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!

Vista is Slower, But XP Is Still Dying

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the ugly-truth dept.

Microsoft 573

An anonymous reader writes "Though the Redmond software giant may be extending the lifetime of XP on low-end laptops, the end is nigh for the aging OS. That extension makes perfect sense, as recent studies have shown XP is far faster than Vista across a number of platforms. Still, Microsoft is 'sticking to its guns' when it comes to drop-dates for most other uses of the XP operating system. 'There are several dates that apply, but the one you're probably thinking of is the June 30 deadline that Dix referred to. That's the last day when large computer makers -- the Dells, HPs and Lenovos of the world -- will be allowed to preinstall Windows XP on new PCs. It also marks the official end of XP as a retail product.'"

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

Vista is dying you say? (4, Informative)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975840)

You have to follow a few links [] in the first link to get to this fine article where they explain that in 2007, XP's share went up in the enterprise. Since we know the end is nigh for Vista as well there seems little motivation to feel this pain.

That's telling, isn't it? And that's actually from Forrester, whose bias is legendary in favor of Redmond.

I should think some Vista evangelists aren't getting their bonuses this year.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (5, Insightful)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975874)

For now it's up to the users to decide if and when XP "dies". There are two ways I can think of for Microsoft to kill XP: (1) They could develop and release a useable next-generation OS(which remains to be seen) or (2) Putting on the tinfoil hat, I guess Microsoft could "accidentally" leak hitherto-unknown XP vulnerabilities so that XP will be so exploitable and unpatchable that it will eventually be unuseable...but that scenario is unlikely given Microsoft's support lifecycle policy [] . I doubt that they could handle lack of innovation and 1 or 2 more crappy OS releases before *NIX and Apple eat MS' marketshare. Also, MS' foray into the services market may go bust and after that, supporting their legacy software may be one of the few things that will earn them money.

Next generation OS. (5, Funny)

gnutoo (1154137) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975974)

You might have heard of this little thing called GNU/Linux that's been able to do everything XP and Vista can but with far fewer resources. No? Oh well, run your 7 year old OS and wait for Windows 7. The 7 to 7, or 7up should match the Coke classic upgrade very well, complete with a corn syrup obesity epidemic. Where did you want to go yesterday?

Re:Next generation OS. (3, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976018)

Really? How do I run Office 2007 and VS 2008 under Linux? What about current and next gen games? How do I get those to work?

That was easy (4, Funny)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976082)

How do I run Office 2007 and VS 2008 under Linux?

In a VM or better yet in a Citrix session, silly. That's not a good excuse to run Windows as your base OS.

What about current and next gen games? How do I get those to work?

This wikipedia link [] should help.

No charge. If you need anything else I'll be here all day.

Re:That was easy (2, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976096)

Running them under a VM or under Citrix is still running them under windows. I was told I could do it all under Linux. And I don't do console games. You don't have an answer.

What you're saying is... (0, Troll)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976168)

"LALALALALA I can't hear you!"

Not real persuasive. Not going to work any more.

Re:What you're saying is... (4, Insightful)

abigor (540274) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976230)

How does he run them under Linux, as you suggested? Citrix or a VM STILL USE WINDOWS. The point is to NOT USE WINDOWS, remember?

Re:What you're saying is... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976256)

He does have a point. If using your software on Linux means you need to run Windows in a VM, then that isn't dropping the Microsoft OS altogether, is it?

Until you can come up with a solution other than "Stop using proprietary software" or "VM Windows", it isn't going to work out.

Re:What you're saying is... (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976306)

on the other hand vming windows gets arround the problem of hardware support for old versions of windows nicely. Afaict the likes of vmware support any version of windows down to 95 and probablly earlier.

Re:That was easy (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976182)

A lot of Windows-only programs run fine under wine - including such core products as Internet Explorer 7.

Other products have free equivalents that can do the job for most people - OpenOffice, etc.

Re:That was easy (4, Insightful)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976212)

The answer is patience. Suck it up, there is always an awkward, uncomfortable, inconvenient, transition times between OS's. Applications that you would like to use are unavailable because the companies don't want to invest additional resources (although in an major OS swap there are lots of applications that need to get replaced).

