Discussion on:

The end is near for Windows XP, what are you going to do?

If IE8 is an example of what to expect from Win7, I plan to stay with XP as long as possible.

Maybe everybody should stop buying Microsoft products & just let them go broke.Microsoft thinks that people are going to buying a new O/S in bad times like we have how. How do they expect schools system to buy the new O/S when school levies can't even pass. Maybe get a new CEO that will listen to the people who buy their products. I can remember when techrepublic est. a few years ago that about 50 million people were still using Windows98. Microsoft in it just for the money. When are the going to get it, people can not buy a new computer or O/S everytime Microsoft is going to end an old one.

Hi everybody.
We delay the O.S. migration because we don?t have any better option. Vista sucks, and for me, it?s more dead than Win 3.1. Like I said, Windows 7 it?s not bad, but of course, it isn?t XP. After many years XP it?s stable and moreless secure. Many users have at least a general idea of the O.S. Change it now will cause many problems with them, beyond the issues of compatibility with SW or HW

The only reason I switched from W98 was because there weren't any drivers for my new hardware.

legacy? i still have two computers running win95. and my model railroad at home runs on windows 3.1. we will exchange xp for win7 when we can afford it, next year sometime, according to the boss. but she's not too clear about it herself.

As long as the license is portable; and AV/AS, and application vendors help mitigate the security holes - we could run XP forever!

It would actually be a relief to dump WGA! FINALLY!

Most people are missing the whole point! It's a money making operation. Why is it that almost all people put so much premium on follwing what does not need to be done? Reasons for change in this particular subject is nothing more than making MUCH money. Or is it to embrace better tracking tools? Now is not the time to put economic strain on our countries business'. I believe we should have proper motives and a workable strategies mind set. Not put burden on so many great companies and have them just pass the cost on to the consumer. It is not neccessary unless it is really going to benefit everyone and I have many doubts as should any thinking person.

Just read an article on techdirt.com you can down grade to XP with purchase of Win 7

We've got 1 machine running Win 2000 pro, and only because we're getting a sound system custom shoehorned in was I able to get *nix even into the picture...

It doesn't help that the main application we use for our company's work is a windows only (and rated "garbage" on WINE, too...)

the odds of us switching beyond when we have to replace the hardware? minimal. (That said, the main fileserver is looking like it's going to need a replacement, and the old win 2k workstation is already slated to be replaced, just because of the inability to keep up for the workload given to it's owner)

Your survey ignores users of Vista Business SP2 and those already using Windows 7 RC

Your options in the question on alternative OS's is poorly phrased you need an option for "Seriously but they do not fit our business requirements" and "Casually, our IT specialists use them but mainstream business units are not suitable for deployment"

When they give us what we want, I may consider it. Considering the amount of issues with Vista & M7, I'll be staying with XP unil the next millenium.

They've forgotten what an OS is, a user end system for doing things.

It's not an advert forcing you to upgrade your hardware and forcing you to work they way they want us to.

Hell why not just use an Xbox for word, oh that's right we cannot even get most MS software to function on a PC running their OS in the first place.

Looking for something alot better. Their new OS replacements are pathetically inadequate!

Wait. As long as possible.

That MS is rolling out bright, new, shiney Operating Systems makes no more of an impression upon us than some car manufacturer rolling out some bright, new, shiney automobile.

The fact is that as long as the current vehicles we have serve their purpose well and are adequate to our needs, we'll keep them.

The same goes with computer operating systems.

There is nothing, so far, in Vista or Windows 7 that is advantageous to us in a business sense that justifies a switch to either.

Forget the added eye candy appeal, we're a business and could not care less about that.

As many others have stated one way or another, we're application driven. And the simple fact is that the applications we most rely upon in order to conduct our business are applications designed for running on the Windows OS, up to XP.

Some might or might not run on Vista or Windows 7. Some definitely WILL NOT run on Vista or Windows 7, unless they will perform all functions adequately under a virtual machine/OS ... and why would we want to have to take that extra trouble?

Numerous of the apps we need to run have no suitable equivalents under other OS's, in our eyes. So Linux or Apple machines are not a consideration at this time.

Some may argue this point. But the fact is that we will not willingly make a switch which requires the users, our employees, to HAVE to take one more step or action to do what they need to do on a daily basis than they now do. Or to have to re-learn how to do exactly the same thing as they now do.

