Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Not Ditching Vista Until At Least 2011

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the contrary-to-rumors dept.

Windows 297

CWmike writes "Microsoft will not dump Vista when Windows 7 launches, and plans to keep selling it to computer makers, system builders, volume licensees and consumers at retail until at least January 2011, a Microsoft spokesman said, citing long-running policy. Earlier today, a Microsoft general manager hinted that the company might ditch Vista as soon as Windows 7 ships. He also said that support for all versions of Vista will end in April 2012. Neither is true, according to the company. Michael Cherry, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, said, 'to try to stop Vista or make it unavailable, that would just draw attention... The truth is, few people will be likely to order it once Windows 7 is available.'"

cancel ×

297 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

i just got off the toilet (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27823467)

i shit out an obama.

plop!

Re:i just got off the toilet (-1, Troll)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823937)

Man, you missed out on the opportunity for a First Plop! (First as in Presidential - First Lady, First Dog, etc., as well as being the first post.)

Re:i just got off the toilet (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824011)

Keep your USA politics crap to yourself. It irritates readers living in real democracies.

Re:i just got off the toilet (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824319)

The US isn't supposed to be a democracy. The more it becomes one, the more it sucks.

Much like Vista. I think Microsoft is trying to pretend vista wasn't a failure, so they try to cut off XP, then rush Windows 7 but insist vista will still be available for all the people who love it.

WTF is happening to Slashdot? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824475)

I loved Slashdot for many years. Even with all its faults, including, but not limited to: three-day-old "news that matters," Goatse links, geeks who know nothing blathering on like they are all-knowing, and the outdated design that would have made 1997 blush. It just felt like home.

But rather than keeping these faults, which we have come to know and love, Slashdot has been trying to "improve." First it came with asinine decision to switch to a sans-serif font across the site. Hello, body copy should be in a sans-serif font. No, you didn't have to stick with Times, but Arial/Helvetica was not the answer either!

Then came the incredibly awful new discussion system. It just makes no sense and is one of the worst AJAX-y implementations on the web. "Click here to see 108 more comments." Click. "Click here to see 154 more comments." Click. "Click here to see 19 more comments." What is the mathematical formula used here to divide up the comments? Just totally random? And that's just the tip of the usability iceberg.

At least we can switch back to the old discussion system. And at least we had metamods to help keep the system in check. But now we have the new metamod, which is not a metamod at all. Apparently we are supposed to re-rate the comments, instead of rating how well the mod did in rating the comment in the first place. Isn't this a remod instead of a metamod. I have decided to stop metamod'ing when offered in protest. Yeah, I don't get mod points anymore, but who cares? The system is broken. If I feel like doling out a point, I'll go over to Digg.

Speaking of Digg, have you read the outdated Slashdot FAQ, where CmdrTaco states several times that he doesn't think it's a good idea to let people vote for the stories that make the front page? Well apparently he has changed his mind, and we have the incredibly lame Firehose and Idle sections. We've got stupid +/- buttons everywhere. Listen, Taco, when I want to go to Digg, I'll go there. I want my Slashdot back.

Yet still, I keep coming, hoping that some of these ridiculous decisions will be reversed. But it looks like they are just going to run in one of the formerly great websites further in to the ground.

Makes sense (-1, Troll)

XPeter (1429763) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823493)

By 2011, with the launch of Intel's 35NM processors, we will have some Vista compatible computers.

Millenium 2 (5, Insightful)

grapeape (137008) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823579)

Well remember MS continued to offer Millenium until 2003 even though XP launched in 2001. Offering and actually selling are two different things, I know I never heard of anyone buying Millenium after XP shipped.

Re:Millenium 2 (4, Funny)

owlstead (636356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823701)

"I know I never heard of anyone buying Millenium after XP shipped."

I did, my computer illiterate aunt. Some time ago, after years of letting them simmer I fixed some parts of their computer. That'll teach 'm not to listen.

But the computer salesman was such a nice guy. Much better than the shop I was pushing. Well, to be fair, that computer was not worth XP. It was a match made by the devil.

Re:Millenium 2 (1)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824833)

What's wrong with M.e? Isn't it just Windows 98 with a few new features added?

Re:Millenium 2 (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824855)

"I know I never heard of anyone buying Millenium after XP shipped."

I did, my computer illiterate aunt.

Hey genius, it's "I have." I have heard of someone buying ME after XP shipped. Not I did heard of someone buying ME after XP shipped.

Unless you misplaced a comma and meant to say, "I did my computer illiterate aunt." Which all I have to say is 0_o That's some payment for working on her computer.