So in the big swap from M$ to Linux there are going to be a lot of delays and a lot of hassles. People will just stretch out the old stale piss (and yo will it get stale) for as long as they can, as they stop investing (throwing away) money into windows.

So basically you stop buying or upgrading applications unless they are Linux variants and you get used to dual booting, windows the toy OS for play and Linux for work and the web. M$ with their consistent lies and customers abuse have forced the situation, Linux didn't create the alternate OS market M$ did.

For the PC games companies, Linux will be a huge bonus, as all the old windows boxen die, all those games will have to be replaced, all the way back to win98, literally a market of hundreds of millions of games.

Re:That was easy (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976254)

So what you're saying is, "I'm an inflexible monkey who has committed all my mental capacity to memorizing how to use a few specific products and is incapable of switching to similar products with comparable functionality, because they aren't the *exact* products I already know how to use."

You're welcome to spend the rest of your life paying Microsoft's ignorance tax.

Re:That was easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976368)

Now we know where the auctioned UID went to, Microsoft.

great answer (5, Interesting)

sentientbrendan (316150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976196)

>>What about current and next gen games?
>>How do I get those to work?
>This wikipedia link [link to playstation 3] should help.

So your answer on how to get PC games to work on Linux, is to not play PC games? I'm just *not allowed* to play starcraft II when it comes out?

Many people own PC's specifically for playing games, and don't do much else with them. Is your solution for them, that they don't need a computer at all? Or maybe they should put Linux on their computer, and then throw it in the closet and never look at it again?

Blind evangelism isn't helping Linux... it turns people off when they are given bad advice by people with an agenda.

Re:great answer (1)

menkhaura (103150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976356)

So your answer on how to get PC games to work on Linux, is to not play PC games? I'm just *not allowed* to play starcraft II when it comes out?

Bohooo! Bitch to Blizzard, they are the ones who didn't port their games to non-windows OSs. I know, I've bitched to death to Atari and Bioware for a Linux-based NWN 2 client. iD Software, on the other hand, know their stuff, and know their market; Quake 4 and Doom 3 absolutely and natively rock on Linux. Linux-based OSs have proved time and again that they are very worthy gaming platforms

Many people own PC's specifically for playing games, and don't do much else with them. Is your solution for them, that they don't need a computer at all? Or maybe they should put Linux on their computer, and then throw it in the closet and never look at it again?

"Many people own PS2s specifically for playing games, and don't do much else with them. is your solution for them, that they don't need a PS2 at all?"

If they want to play games and almost nothing else, yes, they may keep their XP PCs or switch to a platform explicitly dedicated to gaming, such as PS3 or Wii, or the latest XBox. Besides, they say that keeping a console is waay cheaper than a gaming PC, even more so if you keep in mind that a console is good for at the very least 3 years.

Re:Next generation OS. (1, Interesting)

cloakable (885764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976086)

You contact the developers and ask them to stop coding like retarded crack monkeys. Then perhaps their code will be portable.

Re:Next generation OS. (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976184)

Actually, here at microsoft HQ, we've replaced all the Windows developers with "retarded crack monkeys", as you put it. It really saves on development costs. The only drawback is getting the verious drugs (crack, LSD, meth, etc) that the monkeys are on. The reason for this is simple. Have you ever heard of a normal monky creating an operating system? It's ludicrous! Unless, of course, the monkeys are as high as a kite!

The drawbacks are, well, install Vista and you'll see for yourself. The upsides are more coffee and donuts, and Lord Balmer leaves the chairs alone.

As for other "crack monkey" developers out there, we license our drugged monkeys to other companies, so everyone can enjoy the benefits of using lower primates to do all their programming work for them!