Almost the same, mostly the same, nearly identical, etc etc are not close enough. If we have a choice in the matter.

With some of the specialized commercial apps we use daily, the creators have not yet made Vista/Win 7 versions. And it will probably be at least a couple years before they do. They're justifiably unwilling to turn out buggy upgrades and are taking their time.

As concerns general office applications, we haven't a single customer, business partner, vendor, associate, or anyone else we deal with who is not using one version or another of MS Office. We need to maintain as near a perfect compatibility with them as is possible. And internally, within our own organization we use literally hundreds of customized formal forms, templates and such with embedded macros and/or VBA routines. Some of which are very complex and took years to develop and debug. We're in no hurry to have to redo all that work.

Then there is the subject of custom apps, scripts, and so forth which we ourselves have developed. We're in no hurry to have those broken and in need of re-development.

End result. At this time there is no justifiable business reason to be switching anything. To what end? What's the justification?

?Windows 7 Professional and Ultimate customers will have the option to downgrade to Windows XP Professional from PCs that ship within 18 months following the general availability of Windows 7 or until the release of a Windows 7 service pack, whichever is sooner, and if a service pack is developed.?

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=3104

Although I don't have time to read all the comments posted here, from the poll I can see that our firm is not the only one not wanting to switch from XP. It is not budget wise to invest in a whole new operating system for each machine and teach the users how to use it as well. Doesn't Microsoft understand that there are a lot of small business people out here that simply cannot afford to change their systems every time Microsoft decides we need something newer. Let those of us who want to, stick with what works and support us in doing so.

I personally switched to Vista the day it came out (had been using it since RC1), and have NEVER had one bit of trouble with it. I've started using Win 7 on another PC, and it too has been flawless.

The problem with the company I work for is that it has over 100,000 endusers, and programmers who are set in their ways.

What a rediculous title and story: "The end is near for Windows XP: what are you going to do?" Win XP will still be supported for another [up to] 5 years. Hardware manufacturers won't dare stop supporting it. I'm sure even new hardware will still be mostly supported. It won't affect businesses if they have volume licenses as they can downgrade. It will only affect the typical end user.

Bill Gates and Microsoft have never, i mean never created an OS that ever worked properly or that they have ever fixed completely totaly, from day one without and not even then, before creating another headache OS that had the same defaults of its predicessors. MS & Gates have never ever fixed, repaired or patched any operating system compidently and as they should have been made to doo as a company that monopolizes the PC Industry worldwide as the major OP system. Its a moral issue for one with integrity for true fixes to what u create that is defective from the beginning at the point of sale. Now that we have XP and more specifically XP Pro near a total fix and working for the most part like the very reliable OS it was designed and intended to be, MS and Gates again want to force the change without having any choice or say in the matter. If I have to purchase new hardware, which i wont for a very long time, and I could not continue to run XP after we finally have ONE, yep thats ONE out of how many now, that is finally patched, fixed, repaired, almost, I would rather sit down with everyone else around the globe in a global sit down and chant, HELL NO WE WON'T GO, HELL NO WE WON'T GO, HELL NO WE WON'T GO!!!!!!!!!!!!! until Gates and Microsoft begin to deliver OS that are correct an solid without issues of any kind at the point of sale period. Its high time microsoft should be without issue be held to a higher standard of quality of the products it creates, produces and markets directly and indirectly to the public once and for all, without flaw from this time forward and forever and ever. Amen and Amen!

One thing I am definitely NOT going to do is buy a $70 book from you on XP Tips! What were you thinking?

This is actually rubbish ! In fact its quite alarmist. Are the Microsoft Police going to come visit your home sometime soon and demand you surrender your PC because in Microsoft's world its out of date.Utter nonsense. Technically you can run XP until at least 2014 . OK certainly the ongoing development and improvement of XP is more or less finished but you can still use it unchanged. A solid anti-virus program suite and decent firewall is all you need extra and the functionality you enjoy now is not really any better in Windows 7 (you'd be smart to avoid Vista) and Microsoft have hardly made it easy for an XP user to go to Windows 7 as there is NO UPGRADE PATH. I am not being fooled by the press who make a living by advertising what Microsoft wants us all to believe. Do your self a favour and open your eyes and mind to the facts before you waste money opening your wallet.

