# It just wont die: Windows XP gets another six months



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

"Recent market data showed that more than one third of new PC buyers choose to downgrade their Vista installations to Windows XP. Another research revealed that enterprise users, one of Microsoft's key markets, are even less inclined to dump XP for the newer operating system."
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39594/140/


----------



## hewee (Oct 26, 2001)

My new Dell Vostro 410 I got the XP Pro downgrade for $99.00. XP Pro sp2 was the installed OS and I got the same on a CD along with a Vista CD.


----------



## WWEFreak666 (Apr 18, 2007)

I know why people are choosing to downgrade. I suppose when people go out and buy a low spec'd computer with Vista on it, I wouldn't blame them.. But if your willing to spend money, Vista on a good computer runs as good, if not better than XP. For example, my new PC cost me about $800. It's 2.4 GHz and 3.0 GB RAM. I have yet to experience any significant problems with Vista and I do not plan on downgrading to XP unless Vista crashes, simply because I do not have a copy of Vista and I do know that my computer would be even faster if I ran XP on it. It's just the simple fact that Vista takes higher specs than what XP does and if you compare Vista on a great computer and then install XP on it afterwards, of course XP is going to win, but what Vista offers that XP doesn't makes it all worth while for me personally.


----------



## BobsComputerSvc (Oct 2, 2008)

Ok so here is how I see it. Home users just cannot adapt to change. I mean look at Windows it has had the same looking user interface since Windows 95. I see this everyday in my profession people slamming Vista just because they cannot use it. People need to get over it and start to use Vista. Now on the other side there are business users and I do not suggest a switch there yet because the companies would have to upgrade their pc's to run it. Now if this was a new company just starting I would recommend getting Vista boxes. SO that is where I stand on the whole Vista thing.


----------



## hewee (Oct 26, 2001)

I guess with Vista you can do the same with XP and turn off lots of the things that just take up cpu and memory by Slimming Down Windows XP


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

BobsComputerSvc said:


> Ok so here is how I see it. Home users just cannot adapt to change. I mean look at Windows it has had the same looking user interface since Windows 95. I see this everyday in my profession people slamming Vista just because they cannot use it. People need to get over it and start to use Vista. Now on the other side there are business users and I do not suggest a switch there yet because the companies would have to upgrade their pc's to run it. Now if this was a new company just starting I would recommend getting Vista boxes. SO that is where I stand on the whole Vista thing.


Home users don't have to upgrade? Just business'?

Why should anyone switch to Vista, Windows 7 is just around the corner.

I guess myself and so many others were so afraid of change we went to Linux.


----------



## BobsComputerSvc (Oct 2, 2008)

RootbeaR said:


> Home users don't have to upgrade? Just business'?
> 
> Why should anyone switch to Vista, Windows 7 is just around the corner.
> 
> I guess myself and so many others were so afraid of change we went to Linux.


I think that home users should upgrade. I am a tech all day long i see people comming in with mid lvl P4's with 256 - 512Mb ram. People these days should be using a Vista box with a Duel Core and atleast 2gb ram. Now for business it is not worth it to change yet. It would cost way to much to buy or upgradeall thre pc's to run Vista. Also from what i hear the new Windows isn't going to launch until around 2010. Not so much around the corner.


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

BobsComputerSvc said:


> I think that home users should upgrade. I am a tech all day long i see people comming in with mid lvl P4's with 256 - 512Mb ram. People these days should be using a Vista box with a Duel Core and atleast 2gb ram. Now for business it is not worth it to change yet. It would cost way to much to buy or upgradeall thre pc's to run Vista. Also from what i hear the new Windows isn't going to launch until around 2010. Not so much around the corner.


I hear '09.
One computer or a hundred, makes no difference as a second isn't added unless it is a benefit. Except they can probably buy bulk cheaper than I can buy one unit(Going to give me a deal or am I shopping elsewhere?).
You forgot the graphics card. And it is still too expensive for me. I don't have the funds available that a business has nor can I write it off as an expense, making it that much cheaper for the business to do so.