Re:Next generation OS. (2, Informative)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976136)

You mean office 2007 doesn't run under WINE? Well, it will eventually, though why you'd freakin want to use it over 2003 is beyond me. As for Visual Studio, if you're developing for Linux (MS truly ending XP sales will be enough to push me and other IT managers to start using Linux on all machines that don't *need* Windows-only apps - for general office uses Linux is fine, though as Autodesk don't do any CAD apps on linux then I'd have a real job switching over our engineering dept..) then why would you need visual studio anyway..? Current games tend to work okay on WINE, and as for next gen games.. well, consoles are getting pretty darn similar to PCs these days, so for people like me, I'm happy to game on my PS3. I'm hoping that GTA IV and other new games involving shooting support mouselooking - then I really wouldn't miss PC gaming at all, since the latest generation of consoles can also download extra content and updates just as PCs can. I know that the graphics capabilities of current PCs probably already outstrip a PS3 (though the CPUs definitely don't yet), though they also cost about twice as much - and now it looks like gamers will have to put up with Vista on their shiny new machines. Do you actually like Vista? You are happy with your OS needing 10GB HD space and 2GBs of RAM just to run the display manager properly? Yuck..

Re:Next generation OS. (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976142)

How do I run Office 2007 and VS 2008 under Linux?
I'd suggest Crossover or WINE. which reminds me, why can't Windows run Compiz or Konqueror or any of the other programs available for years on *nix systems?

What about current and next gen games? How do I get those to work?
talk to the gaming companies, only very recently did they bother issuing patches or creating ports for Mac let alone anything else. Right now most new games are coded specifically for Windows making use of APIs that are either not documented at all or documented very poorly making porting these games difficult or even impossible by third parties.

Re:Next generation OS. (2, Interesting)

abigor (540274) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976250)

Windows can run Konqueror. KDE on Windows is in its early stages now, but by 4.1, the apps will run just fine.

Re:Next generation OS. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976156)

This is so cool, you've just given me an insight into the difference between
Linux users and Windows users:

Linux users care about data formats. They want open standard data formats
so they can run their *choice* of software that understands the data formats.

That's why you find a bazillion text editors for example for editing code,
or why there are so many multimedia apps under Linux (vlc, mplayer, xine, kaffeine,
totem just to name a few) --- they all understand and speak the same open standards formats.

Windows users: They want what they think is "ease of use". So they spend $$$$$$$ on
proprietary software that does a "task" "easily", but uses a funky proprietary format
that only *that* particular proprietary software understands. Consequently,
the windows users are stuck on Windows because that's the only platform that
runs their proprietary software.

No wonder so few windows users migrate to Linux --- it's going to take a lot of pain
of using windows (windows activation, windows genuine advantage, windows spyware,
windows viruses, etc.) before a windows user ditches windows and moves over to
either Linux or OS X, or one of the BSDs. Now it makes sense to me whenever
I see such a story about some windows user moving over expressing "frustration"
as the reason for the move. The stories didn't say they moved because Linux
made them happier (although in most stories they were surprised to find out, that
they were indeed happier after the learning curve), they moved because windows
made their pain grow worse. It wasn't that Linux was "too hard" (after all they
did make the transition), or that Linux was so much "easier" (in *my* opinion it's
easier, but that is after all just *my* opinion), it was that giving up on windows
meant losing so much proprietary data that there had to be a compelling reason to
abandon windows (i.e. frustration with windows)

Linux users on the other hand can use (and lots do) use OS X, because that OS
also speaks to open stardards formats and can run whatever applications on OS X\
that understand the open standards formats. It's no wonder then why it's relatively
painless to go from Linux -> OS X, or the other way OS X -> Linux if all you're doing
is moving data encoded using open standads formats.

--Johnny is grateful for the epiphany.

Re:Next generation OS. (2, Interesting)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976354)

It is not just data in propietry formats you lose it is also experiance. A different application may have similar functionality but will often do things very differently. The same goes for configuring the os to be the way you like (BTW does anyone know how to make the taskbar on gnome have more than one row and stop it folding together windows from the same program when it gets moderately crowded)

Worse things vary a lot between linux distros, the configuration tools provided are often completely different.

