Read more.Quote:
Wintel partnership still can't entice users away from the 13 year old OS.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Wintel partnership still can't entice users away from the 13 year old OS.
Windows XP - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Shock horror, people are still using computers which do everything they need.
They should upgrade now to something to costs more but offers them nothing!
I think the opposite was the problem, Windows kept patching XP far beyond a decade after its release; and IIRC will continue to do so for some customers. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Brewster0101
if you change a setting in the reg.... xp still gets updates.... but your pc then becomes a cash machine...
"Windows, if it ain't broke ... then you've not switched it on."Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewster0101
I'm probably being naive but I thought that new OS's were supposed to be more capable and more efficient than old ones. Don't tell me that Intel's basically admitting that OS's get more bloated (and therefore need faster processors to be usable)?
I can kind of understand/appreciate that - which'd explain why a lot of these Windows "cast offs" get a new life as Linux boxes. Heck I've got an old Core2Duo laptop that I use a lot more than my fancy hexa-core desktop.
It's because most windows licenses are sold with PCs/laptops and kept with the device for the duration of it's "first user" life.
tbf, Windows 7, 8 and 10 have all reversed the bloat trend, but Win XP over its lifespan steadily became more bloated and resource hungry, to the point where SP3 practically required 1GB of RAM to be usable (256MB was very usable when XP was first released). Vista waa a bit of a pig, even with 2GB, whereas I've run Win 8 in a VM with 1GB of RAM and found it very responsive. So I'd say we're probably back to the point now where a decent Win XP machine will actually run Win 8/10 pretty well too.
The bigger problem in inertia terms is less common peripherals. You have a mission critical doodad that you can't easily or cheaply replace, and the manufacturer never made Vista or later drivers for it, then you're kind of stuck on Win XP whether you like it or not!
I cant comment on windows 8/8.1 or 10 but 7 bloats up like eating prunes all day.
Not as bad as xp, but still eventually eats itself alive with it's own updates.
Though to be fair those mission critical doodads should all be on an incredibly segregated network (and certainly with no internet access) - if so then they're reasonably secured against the holes in the OS, but what's the plan for when the machine that's running them goes pop?Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
In my case, the plan is a cupboard full of bits to repair/replace, and several suitable and currently unused whole machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash
Maybe if Intel actually released products that were worthy of upgrades, rather than the incremental bump each year that they've done since they overtook AMD back in the Core2 days.
I'm still using a 2008 i7 920 and see zero reason to upgrade - what can't I do which a current Haswell chip could do, or save any meaningful amount of time by upgrading? Not Twitch as efficiently? Oh, I must immediately splash out on a new motherboard and CPU!
And this comes from a workstation user who does plenty of Photoshop and Premiere Pro editing. A Haswell is quicker, but by such a pitiful margin it's certainly not worth an upgrade.
"Weaker than expected demand for business desktop PCs."
"PC supply chain maintaining lower inventory levels"
...So Windows 8.x and Microsoft's inability to actually listen to what customers want has nothing to do with this decline? Hmm.
And when they go pop?Quote:
Originally Posted by Saracen
(this could go on for a long time, but I guess my point is made)
to a certain extent bud, but we are not using the same RAM we were back then :)Quote:
Originally Posted by scaryjim
Emulate a 1GHz XP box on a Raspberry Pi 4 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Splash