News - Microsoft reminds us of the risks of not moving on from Win XP

[crossy]

... valid point about software compatibility, and not fixing what aint broken. And new == better is a fallacy called an appeal to novelty. In many respects, computer software is becoming incrementally worse as it continues to exponentially bloat and accumulate more buggy and exploitable code, and applies untested retrograde usage paradigms for nothing more than to peddle mobile brand recognition and platform appeal. You're perfectly free to slurp whatever koolaid Microsoft's marketing team has served you with, but do not denigrate those who don't.

Hmm, that's pretty much the line that Steve Gibson trots out on the Security Now! podcast - XP has many vulnerabilities, but they're known ones, as opposed to the unknown ones that lurk in 7 and 8. This always struck me as weird for someone who otherwise extols the virtue of being "patch current" to say that they'd choose an OS for which they know isn't going to be patched. Then again, the last person I spoke to about the SN! podcast was of the opinion that Mr Gibson may be a good developer, but as a security "expert" he's a prat.

If you've got to port a legacy system anyway, why not consider porting it to Linux and have done with it? At least that way you're not beholden to someone else's support schedule, because at the end of the day you've got source code availability. I run both (Ubuntu 12.04LTS on my main box, Win7/64 on the gaming PC) and I've got to say that, based on my personal experience, Linux is a LOT less troublesome.

Oh, and on my Linux box I can choose which UI to run, unlike Windows, where you're at the mercy of whatever the "experts" in Redmond decide that you need. (MUI) And if you decide that you like the Windows XP style of UI, then there's a couple of ways to get that on your Linux box too. Although with me the move from XP was easier because I actually quite like the Windows7 UI.

Sits back and waits for the flaming from the Windows acolytes to start...

[AGTDenton]

Just why?

Too many reasons to list and to be honest Saracen has done a great job, but one thing I do want to mention is that certain variants of Windows XP are actually supported until 2019 so I see no reason as to why people should not strive to get a return on their investment. My line of work will still be dealing with Windows XP for many years to come, these are PC's that don't allow casual use and are very restricted to certain applications and functions they also do not use the Windows XP shell therefore are less prone to security issues.

So thats just a couple of reasons why I personally must keep on top of Windows XP and continue to keep my knowledge. Another reason is that I have no issue in saying I like Windows XP

A useful website to keep hold of
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/search/

[Saracen]

....

If you've got to port a legacy system anyway, why not consider porting it to Linux and have done with it? At least that way you're not beholden to someone else's support schedule, because at the end of the day you've got source code availability. I run both (Ubuntu 12.04LTS on my main box, Win7/64 on the gaming PC) and I've got to say that, based on my personal experience, Linux is a LOT less troublesome.

....

True enough. In my case, the objection is to upgrading at all, unless I have to, rather than objecting to Win 7, which I already use. Some systems would be relatively cheap and easy to upgrade, but for others, I face the same issue of lack of drivers thereby rendering the hardware they drive defunct. It's still not an attractive option.

But you cover that with "if you've got to port ..... anyway". Indeed, "if".

In my case, I don't have to. But if I did have to, Ubuntu would certainly be an option I'd look at, and look at favourably compared to Win x, for the reasons you give, though I may still end up on Win 7. But unless I have to, I'll just let working systems continue to work. I see no point in changing unless I need to, any more than I upgrade my food mixer every time Kenwood bring out a new Chef. And the current one was bought in the 1970's, and (surprisingly) still works .... if a bit noisily. Sooner or later, it'll die, and when it does, it'll probably be replaced by a KitchenAid. Unless then, it still does a nice job of my cake mixes.

[crossy]

True enough. In my case, the objection is to upgrading at all, unless I have to, rather than objecting to Win 7, which I already use. Some systems would be relatively cheap and easy to upgrade, but for others, I face the same issue of lack of drivers thereby rendering the hardware they drive defunct. It's still not an attractive option.

Hmm, that's a good point - it's all very well to say "oh but you've got to have the latest" but if that means having to chuck out hardware because there's no drivers then is that really a good option? I've got a tape drive in my PC that's using drivers designed for XP, and it works relatively well (i.e. the odd hiccup) on '7, but I'm not confident that it'll work on '8 never mind '9.

But you cover that with "if you've got to port ..... anyway". Indeed, "if". In my case, I don't have to. But if I did have to, Ubuntu would certainly be an option I'd look at, and look at favourably compared to Win x, for the reasons you give, though I may still end up on Win 7. But unless I have to, I'll just let working systems continue to work.

Actually for server use Debian's probably better - Ubuntu has too many issues with Canonical tweaking things for my liking. But there's the rub - if your XP systems are working well, and they're not connected to the internet then where's the harm in keeping them. In my book, as long as they're not vulnerable then there's no harm done - especially if you've got spares/backup machines.

As aidanjt says, there's this assumption in the mind of businesses that we all operate on the premise that "this is new and therefore better" so we're all going to run out like good little lemmings and spend (/waste?) our hard earned.

Similar to your XP systems, I'll hold onto my Windows 7 system until it stops being able to do something I want/need to. Usually these days that means that there's some hardware driver that only exists for an OS version later than the one I'm using. I only moved from XP because I did a motherboard and CPU change and my new motherboard only had a full driver kit for '7 (plus I'd bought a copy when it was cheap). I suspect I'll be forced to move to 8 at the next mobo change.

Although at the moment I'm trying to find a decent way to install a Windows 95 VM - there's a driver issue that keeps BSOD'ing on boot.

[PixelBurst]

Microsoft have a point.
And I am NOT putting Win8 on those machines, now or ever, not least because they would either struggle to run it, or simply not run it.

I'm not allowed to post URL's, but Google "windows 8 windows xp hardware" - There's no denying that 8 is more optimised than 7 and by the looks of things XP. Just saying.