The config files are a bit more consistant but even there sometimes things differ and then there is this whole network manager shit which seems to run roughshod over the conventional configuation options (including the ones in the menus on my debian systemt that had it installed by default) making it almost impossible to fix my network configuration.

Re:Next generation OS. (1)

Hemogoblin (982564) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976242)

You could play Savage2 [] , a "next gen" game released by an independent developer. It has a native linux binary. /end shameless plug

Re:Next generation OS. (2, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976304)

Depends on the game.

If you mean all current and next gen games, you'd better have a few consoles, too.

If you just mean enough, there are quite a few games with Linux ports (more than you'd think), and more run under Wine. I honestly don't have time to play all the games that I could play on Linux. I will confess I dual-boot, though -- to XP.

The answer to Office and VS is to run alternatives -- in particular, if you have to run VS at all, chances are you're not developing anything that would run on Linux anyway.

Personally, I'm much more willing to put up with the pain of getting games to work on Linux, then getting everything else to work on Vista -- or simply working with Vista at all. Right now, I'd sooner give up games than boot Vista.

Re:Next generation OS. (1)

fluffman86 (1006119) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976362)

The key is that you can DO every THING in Linux that you can do in Windows. People say "But I can't play Halo 18, or run Office 2020, or Photoshop CS 12!" Yes, this is true, but you CAN play FPS (and other) games, and you CAN edit photos, and you can read and write office documents.

It may be different, but I still have yet to find something that photoshop or msoffice can do that can't be accomplished with GIMP or OOo. Especially with GIMP of the big ones being CMYK support which is available with []

Re:Next generation OS. (1)

SleepyHappyDoc (813919) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976290)

Linux had been out for years when XP came out. You fail.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (3, Funny)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975904)

You can have my copy of XP when you pry it from my cold dead hands. As long as there are people out there using hardware that won't run Vista (ie anybody not working on the Human Genome Project or running a cluster) there will be people working on and patching XP.

I'm running the triple-crown right now (XP, OSX, and Ubuntu) in my graphics lab. For a laugh I put a Vista machine in. The students refused to use it and I ended up giving it to one of our faculty. The render stats for Maya and Studio Max are well in XP's favor.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22975960)

"I'm running the triple-crown right now (XP, OSX, and Ubuntu)"

Larry, Curly and Moe?

Re:Vista is dying you say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976030)

You're running Ubuntu on other machines, and you gave away a perfectly good machine with Vista on it that you could've wiped and put linux on instead? Why do I find that difficult to believe?

Re:Vista is dying you say? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976160)

Well, there are always idiots about who want the latest stuff, and it sounds like he has plenty of other machines in his lab. Not very unbelievable to me..

Re:Vista is dying you say? (1)

Taelron (1046946) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975926)

And marks the end of Microsofts dominance on the desktop...

Re:Vista is dying you say? (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975986)

"enterprise" customers buy volume licenses with generous downgrade rights anyway so they really aren't affected much by this end of availibility.

Still I bet there will be a BIG surge in PC sales come may/june as home/small buisness uses rush out to get XP while they cab.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976190)

Yep.. we have volume licenses for Windows Server and Exchange, but I think we'll have to get some for all our workstations as well if MS manage to pull this off.. I told people that there's no way in hell anyone's getting a Vista machine until MS sort it out, and it's largely worked out so far (one of the MDs bought a Vista machine, and one of our salespeople wangled one from my assistant because he needed a decent machine for presentations and the XPSs only came with Vista - the latitudes were having weird issues when you hooked them up to projectors.. :/ )

Re:Vista is dying you say? (4, Insightful)

LineGrunt (133002) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975996)

There is a significant difference between "dying" and "being killed."

As in "the death was ruled a suicide after the victim died from three self-inflicted gunshots to the head."

Re:Vista is dying you say? (1)

KiwiRed (598427) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976068)

I was going to make that point myself; nice to see someone else saw the obvious.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (2, Informative)

westlake (615356) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976180)

You have to follow a few links in the first link to get to this fine article where they explain that in 2007, XP's share went up in the enterprise.