Re:Millenium 2 (2, Insightful)

Locutus (9039) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823771)

the difference was that WinME was DOS/Windows based and Win2K was NT based so there was little in common. Windows 7 is basically Vista SP3 so it's the same core. That makes this news even more of a dah moment and a WTF cares kind of news item. They won't continue _forcing_ OEMs to ship Vista but will let them sell to any sucker who bought their snakeoil sales pitches and asks for it.

LoB

Re:Millenium 2 (2, Funny)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824897)

>>>Windows 7 is basically Vista SP3 so it's the same core.

I think that diminishes the changes that have been made. XP == Windows NT 5. Vista == Windows NT 6. Windows 7 == Window NT 7. Each one is a different generation from the previous.

Re:Millenium 2 (2, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824061)

I had a computer that wouldn't run 2k or XP (or 98!) but would run 95 and ME. That computer is gone now... (It wouldn't boot linux either.)

Why? (1)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823581)

They finally spit out a half decent product (Win7) and they want to hang on to their most unsuccessful release since Win2000 or ME? I wonder if the copies of Vista sold after Win7's release date will still have the free upgrade to Win7 option?

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

clampolo (1159617) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823679)

I bought a pc about 2 years ago and it had Vista on it. I mostly use Linux but keep the Vista partition around so I could easily use Windows-only apps. It pisses me off that I won't get the Vista Service Pack (Windows 7) for free.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824485)

I don't see how /. can claim 7 is the service pack to Vista and also say Vista is exactly the same as XP. Atleast the 7 = Vista SP has some basis, it's mainly Vista stripped of the negative hype, but Vista was a huge improvement over XP.

Re:Why? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824719)

Name and cite a single person that has ever said both of those things.

Re:Why? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824533)

You can only lose with microshit windaids.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824801)

That fucking Steve Jobs eh?

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

theaveng (1243528) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824945)

>>>It pisses me off that I won't get the Vista Service Pack (Windows 7) for free.

What a stupid comment. I bought Win98 and nobody gave me a free upgrade to XP (Windows 5). Later I bought to an XP-PC and nobody offered me a free upgrade to Vista (Windows 6). Why do you think you're entitled to get a free upgrade to a totally new OS (Win7), if Microsoft never gave free upgrades for previous OSes?

Wow. Talk about "entitlement generation" - you fit the profile perfectly. Sorry but you're going to just have to pay, same as I paid for my previous OS upgrades. The real world doesn't hand-out free lunches.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824963)

It pisses me off that I won't get the Vista Service Pack (Windows 7) for free.

Interesting.

If Microsoft does something incremental (eg. 2000 -> XP, or Vista -> 7), people complain that too little has changed, that it's basically just a "service pack" which Microsoft is charging money for.

If Microsoft does something too radical (eg. XP -> Vista), people complain that too much has changed, that they should have just touched up XP a bit, given it a visual makeover and a few core updates and that would have been enough.

Conclusion - Microsoft can't win. At least with the fussy pricks on Slashdot.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823799)

their most unsuccessful release since Win2000 or ME?

Look, I'm an Open Source advocate as well and I use Linux and OpenBSD... However lumping together Windows 2000 and Windows ME is just not fair. Windows 2000 was pretty much their best operating system ever, and Windows ME their worst. Just in case you didn't know: Windows 2000, meant for the business world and used in the business world was a big hit. It was and is still very popular in corporate environments.

Windows XP has exactly three things that make it "better" than 2000: Fast user switching, good wireless support and terminal services (only in Pro). The first and the second are good for home use, the terminal services only for business use.

Windows 2000 is used to this day in controlled secured environments.... I wouldn't call it unsuccessful in any sense of the term.

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823955)

The first and the second are good for home use, the terminal services only for business use.

Oh, man, you have no idea. I use RDP and terminal services daily around the house. Until I found mpd and Pitchfork, it was how my music machine ran. I still use RDP to another old computer that runs my IRC and Pidgin stuff (VNC and NX ran like shit, but RDP was fine, so RDP it was).

Terminal services is a vastly underappreciated piece of awesome.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824259)

and if you're not technically inclined, then Orb for your music machine, or even better jukefly (streams with flash).

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824297)

Wait let me get this straight?

You take a very low bandwidth, plain text protocol and then you use it over Remote Desktop which sends images flying around the network?

You flipping idiot. :P

Re:Why? (1)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824403)

No, I take mIRC and Pidgin and use it over Remote Desktop, because I like having them active 24/7 on the machines in the basement rather than having to leave my laptop running all the time. It's like using programs in a screen shell, only it doesn't suck.