There is no economical benefit to upgrade and switch to Vista, else business' would do so. Meaning you will be no more productive on Vista than you are on XP.

The benefits go to MS, hardware companies and support.

*One graphics card for me $800.*

One hundred graphics cards for Company $80 000? More like $72 000 max. (10% off)

$72 000 expense X 40% tax rate is $28 800 in tax savings

72000-28800=$43 200

*One graphics card for company? $432.*

If it is worth it for home user, why isn't it as well for business at almost half the cost?


----------



## Rich-M (May 3, 2006)

RootbeaR said:


> Home users don't have to upgrade? Just business'?
> 
> Why should anyone switch to Vista, Windows 7 is just around the corner.
> 
> I guess myself and so many others were so afraid of change we went to Linux.


Because that will be a much bigger change, won't be on time and if you think Vista was "buggy", with all the changes for "7" I can imagine how "buggy" it will be.


----------



## BobsComputerSvc (Oct 2, 2008)

Rich-M said:


> Because that will be a much bigger change, won't be on time and if you think Vista was "buggy", with all the changes for "7" I can imagine how "buggy" it will be.


I am going to have to agree that 7 will probaly be extreamly buggy at launce. And I bet that we dont see it unit late last 1/4 of 2010.


----------



## allheart55 (Jun 5, 2007)

I agree, I think it will be released late and it will be more problematic than Vista initially was.  I can't wait!! I beta tested Vista and I was a bit disappointed at first with the differences between the last beta and the final released version. I hear 2010 and the only mention of 09 was for Win 7 Beta testing.......:up: I'm ready....


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

Rich-M said:


> Because that will be a much bigger change, won't be on time and if you think Vista was "buggy", with all the changes for "7" I can imagine how "buggy" it will be.


Bigger than XP to Linux?

What are the changes for "7?"

I agree with what is said here on the podcast:
http://forums.techguy.org/tech-related-news/756446-tsg-5-evil-empires-version.html

They will just rename Vista. With some minor changes.


----------



## Wino (Dec 1, 2001)

I skipped ME and intend doing the same with Vista. Have worked with Vista and found it lacking, slow, intrusive (some of the nice things I have to say) and have no intentions of buying new software or hardware just to be compatible when XP is doing just fine. Am also doing dual boot on two machine with Ubuntu Hardy Heron and will probably make one a sole Linux machine. I also have a couple of spare (unused) XP SP2 disk that I will eventually use on new builds.


----------



## CTPhil (Jan 5, 2006)

BobsComputerSvc said:


> I think that home users should upgrade. I am a tech all day long i see people comming in with mid lvl P4's with 256 - 512Mb ram. People these days should be using a Vista box with a Duel Core and atleast 2gb ram.


Why?

If you like your mid level PC with XP, and it does everything you need it to, why must you upgrade to something you don't want or need?

I'm planning to keep my current computers going until I'm forced to do something else by whatever unforseen circumstances would make them unviable. No apologies.


----------



## BobsComputerSvc (Oct 2, 2008)

RootbeaR said:


> I hear '09.
> One computer or a hundred, makes no difference as a second isn't added unless it is a benefit. Except they can probably buy bulk cheaper than I can buy one unit(Going to give me a deal or am I shopping elsewhere?).
> You forgot the graphics card. And it is still too expensive for me. I don't have the funds available that a business has nor can I write it off as an expense, making it that much cheaper for the business to do so.
> 
> ...


You are WAYYYY off there for price on a video card. You can get a video card that will run all Vista functions for only $59.95 it is the GeForce 8400.
If you pay $800 for a video card just to run Vista then come to my store.:up:


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

BobsComputerSvc said:


> You are WAYYYY off there for price on a video card. You can get a video card that will run all Vista functions for only $59.95 it is the GeForce 8400.
> If you pay $800 for a video card just to run Vista then come to my store.:up:


I haven't priced one in a couple of years.

So instead, lets assume that is the total cost to upgrade all hardware.
For me it costs X.
For business it costs .54X (not quite half)

Why isn't it worth it for business but is for home user?