[aidanjt]

I'm not allowed to post URL's, but Google "windows 8 windows xp hardware" - There's no denying that 8 is more optimised than 7 and by the looks of things XP. Just saying.

Windows 8 is better on current hardware than XP, but 8 isn't faster than XP on old hardware. XP has *substantially* lower resource overheads.

[Saracen]

I'm not allowed to post URL's, but Google "windows 8 windows xp hardware" - There's no denying that 8 is more optimised than 7 and by the looks of things XP. Just saying.

What aidan said.

In relation to the machines I was referring to in the quote you mentioned, they are all old systems. I gave some more detail in a later post, but a couple have 256MB of memory, one has 512MB, and an Athlon XP1400, another is a 2GHz processor, but only 768MB of memory, and RAMBUS at that.

All these are below what MS list as minimum system requirements. My suspicion is that either would run like a dog, or simply not run at all.

[PixelBurst]

Windows 8 is better on current hardware than XP, but 8 isn't faster than XP on old hardware. XP has *substantially* lower resource overheads.

That's not what this says: http://www.troyhunt.com/2013/02/oper...windows-8.html Granted it's only one system, but I've tested on a Athlon 64 system with similar results myself.

What aidan said.

In relation to the machines I was referring to in the quote you mentioned, they are all old systems. I gave some more detail in a later post, but a couple have 256MB of memory, one has 512MB, and an Athlon XP1400, another is a 2GHz processor, but only 768MB of memory, and RAMBUS at that.

All these are below what MS list as minimum system requirements. My suspicion is that either would run like a dog, or simply not run at all.

Definitely wouldn't do it with less than recommended though.

[magnusfl]

What sucks is some people have perfectly good laptop like my HP ZD7000 with a GeForce 5600 and a 17 wide screen but there are no widows at all for it for vista win 7 or win 8 so I stuck at xp as I have no choice as I can not upgrade

[andyinscotland]

If windows 8 was any good then MS may have a point, but win8 is so horrible to use that for the average user xp is still a better option. Yes win7 is much better than xp and would be a good upgrade but that is not what MS are pushing people to do, MS want people to suffer the pain of win8, and unless you have a tablet then it is just not a suitable os for a pc or for the average user who has been using xp. Every client i see who has reciently bought a pc with win8 on it asks for a win7 downgrade. Perhaps MS will get it right with win9, i can only hope.

[Saracen]

If windows 8 was any good then MS may have a point, but win8 is so horrible to use that for the average user xp is still a better option. Yes win7 is much better than xp and would be a good upgrade but that is not what MS are pushing people to do, MS want people to suffer the pain of win8, and unless you have a tablet then it is just not a suitable os for a pc or for the average user who has been using xp. Every client i see who has reciently bought a pc with win8 on it asks for a win7 downgrade. Perhaps MS will get it right with win9, i can only hope.

My view on that is that for the out-of-the-box experience with Win8, I'd entirely agree with you. I dislike the 'Metro', or Modern (or whatever they're calling it) interface intensely. But, with various free or cheap utilities, it's possible, and not hard, to make it work more or less like Win7.

What annoyed me so much was that MS tried to force the MUI way of doing things on users, simply for their benefit. For me, rather than Win8 MUI leveraging me into portable devices based on Win8, it left me adamant that I won't buy a Win8 portable device, tablet or phone, period.

But Win8 itself, MUI aside, is actually pretty good, and in several respects, an improvement over Win7. It's just a shame they ruined the launch, and for a lot of people, the reputation by trying to force MUI on us.

[crossy]

What sucks is some people have perfectly good laptop like my HP ZD7000 with a GeForce 5600 and a 17 wide screen but there are no widows at all for it for vista win 7 or win 8 so I stuck at xp as I have no choice as I can not upgrade

If you're not locked into a Windows app (i.e. you're using for office/web/email trio) then I'd recommend that you look at a Linux distro "upgrade". Just checked out the specs of that ZD and they exceed those of the Dell 1300 that one of my relatives is using for Ubuntu. As long as you've got a gig of RAM (or more) then you'll be fine.

Although these days, I'd recommend using Linux Mint for the best desktop experience.

[razeroth]

What annoyed me so much was that MS tried to force the MUI way of doing thinfs on users, simply for their benefit. For me, rather than Win8 MUI leveraging me into portable devices based on Win8, it left me adamant that I won't buy a Win8 portable device, tablet or phone, period.

But Win8 itself, MUI aside, is actually pretty good, and in several respects, an improvement over Win7. It's just a shame they ruined the launch, and for a lot of people, the reputation by trying to force MUI on us.

It is kind of annoying that people will scream others off of Win8 purely on the Metro, which is very easy to turn off completely with classic shell or a simialar programme. Win8 itself is a very nice operating system and has been seen to be slightly, and I mean slightly better for games.

[PK71]

XP is an excellent OS, I will miss it when I finally have to upgrade. RIP XP.

[loyal986]

Never used windows xp for confidental purpose, allways used to brows and chat, once updated turned off auto update, used esset pro NOd32 with firewall. And never had issues. allways watch where I am entering. And I should say that I am in love with xp from the first day and never lost the love. its still strong. I wont leave XP no matter what, just need an installation cd with all the updates for a reformat ocasion. Leave me microsoft as u have brought down nothing good since xp era. I have windows 7 SP1 on my laptop. tried windows 8 on my desktop and eeyak. not for me. XP was, XP is, and XP will allways be my favorite.

[andalus]

Shame lots of very nice features on XP that made life easy like Windows SteadyState (freeze state of you computer, so any changes are reset on reboot). It was really useful for System Administrators who had shared computers. Steadystate where never moved across to Windows 7, and you now have to pay a 3rd party to get the same features.