It's not like I'm using the entire gigabit transfer of my network anyway. Why should I care?

Re:Why? (1)

Randle_Revar (229304) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824499)

Try irssi. Loads better than mirc.
Not sure what is best for CLI IM, maybe mcabber? or maybe bitlbee+irssi.

Re:Why? (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824925)

pork [sourceforge.net]
naim [ml.org]

Pork hasn't been updated in 4 years, but I've used it constantly since I found it ~5 years ago and it does everything I need to.

If I really want video chat I'll fire up iChat.

Re:Why? (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824615)

I use Quassel.

It comes in two halves, one half connects to irc, the second half connects to the first half.
So I'm constantly online, and I can access it where ever I am.

Oh and it doesnt send images around. :P

Re:Why? (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824733)

Funny thing is that a ssh tunnel would do the same... Use the remote machine to make your connections for Pidgin, etc....

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824713)

Yes, it is awesome... I agree... I routinely login from my Linux machine to a Windows machine offering RDP. However, is it enabled in Windows XP Home? It is a great system, but do home users use it? The closest I've seem was "Remote Assistance", which is in Home.... Alas, I only had the experience of this over a 56K modem, and that was far from fun.

I control my Linux machines over ssh with the command line and that works fine over a 56K modem... Just saying...

Re:Why? (2, Informative)

Lonewolf666 (259450) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824073)

I can confirm that Windows 2000 was quite popular in corporate environments. But it had no cheap "Home" version, so GP may have gotten the impression that it was unsuccessful from not seeing much Windows 2000 use on home PCs.

But even in that environment, some people happily pirated and used it. Of course, the same people also have no qualms about pirating XP, and by now hardware vendors often don't bother with Windows 2000 drivers anymore. Which makes the Windows XP Corporate Edition more desirable these days, as it is activation free like Windows 2000 and still has good driver support ;-)

Re:Why? (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824663)

But it had no cheap "Home" version, so GP may have gotten the impression that it was unsuccessful from not seeing much Windows 2000 use on home PCs.

I do know several home users who did go for the Dell business lines in order to get it. Incidentally, those all use Macs by now ;-)

As a dumpster diver, I also routinely find Win2000 computers with valid license stickers.... I don't know where they come from, but I don't think a residential recycling centre (where I dumpster dive) gets a lot of corporate computers.

by now hardware vendors often don't bother with Windows 2000 drivers anymore. Which makes the Windows XP Corporate Edition more desirable these days

I have one of those corporate editions, and I use them to reuse license stickers found on dumpster diven machines. If it has a WinXP Pro machine, you install the corporate version, then you change the license with a tool from Microsoft. It's wonderful you can do that, because you cannot use the license printed on the sticker with a volume license CD. You can change it afterward, so you have a valid XP license and you do not misuse the corporate license which is owned by your company.

Re:Why? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824689)

Which makes the Windows XP Corporate Edition more desirable these days, as it is activation free like Windows 2000 and still has good driver support ;-)

The geek's obsession with activation can be really puzzling to others. I activated this old Dell workhorse in 2001 - and that was that.

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

Lonewolf666 (259450) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824843)

The geek's obsession with activation can be really puzzling to others.
We geeks have a strong aversion against giving up control of our toys ;-)
That includes wanting to reinstall the OS when we feel like it, without asking someone for permission. And the typical geek does this more frequently than every 8 years.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824681)

ClearType is in XP. It's one thing that makes me prefer it to Windows 2000.

Re:Why? (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824797)

Ok, granted.... forgot that one.... Didn't Win2000 have a font smoothing technology? Not sure, I haven't used it in a while.

Re:Why? (1)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824821)

I think if you carefully read what I said in my post, you will find that I didn't explicitly call Win 2000 unsuccessful either. Is Vista the worst general release since the two operating systems mentioned? Yes. No other release in that time frame (ie this century) has caused MS more loss, so to speak, in reputation or custom. I rest my case.

Re:Why? (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824899)

Okay, I accept that. It did give the impression to me that Win2000 was unsuccessful. You didn't mention anything about centuries, but... okay. To me you did imply that both ME and 2k were unsuccessful, and only one of those assertions is true. That you didn't mean that and take it back gives you bonus points.

Re:Why? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824377)

Win 2K was successful. (I consider it the high point, though XP is ok when you turn off the crap and make it work like 2K). It wasn't marketed as a consumer OS, but I used it at work and at home. Hell, I still use it for a couple apps via virtual box.