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

CTPhil said:


> Why?
> 
> If you like your mid level PC with XP, and it does everything you need it to, why must you upgrade to something you don't want or need?


At the very least, to stay moderately current with technology trends. At some point, it will become challenging and expensive to find replacement parts for the aging machine and there will be some application or device that will require hardware or software that won't be supported by this mid level PC.

I'm not saying Vista is the reason to upgrade but only that people can't expect to keep their computer for 10 years and be able to run any given modern software application or use any given modern peripheral with it.

Peace...


----------



## Doom_Machine (Jun 26, 2005)

for basic use with 3rd party apps, vista really isnt different than XP and no reason to change. out of box install then you can really see the differences and security...on a more expensive computer that is.

MS kinda screwed up Vista by underestimating the current technology trends. OSX and Linux both offer some things here and there that MS shouldve caught up on long ago. like single file folders, NTF's innability to leave empty space between data to let it expand (so you wont need to defrag). virtual desktops, sandboxing...etc

on top of that, most of Vista's code is whats in XP,. even the cursors didnt change and Vista's entire interface looks and reacts pretty much the same as XP. while much of Vista is an improvement (out of box). most users can use 3rd party apps to do everything in XP that they can in Vista and even make it look the same right down to "dreamscene" app called "dreamrender" which is free btw, like so many XP apps can be if one wanted to save money yet do all the Vista like stuff.

see, this is why they did the Mojave experiment. but ever wonder why the people they chose for the experiment werent enthusiast users? likely cause they'd say "hey, this mojave OS looks and performs the same as Vista...wtf?"
so they get a bunch of noobs in there instead....way to market an OS microsoft.


----------



## Beta19 (Sep 8, 2008)

Everyone says that you should upgrade to Windows Vista. Why are people going to change what works for them. Why do people still use XP? Simple, it works for them. Look how long it took people to switch to XP from 98. It just takes time and people should not be pressured to use an os that they just aren't used to. People use what they know how to use and the fact is people know how to use Windows XP better than Windows Vista. I just takes time, once Vista has been on the market a little longer, it will work it's way into people's hearts(or wallets) eventually. I for one, prefer Windows XP over Vista. Why?, because I know xp better than vista. When I have had more experience with vista, I may change my position. When you pressure someone into something they don't want to do, it usually doesn't end well. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Rich-M (May 3, 2006)

BobsComputerSvc said:


> I think that home users should upgrade. I am a tech all day long i see people comming in with mid lvl P4's with 256 - 512Mb ram. People these days should be using a Vista box with a Duel Core and atleast 2gb ram. Now for business it is not worth it to change yet. It would cost way to much to buy or upgradeall thre pc's to run Vista. Also from what i hear the new Windows isn't going to launch until around 2010. Not so much around the corner.


Like you I have a repair and build business and see computers both home and business all day long, but for the life of me I cannot imagine why you think home users should upgrade to Vista when they have XP.

I have Vista on most of my working pc's and of course believe a tech should as I believe with any new pc bought. But to suggest users upgrade to Vista from XP, not only don't I see why, I think it is a poor idea because I can't find the justification in gains for the resultant hardware issues that will ensue.


----------



## CTPhil (Jan 5, 2006)

I'm not a pro, but fix computers as a sideline. Most of my customers don't want to spend money if they don't have to, but usually ask if I think they should buy a new computer. I always ask, "If your present computer works like it did when it was new, would it do everything that you need and want it to do?"

The answer is usually yes, and people are happy and relieved to hear that they don't have to buy something new and learn a whole new OS. Obviously the cost of repair must be factored in and I wouldn't recommend a $300 repair on an 8 year old computer, but most people just have a bad hard drive or need to have Windows reinstalled and they're back in business.

If you upgrade before you need to, by the time you need the new features your computer will already be obsolete. Computers are just getting cheaper and faster.


----------



## CrazyComputerMan (Apr 16, 2007)

Im pleased to hear that Windows XP get another 6 month extra.


----------