Ken
IT Director

MS has again extended the OEM life of XP, this time to the earlier of

1) 1 year after Win 7 is released; or,
2) the release of Win 7 SP1.

Keeping Win 7 under tight control in the VM of a different OS because it speaks and bypasses firewalls that are native. With an external firewall I can stop or limit and monitor these unauthorized external communications.

I've been experimenting with the Windows 7 release candidate and am very disappointed that it seems to kill the ability to create a pan-and-scan virtual desktop with ATI video cards. This is a desktop that actually extends beyond your monitor?s screen (or ?viewport?) to give you about 4 times more real estate than your monitor?s screen. So when you move your cursor to the edge of the screen, the screen moves to reveal more desktop. ATI cards have supported this capability for over a decade, although ATI officially refuses to acknowledge it or offer support for it. But to tell the truth, after all these years I can?t live without it.

So it frustrates me no end that Windows 7 prevents you from making the changes to the resolution needed to create a pan and scan virtual desktop (instructions are at: http://planningcommunications.com/computers.htm ). Windows 7 insists on preventing you from changing the screen resolution to a resolution your monitor allegedly does not support (a key element to creating the pan-and-scan virtual desktop). Without that ability, I can't see leaving Windows XP Pro.

Hmmm, maybe if I turn off Aero in Windows 7 -- maybe that would do the trick?

If pan & scan is something that a lot of people are into. Then someone will probably come up with a crack to make that feature work. Does ATI make a driver for w7. If not that could be the problem. ATI isn't exactly known for their driver support. But someone will surly figure it out.

On some drivers (or in previous WinOS, not sure which) there is a checkbox/button to show and/or enable supposedly unsupported resolutions(modes). If you can find that setting you might be able to 'force' the OS to let you set it to a higher resolution - just a thought...

Thank you both. ATI does make a Windows 7 driver -- and I'm using it. (BTY, ATI has gotten very good about updating drivers monthly and staying ahead of the curve.)

I have checked the box to show unsupported resolutions. The problem is that the pan and scan requires you to set a resolution of 800 x 600 in ATI's Catalyst Control Center (CCC) and then a resolution of 1600 x 1200 (or anything higher than 800 x 600) in Windows' resolution. But Windows 7 insists on greying out the resolution choice and insists on the 800 x 600 set in CCC. In Windows XP I've been able to set different resolutions in the two places to create the pan-and-scan virtual desktop.

Unfortunately not enough people use a pan-and-scan virtual desktop for Microsoft to care. In fact, ATI does not even officially support it.

Thanks again for your suggestions.

I like to think that I'm able to see "outside the envelope" if you want to call it that, but what advantage do you get from a desktop four times the size of your monitor? Maybe I'm not seeing what's right in front of me but really, I can't figure that out. It certainly can't be to fit more icons on it.....so why? And I'm not trying to be a wise ass, I'm just curious and can't for the life of me come up with any explanation. And also, this is something Nvidia users can't do?

You asked, so I'll answer: It's a productivity enhancer.

The larger pan-and-scan virtual desktop enables you to open applications like word processors, desktop publishing, and even spreadsheets full page -- so you rarely have to use scroll bars. You move your cursor to the edge of the screen and the screen moves to reveal more page. It allows you to have your applications at 800 x 600 dpi while your screen is at 1600 x 1200 dpi. Once you're over 40 years old, you'll really appreciate that!

NVIDIA used to allow for this feature -- but it disappeared in Windows XP. ATI allows for it although it does not "officially" support it. Sometimes you can get it by setting the screen resolution higher than the native resoultion -- but on a lot of computers that just won't work. But ATI's approach has worked just fine -- until now with Windows 7. I'd like to upgrade from XP, but if Windows 7 really kills off the ability to use this feature, Microsoft is going to lose a bunch of sales from us.

Last night fooling around with my Windows 7 partition I changed something in one of the display panels and it offered the choice for "enhanced" something or other, I can't get to it without rebooting, but it changes the colors and does enhance the difference between colors, but what I noticed since I was still thinking about what you wrote was that I could go to the oorner of the display, hold down the left button and drag a part of the screen that was not visible because the screen was much bigger than the 17 inch monitor. I'll try it later but when it happened I immediately thought of your post and said "ah ha! this answers a question someone asked!" and here I am with little detail. Later I'll go back and figure it out but it DID work!