Re:Why? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824835)

Why is easy. Think of a large business that after a few months of debating decides that they need to migrate from XP (or earlier!) to a more modern OS, so they decide to roll out a few test systems with Vista on them. They get to wrapping it up and see that most of their critical apps work, but the ones that don't they test alternatives, etc. And they are about to buy some Vista licenses for the many computers they have. If MS discontinues Vista, they delay any sort of profit till a year or two after Windows 7 ships for that particular company, or the company may decide that upgrades are too much of a hassle.

Makes sense (5, Interesting)

owlstead (636356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823621)

They may drop the support for consumer versions and keep the business ones available. Sounds logical to me, for consumers there is very little reason to stick to Windows Vista for new systems. Those companies that did switch (the sorry sods) however will need new systems with the same OS.

Re:Makes sense (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27823727)

I still think Microsoft should offer users of Vista the service pack for free: Windows 7.

Re:Makes sense (2, Insightful)

x2A (858210) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824055)

I know it might look like it's a service pack, because for the first time since 2003, it's a release that's an improvement on their previous OS, and the only other times they've released stuff that's improved a previous OS have been service packs, which makes it very easily confused... but it's still not a service pack.

Re:Makes sense (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824255)

Just because it has a different name doesn't mean it's not the same OS with a couple of tweaks. At best it's the Vista "Plus Pack".

Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27823891)

Although the situation at Microsoft is a complete mess right now, the folks in Redmond have to be breathing a sigh of relief that Win7 is almost here and the open source world did absolutely nothing to take advantage of Microsoft in its most weakened state in the company's history.

You had the perfect alignment of events for Linux to seize the moment:

* The Vista fiasco

* The biggest financial crisis in most people's lifetime

* A decade worth of development on the Linux desktop and applications

Consumers and businesses were in the perfect situation to make the easy switch to something that is cheaper(actually free) and already runs on their existing hardware. And it didn't happen.

Multiple competing distros - each having pointless differences between them to real world day to day usage

Multiple competing desktops - each having pointless differences between them to real world day to day usage

Multiple competing apps - each having pointless differences between them to real world day to day usage. No polished set of iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, Mail apps that hit the sweet spot for the giant mass of consumers who use their computers to web browse, email, and take pictures and movies.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (2, Insightful)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824069)

Well, to be fair, the Open Source community has produced Ubuntu 9.04, which is probably one of the best operating systems ever made.

I don't know if I'd call that fumbling exactly.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (1)

Thantik (1207112) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824971)

If by best operating system ever made you mean mucked up a LOT of peoples intel drivers, then yes. Best operating system ever made.
Every system has its flaws, even ubuntu. They're doing a fine job of fixing the mess but if it were Windows...oh wait, it was. And we did.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (2, Insightful)

x2A (858210) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824111)

Erm... Microsoft's like, a business, an entity, that can have policy, direction, a road map, and can make decisions. "Linux" isn't... so... your post makes no sense. If your argument is really "people shouldn't disagree and should all just use the same system" then... that would be Windows. The whole point is that it isn't that.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824119)

I don't think even the most diehard Linux fans still believe that Linux is ever going to have anything other than a percent or two marketshare.

It's been over a decade and Linux on the desktop has gotten nowhere outside of a tiny niche userbase. You would have to be delusional to actually think Linux is going to all of a sudden just be widely adopted by both OEMs and consumers if it wasn't for the past ten years.

No matter how hard you try and how motivated you are everyone eventually gives up trying to Herd Cats or expecting others to be successful in doing so.

Linux right now is like some sad little African country that is overrun with petty warlords each controlling their own little region. Each one looking out for their own special interest and not giving a damn about the overall health of the country.

* Font rendering is still a complete joke.

* The UI toolkits look like they are halfassed Win2k knockoffs.

* Apps continue to look like they are built without the slightest knowledge of graphical layout - font kerning problems, font choice problems, random color choices, UI element spacing problems, and on and on and on

* Utterly trivial things like sound continue to be a mess and different across the various distros

* No single IDE and API and app packaging system for developers to use to port their apps for Linux

And the supposed 'star' of Linux distros, Ubunut, still is braindead enough to continue to ship a desktop with what people refer to a 'baby shit' brown as the default color scheme.

"Buh, buh, buh, you can just change it!"

What a train wreck.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824137)

For all the freetards do, they still can't equal the ease of use of Windows. It's the universal corporate standard for a reason. Canonical's feces-colored desktop doesn't work.

Don't take my word for it--download the Ubuntu live CD yourself and try it. If you like it better than Windows I'll eat my own ass. (It'll be the color of Ubuntu.)If everyone tried the CD they'd see how bad it was. Windows advocates do download it and know how badly it sucks.

