Time fades those memories and people now think XP (and 2k) were always as good (i.e. refined/fixed/patched/finished) as they are now. They simply weren't.

I don't doubt when Seven arrives we'll be forced to read how terrible it is and how we're all going to stick to Vista etc etc. Just like people said they'd stick to 2k. Just like people say they'll stick to XP now. History, as they say, repeats itself. Yes, MS did a great job at hacking XP into a reasonable shape but it was/is fundementally flawed in a number of areas - and that's why they had to throw it away and start again in many areas with Vista. As a developer you've got to have one eye on the future and I don't doubt that some of the decisions made for Vista were good, solid ones that'll lay a good foundation for Seven.

MS, to my mind, are doing well on two fronts now - security and stability. I'd never of thought I'd see that a few years back when running/developing for NT4 and Win98.

[Funkstar]

Good post Dangel.

Win2K had 6 SPs in total, we'll be lucky (or indeed unlucky) to see 4 for XP and 2 perhaps 3 for Vista.

[digit]

With the widespread of these low cost low power mediocre performance machines, it really suprises me that there hasnt been a proper attempt from Microsoft to introduce an OP sys that sits inbetween the windows mobile and full blown operating systems with the focus on power saving.

Isnt Windows XP embedded meant to do that though? Requires an extremly minimal hardware configuration to run? Interestingly I've just found out there is Vista Embedded as well:

Windows Vista for Embedded Systems: Vista Business and Vista Ultimate

Unless that isnt what you meant?

[MadduckUK]

well 2010 should be long enough to skip vista entirely methinks

[kalniel]

well 2010 should be long enough to skip vista entirely methinks

If you only ever use tiny machines

[Salazaar]

I don't doubt when Seven arrives we'll be forced to read how terrible it is and how we're all going to stick to Vista etc etc. Just like people said they'd stick to 2k. Just like people say they'll stick to XP now. History, as they say, repeats itself. Yes, MS did a great job at hacking XP into a reasonable shape but it was/is fundementally flawed in a number of areas - and that's why they had to throw it away and start again in many areas with Vista. As a developer you've got to have one eye on the future and I don't doubt that some of the decisions made for Vista were good, solid ones that'll lay a good foundation for Seven.

So if you think about it, sticking with XP until Seven comes out would seem to be the way forward.

[dangel]

So if you think about it, sticking with XP until Seven comes out would seem to be the way forward.

Not quite the point I was making methinks
And if Seven really is NT 7.0 (rather than 6.1) then it's hardly analogous to XP (versus 2K) now is it?

It may not be fashionable to like Vista - but I do. I'm a fairly pragmatic chap - to me it's better to evaluate a product on it's relative merits - and in many ways (particularly with time) I honestly think Vista kicks XP into touch. That trend isn't going to go away, if anything the gap is going to widen to the point where even the most vocal XP-ites will switch. We've seen it all before..

[Rabs]

Great news, that helps me the skip the bloated, worst performing and worst supported (driver wise) OS, that M$ ever made.

Considering its Windows NT6 I'd have expected a lot more optimisation, 'user friendliness' and better driver support since beta/RC candidates were released ages ago to manufacturers (not strictly MS's fault but they could have given them a kicking...)

EDIT: And yes I have tested Vista properly - I bought a laptop in December with Vista Home Premium, tested it for about a month then formatted it and put Windows XP on it.

I play BF2142 and Eve Online, Eve was about 20% slower using latest chipset/graphics/sound drivers (with UAC and other crap disabled) and the whole Windows Vista 'clunkiness' just annoyed me.