Not are darn thing as it is NOT ending. My computer is not going to turn off and never work again on a certain date/time. So the question is loaded. I have an old computer that runs Windows 3.1 flawlessly to this day. It does what I want it to do regardless of MS support. As will my XP computer.

I'm Going to do what all the IT Pro's are DOING!!! I will not change operating systems unless I am forced to do so!!! If it ain't broke, then why fix (f...k) it!

If we are upgrading your system, then we should enjoy the benefit of this. But when we are upgrading our OS from XP to VISTA, 50 % of our hardware resource is being utilized by the NEW OS (VISTA). So the purpose of the hardware upgrade is defeated here. So now it's your call, Whether you want your hardware needs to be upgraded OR ELSE your OS needs to be upgraded.

The switch to Windows 7 [which at least VM's XP and XP applications] is probably the best option. I agree with the results of the survey. Only a small percentage of people will switch their desktops to Linux. For Microsoft the timing , rather than the OS sucks this time. Business are really strapped for operational expenses. They have been for a decade. It is rather unfortunate for both customers and company that their marketing people have really misjudged the situation. The only other place I've seen this is in the Entertainment business. But there there is no open software market there other than piracy. And even there the content creators are bound for trouble despite of their "wins". If you are a VAR or like all of us part of your income comes from tech support make MS know your opinion, not your Sales person opinion. Your income is on the line. MS operates the world's computers, for all practical purposes. Their eventual failure will bring more monetary loss than their survival at a lower market share. But it time for a change.

with our in-house capabilities, like we do for Win 98Se in some special isolated situations to maintain expensive equipment usability for their life.

I'm staying with XP until it proves obsolete. I have tested Linux (Ubuntu) and if XP fails me, will try Open Source next before committing to another

Actually it seems Ubuntu take that place and working much better, even that need little more practise and it based on UNIX (XP-Dos)

Will cling to XP as long as I can. If "7" isn't better, will switch to Mac.

Hype: Bigger better faster!
Truth: If your Windows computer operates correctly, and does what you need it to do, why upgrade? If you were going to have problems, you would have had them already and probably know some quick fixes to get things rolling again.
Conclusion: another revenue stream for Microsoft and validation for a very large support system.
If it works, don't fix it!
Unless you're a geek, then disregard this post

Nope, it's definitely NOT! What is going to happen is this: Windows 7 will have an option (for extra money, of COURSE!) to run XP within it in a virtual machine. So all this FUD about XP nearing its end is just that: FUD!

Therefore, IF one wants to "upgrade" to 7 AND pay the extortion money to be able to keep XP one can do so. But if XP is still going to be around WHY bother???

you can have XP working for you for decades to come, hell DOS, Win 95, and Win 2000 still work OK. The only concerns are the SPs that loads up WGA and later MS malware that will crash your system on orders from MS.

Book of DaveSmall (4:24):

"And it shall come to pass that the cities of XP were indeed annihilated, and its peoples came to wander."

"* Some wandered to the Shores of Lake Linux, where they found it difficult to speak the local language, called '#grep -in . | more'. At night, each hour, The City Watchman cried, "In Five More Years, We'll Own The Market! It's 11:00 and All Is Well!"

"* A few wandered to the City of Vista, and found it mostly abandoned, taken over by the Demons of Restraint. They found themselves only able to move at a slow creep. As was prophesied, 'Even The Fastest Were Made Slow'."

"Another few traveled to the Mirrors of Mac, which when looked at, reflect powerfully seductive images, the admirable, alluring, appealing and attractive part of the wanderers, who now knew they were part of high society, the "in-crowd", the elite. But the Mirrors giveth, and they taketh away. Sadly, they take away the viewer's ability to speak with others who are not viewing the Mirrors of Mac.

* Most of the wanderers knew of these places, and knew that The Seven Cities Of The Plain had many temptations ... but might hold demons, as well, as the town of Vista showed.

* And a few said, "We shall wander for forty years in the desert before we are delivered!"


Thank you,

David Small

When we are sure Windows 7 is stable we will look at migrating over to it from XP. We still have customer's who insist on W98. No matter what, they don't want to upgrade to anything else. Should be interesting when their machines crash.