Go on, mod me down, Canonical shills -- but you can't hide how much your system sucks forever.

Again, don't take my word for it -- download the live CD. Really, do this. You'll see just how much it sucks.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824345)

Haven't I seen this troll before? More-or-less word-for-word, I seem to recall.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824393)

Truth is eternal.

Download the Ubuntu live CD and try it. You'll see what "suck" is.

Re:Meanwhile, Open Source And Linux Fumbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824229)

I guess I can take this troll on because....

Windows doesn't have multiple competing versions (XP Home, Pro; Vista HS, HP, B, and U)

Windows doesn't have different feels to it's desktop (Classic, XP, Vista Basic, Vista Areo, Program Manager)

Windows doesn't have multiple apps availible to do the same thing (MS Office, Star/Open Office, Corel WordPerfect; Paint.NET, Photoshop; ad nauseum)

I mean, after all, no polished apps for Linux multimedia (VLC, amarok, XINE), mail (Thunderbird and Evolution), web browsers (opera and firefox), or Office software (Open Office, KOffice, Abiword) that the user can choose from.

Please Stop Trolling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824287)

I guess everyone knew some idiot would post this stupid troll in response. I guess it wouldn't be Slashdot if the site wasn't filled with Linux trolls like this clown posting the same stupid shit year after year.

No wonder "Year of the Linux Desktop!!!" and Slashdot have become such a sad joke to computing world.

Re:Please Stop Trolling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824571)

If ad hominem is the best response you have, then I've already won. (Same AC from GP post)

Nothing exclusive to Linux (2, Interesting)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824771)

I mean, after all, no polished apps for Linux multimedia (VLC, amarok, XINE), mail (Thunderbird and Evolution), web browsers (opera and firefox), or Office software (Open Office, KOffice, Abiword) that the user can choose from.

The problem here is that the successful Linux app is ported to Windows or begins as a native Windows app.

There is no compelling reason to migrate.

Re:Nothing exclusive to Linux (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824851)

OMG!!! You just totally OWNED that post with those ()!!!

Enjoy your 1 percent marketshare you fucking faggot

Re:Makes sense (1)

Ernesto Alvarez (750678) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824101)

Besides, if they decide to drop support, they will need to either refund the cost of vista the users have paid, or at least provide an upgrade to windows 7.

If they keep minimal support, people wanting to stop using vista will have to pay the upgrade themselves.

Re:Makes sense (2, Funny)

dissy (172727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824317)

Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people do.

I'm pretty sure if you hang around nuclear weapons enough, you could very well get killed with no other humans being involved...

My guess, XP will outlast Vista (1, Interesting)

richardkelleher (1184251) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823695)

Any bets on if XP will still be available from Dell by then?

Re:My guess, XP will outlast Vista (1)

Brain Damaged Bogan (1006835) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824265)

no, it won't be. MS no longer support XP, so Dell would only be digging themselves a hole if they kept selling unsupported software.

that said, XP will always be available via bittorrent ;)

Re:My guess, XP will outlast Vista (1)

richardkelleher (1184251) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824937)

I respectfully suggest that if tens of thousands of businesses continue to demand sales and support for XP, Microsoft will follow the path they have thus far and continue to sell and support XP.

My guess is: kickass malware (1)

Ingcuervo (1349561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823699)

Have you ever faced one deeply malware infected system? how long took it the get rid of it? well, I think MS figured that vista actually is a malware piece, and they are not optimistic to get rid of it!!

Two-Way Street (1)

ChinggisK (1133009) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823819)

plans to keep selling it to computer makers, system builders, volume licensees and consumers at retail until at least January 2011

Of course, for them to keep selling it, requires that people actually buy it in the first place.

Order it?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27823821)

Who actually ORDERS a copy of Windows (any version) from Microsoft anyway? It comes pre-installed (like it or not) 99.99% of the time. Just about all of the "sales" of Windows comes from forced pre-install.

Re:Order it?? (1)

Randle_Revar (229304) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824561)

I don't know about "from MS", but anyone that builds their own computer and wants a legal Windows OS buys it from somewhere, rather than getting it pre-installed.

I may end up buying a copy of 7, for dual boot or a VM. I don't trust the pirated versions at all.

2012 (5, Funny)

Jamamala (983884) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823847)

He also said that support for all versions of Vista will end in April 2012

End of the world prophecies in 2012 - coincidence? I think not.
Obviously Microsoft will only stop pushing Vista at the behest of the four horsemen.

FACT: Vista is fucking shit! MS doesnt care (-1, Troll)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27823867)

File I/O in vista Sp1 is as fucking horrible as it was with the release version of vista.

I cant stand the fucking dumb fucking search bar any more. Why do i have to click to "show advanced features"? Why does it take 2 FUCKING CLIKCS TO DO IT?

WHY DOES AN OS have to be written for fucking morons? Why cant the advanced features be displayed by DE-FUCKING-FAULT?!?!?!

WHY do i have to CONSTANTLY wrestle with the OS's fucking brilliant choice of folder view modes?! ITS ALWAYS FUCKING WRONG.

Microsoft makes SHIT. Its fucking time they stop making crayola fucking operating systems because i cant stand it. XP is 50x faster than VISTA!!!! ... AND ITS STILL FUCKING poorly designed.

Why the hell cant you get it right microsoft? WHY?

Re:FACT: Vista is fucking shit! MS doesnt care (2, Insightful)

FishWithAHammer (957772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824001)

WHY DOES AN OS have to be written for fucking morons? Why cant the advanced features be displayed by DE-FUCKING-FAULT?!?!?!

Because those are the overwhelming majority of the people who use computers. This is not a hard concept.

Its fucking time they stop making crayola fucking operating systems because i cant stand it

Clearly, Slashdot users are Microsoft's target market. Really. No, really. It isn't the legions of people who buy the first Dell they see.

See, it's so clear. It's obvious that they should change what works so successfully just because Jackie_Chan_Fan on Slashdot doesn't like it.

Re:FACT: Vista is fucking shit! MS doesnt care (-1, Troll)

Grem135 (1440305) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824163)

Why are YOU such a fucking moron?

Re:FACT: Vista is fucking shit! MS doesnt care (3, Funny)

ConceptJunkie (24823) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824341)

Why the hell cant you get it right microsoft? WHY?

Because obviously they hadn't had the luxury of your well-reasoned, thoroughly detailed, and above all, well-worded criticism. 'S obvious innit?

Re:FACT: Vista is fucking shit! MS doesnt care (0, Troll)

mindstormpt (728974) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824387)

WHY DOES AN OS have to be written for fucking morons? Why cant the advanced features be displayed by DE-FUCKING-FAULT?!?!?!

Just ask Apple, it's been working [gearlive.com] for them. Or GNOME [desktoplinux.com] .

/me ducks.

Re:FACT: Vista is fucking shit! MS doesnt care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824691)

Microsoft writes operating systems for fucking morons because they like to make money.

What is the windows market share of desktops right now?

That is why.

.DE recognize the pain in the ane that's Vista (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27823919)

The German pronunciation of this horrid MS Turdware rings true:

Microzoft 'Fister'

But what about their other great OS? (2, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824003)

I'm appalled Computerworld doesn't mention Microsoft's greatest success ever, Windows ME. Just how long was the extended support for that operating system? They talk about Windows 98 as being succeeded by XP - just as if ME never existed! ME's many, many fans will be outraged at such an omission, and suspect they would treat Vista, Microsoft's second-greatest success ever, the same way.

And how about extended support for Microsoft's third-greatest success ever, Microsoft Bob [today.com] ? I think we should be told.

It's about time to migrate (1)

Matey-O (518004) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824027)

Having had more than a good run with XP, our office is seriously considering a mass upgrade to 2008 server, Exchange 2010, and Windows 7. We saved quite a bit in migration and training costs by skipping major versions of Server, Mail, Office, and OS products.

Downgrade options (4, Funny)

Faustust (819471) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824029)

'Customers who purchase a PC with Windows 7 pre-installed will be allowed to downgrade to Vista," Francis said.' That's the hardest I've laughed in a while. Thanks Richard Francis!

Uhhh... so I buy Vista and ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824113)

Microsoft guarantees I get a completely useful product for at least 1.5 years. Wow. That's awful kind of them. Remind me again why I should ditch XP?

The Rovers should make it that long (1)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824143)

There were supposed to die before Vista came out,
but it sure looks like they will outlive Vista.

Ahh Vista. (1, Troll)

RichardJenkins (1362463) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824173)

Ahh Vista, you're the spiritual successor to ME.

Billy Goat (5, Funny)

CuteSteveJobs (1343851) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824177)

We should troll Microsoft by starting a 'Save Vista' campaign. Imagine the warm glow Steve and Bill would share on hearing it. It's almost too cruel. Almost.

Re:Billy Goat (5, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824613)

(You inspirational bastard. Credit on post.)

With the release of Windows 7 set for October 23rd, Microsoft marketing marketer Richard Francis says computer manufacturers may not be able to ship Vista once Windows 7 is available.

Outrage at the news was rapid. Microsoft quickly backtracked, claiming it would remain available until at least 2011 ("we kept 98 support up for 18 months when XP was out"), but customers were not mollified by promises that Windows 7 buyers would be allowed to downgrade ("we call it an upgrade”) to Vista.

A "Save Vista" [today.com] campaign has been organised by InfoWorld. "We detected a deep anxiety over Vista among technologists and consumers alike," said editor Galen Gruman. "We decided to do something about it, launching a petition drive to ask Microsoft to keep selling Vista after the planned October 23 end-of-sales date." The petition has already gathered over ten signatures (most recent signatories: L. Torvalds, S. Jobs, M. Shuttleworth).

"Just how long was extended support for Microsoft's greatest success ever, Windows ME? Microsoft talks about Windows 98 as being succeeded by XP — just as if ME never existed! ME's many, many fans will be outraged at such an omission, and we're afraid they'll treat Vista, Microsoft's second-greatest success ever, the same way.

"And how about extended support for Microsoft's third-greatest success ever, Microsoft Bob? By the wife of the founder, no less! I think we should be told."

-1 Troll (5, Insightful)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824329)

I'm certainly going against Slashdot groupthink here, so I'll undoubtedly be modded "-1 Troll", but Windows Vista is really not as bad as people think. The key thing to keep in mind is to make sure your system has enough resources to run it, because it is demanding. Don't try and put it on your P4 with only 512 MB RAM with integrated graphics. You'll regret it. I also wouldn't recommend upgrading to it from Windows XP -- it doesn't offer anything of significant value over XP that makes it worth rushing out to upgrade for. But if you're buying a new system, and it happens to have Vista AND at least 2 GB RAM with a decent graphics card, I wouldn't worry about it.

Re:-1 Troll (2, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824581)

So the real question is: Why in the world would I install it then? To deliberately waste resources?
I can do that better with CompizFusion, and still have left over enough for a couple of needless gcc and java processes, or XP in a VM. ^^
(In fact I have that setup right now. And the only thing that feels a bit sluggish is the VM, which is kinda what I expected.)

Re:-1 Troll (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824977)

hmm, let's see... it's 64-bit with actual driver support for most hardware you are likely to use. this allows you to install several gigs of ram, which is quite cheap these days and you can NEVER have too much ram. any new hardware is more likely to have a vista driver than an xp driver. vista also installs drivers in parallel rather than sequentially, so you dont have to wait 5 fucking hours for your keyboard to be detected when you boot up with a bunch of new hardware. it looks better and it actually uses your gpu to draw windows. it has the start-menu search box, which is fucking AWESOME once you get used to it. you press LWin and type in what you want to run and press enter really fast, and it fucking runs.

i mean really, i don't love vista and I tried to hold off and just use xp like the rest of you. i thought i would hate vista. But when I finally built a decent PC and actually tried vista on it, i realized that a lot of the *dumb shit* that xp does (or doesn't) do is fixed in vista. the little things go a long way. when i go back and try to use xp these days, i miss a lot of this stuff.

and you may ask why i don't run linux as my primary OS. I do run linux sometimes. But most of the time I just want all of my shit to work properly without having to consult any documentation, wikis, or forums. i want that flash video to play the way it's supposed to. i want that game to run properly at full frame rate in crossfire mode. i want that random usb device to do everything it was designed to do instead of working maybe 50% with some wonky half-finished driver that needs to be hand-compiled into the kernel. i run linux on my eeepc because it happens to support all of its hardware, and it fits the usage pattern of that computer (email, web browsing, etc.). i run vista on my workstation desktop pc because it's the best for the task. it can do anything, including games and heavy graphics stuff, and i dont care much about the wasted resources because i have more than enough to go around.

Re:-1 Troll (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824643)

"ONLY" 512 MB? Unless your computer is new, that's actually quite a lot. My desktop, for example, is 256 MB.

Re:-1 Troll (1)

WebmasterNeal (1163683) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824657)

Some of my favorite things about Vista are the updates to the file explorer such as the ability to click on the folder crumbs and jump around folders. Another nice feature is the file view slider which you can make small to large thumbnails in increments. I also like when you click to rename a file, it only selects the file name and not the extension. These little things make me appreciate Vista and I always miss them when using XP.

Re:-1 Troll (1)

Bellegante (1519683) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824665)

Sorry about the troll mod, reflex.

Re:-1 Troll (1)

DougReed (102865) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824697)

It is not that Vista is 'That Bad'. If it came on your computer, and it works swell for you. Don't mess with it. Out of everyone I know there are a few people like you, but with Vista it is like winning the lottery. I know one who's sound card uninstalls itself weekly, and one who every few weeks turns it on to the 'Welcome to Vista' initial setup screen. All settings gone. I have (had) one than hung on shutdown 90% of the time... I upgraded it to XP. Now it's faster and more stable. When the general public is actually considering upgrading ... It's pretty much a disaster.

Re:-1 Troll (1)

ceswiedler (165311) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824735)

Absolutely. I was very hesitant to install Vista but once I did, I loved it, at least once I switched it back to using the Windows Classic theme (which I also used in XP). It has a few useful improvements, but by far the best is that it's 64-bit which means I can install (and use) as much RAM as I can fit in my machine, and it still runs 32-bit apps just fine. I'm sure there's a lot of hardware which doesn't have good 64-bit drivers, but I haven't run into any problems myself yet.

Re:-1 Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824919)

But that IS bad by itself. It's wasteful for what it provides. Needing >2GB of RAM to run some intensive games, huge number crunching, etc.? Sure. To run the OS? That's absurd. Ubuntu'll run in 384MB of RAM just fine (and that's with openoffice, firefox, etc., not just a bare desktop). Windows 7 is apparently useable with 512MB (although is official minimum.) If I order a 2GB system I want it to fly, not be just enough to run my OS decently.

Re:-1 Troll (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824965)

But if you're buying a new system, and it happens to have Vista AND at least 2 GB RAM with a decent graphics card, I wouldn't worry about it.

The quad core CPU, 6-8 GB RAM and 64 Bit Vista is mainstream at WalMart.

4 GB of DDR2 Kingston Value RAM is $50 almost anywhere you look. Gog.com has Vista ready versions of classic PC games available for download at $6 and $10.

The hardware requirements and software incompatibilities that look so forbidding at launch of a new Windows OS - fade away into insignificance a year or so later.

"few people will be likely to order it" (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824359)

IMO that all depends what downgrade rights 7 comes with.

If OEM vista buisness comes with downgrade rights to XP and OEM 7 buisness doesn't ( afaict both XP pro and vista buisness came with downgrade rights for one version back only ) then I can imagine there being quite a few orders.

Plain Stupid (1)

kentsin (225902) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824417)

Keep Win98 if you want variety.

Open it if you want to kept vista.

Save your face by let it go. Not sticking it on your nose.

Ah, Vista (5, Funny)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824493)

Unmourned. Unwept. Perpetually left unloved because your ugly older sister XP always came across with the full release and a happy ending while you were still whining that you wanted another 2G of RAM to show the boy how pretty you were.

I'm sorry I could never be the user you wanted, Vista. I tried. I really, really tried. I even had Millennium on my system for a while, so I know I'm not a completely unreasonable task manager. You wanted too much from me. You wanted to be my Trophy OS...pretty...never doing a real job...pretty...profligate with my hard-earned RAM...pretty. It wasn't enough. I'm so very, very sorry. Your sister XP gave me that dirty smile, and threw my RAM back in my face and performed like a trapeze artist. I was lost, dear Vista. She did everything I wanted, and she never said no, and she just kept going and going and going.

I don't care too much that you're prettier...much prettier. In fact, I'll never tell her, but sometimes when she's happily multi-tasking away, I close my eyes and pretend she's you.

But there's something about her that makes her a magnet. Something you'll never understand. Even when she's making my old CPUnit, do things I thought it could never, ever manage, she doesn't just swallow. She gargles.

Re:Ah, Vista (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27824791)

you could, of course, use the windows classic theme (ie, turn off aero), and the computer will run fine on 1gb of ram.

but, i know, groupthink is so much easier.

Re:Ah, Vista (1)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824867)

Or I could continue on XP, which doesn't even need half that amount of RAM...or just go straight to Win7 and an OS that blows the doors off Vista. Or did that solution elude your keen perception, you dipshit AC fanboi?

Win 3.11 (2, Informative)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824529)

I recall being able to buy win 3.11 (or at least it was available, new, on the shelf at gamestop) when win98 was out. No reason to kill the product if customers are willing to pay for it (XP SP3 excluded of course). Somebody has to help make the Vista sales figures look better and not immediately axing it will do that.

Buying a new computer? (2, Interesting)

MikeUW (999162) | more than 5 years ago | (#27824749)

I've been considering buying a new computer lately. But now that I hear Win7 is coming in about 6 months or so, that pretty much ensures I won't be buying anything with Vista on it.

I don't really care to use windows myself, but it's handy to have some exposure to whatever OS the majority of people use. If I'm going to pay the windows tax, I'd like to try to get something that has a better chance at success, and is more likely to get long term support.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>