There are stats that show a very different picture: Top Operating System Share Trend for May, 2007 to March, 2008 []

Win XP 74% Down From 83%
Vista 14% Up From 4%

It's interesting that the testers chose to compare a system running Ultimate with 1 GB RAM with an unknown version of XP.

If I were using Ultimate on the enterprise desktop, I would want it with full disk encryption enabled, TPM enabled. Performance on the lab bench would not be my prime concern.

The integrated Intel graphics chip is going to cut deeply into that 1 GB of RAM available to Vista.

Interesting as well that the testers didn't seem to grasp the differences in the way Vista manages applications and resources. Programs running under Vista should become more responsive the more you use them.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (4, Insightful)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976302)

Interesting as well that the testers didn't seem to grasp the differences in the way Vista manages applications and resources. Programs running under Vista should become more responsive the more you use them.

Not on the eee [] they don't. Nor under any of the 50 low cost MIDs and mini notebook pc's [] coming out in the next few months. For the two pound laptop with six hours of battery life Vista is dead on arrival.

Vista 14% Up From 4%

Lies, damn lies and statistics. All the way up at 14% after a year and a half with under a year to go before the next version is out [] ? That means it's going to peak at something under 30%. Sure, they sold lots of licenses nobody is using. They made Billions doing that. I hope that's not the kind of trick you can get people to fall for over and over. I wish I knew it for sure.

Re:Vista is dying you say? (4, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976312)

Now, that looks like Vista is catching on. But let's take a deeper look at those figures.

10% plus in one year. Now, how often does the average computer user change his hardware? Every 3-5 years. So, assuming that he also gets a new system when he gets a new machine (which is the norm for those buying computers preassembled rather than building them on their own), this should be reflected by at the very least 20% increase in Vista userbase, because 1/5 of the people should have replaced their machines (assuming a 5 year cycle).

Essentially, what this 10% increase means is, that about half of the people who got new hardware also got Vista to it, and nobody switched "mid-life" for their hardware.

Personally, I'm not impressed.

Has NetCraft confirmed (1, Funny)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975888)

...that XP thinks it is BSD?

Re:Has NetCraft confirmed (4, Funny)

Winckle (870180) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975902)

No, XP is a zombie.

Lovecraft confirms it.

Re:Has NetCraft confirmed (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976322)

Be honest, how long did you wait for the moment that this joke finally fits?

Re:Has NetCraft confirmed (1)

Winckle (870180) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976380)

It really did just come to me now :)

I was playing a lot of Eternal Darkness on gamecube though ;)

Re:Has NetCraft confirmed (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975916)

...that XP thinks it is BSD?
I think XP has all the right to think it's the Bull Shit Distro.

Re:Has NetCraft confirmed (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975990)

That's BSOD to you.

two words (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22975896)

Windows Classic... they'll hire some marketing guy from Coca Cola to run the campaign. "You told us this was the software you grew up on...."

Re:two words (1)

NJRoadfan (1254248) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976134)

...complete with Program Manager and File Manager. can't have Windows Classic without the complete interface experience. ;)

Defective By Design. (1, Troll)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975898)

XP Death Warrant Translation

Does Windows XP Professional get the same extension? No. The business version of XP, which includes remote access tools, significantly beefed-up network support and much more sophisticated file and folder access controls than the home edition does, still goes away on the dates Microsoft has already set for ending sales.

Mobile PC network access will be crippled, only sync of files will be allowed and you will have to treat it like a big PDA. We already know the EEE PC comes with "Works" instead of office. The difference, it seems, is not a matter of storage space or processing power, it's a matter of defective by design.

This is supposed to compete with free software which has all of that and more? What kind of vendor is "clammoring" for software that intentionally cripples their hardware and what kind of customer is going to buy it?

Re:Defective By Design. (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976012)

most companies big enough to care about the differences between home and pro on such a machine are big enough to have volume license deals that come with generous downgrade rights.

as for bundling of works that is common across PCs of all sizes. Office is just too expensive for most manufacturers to bundle it by default.

Office is free to bundle (2, Informative)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976378)

Oh wait, sorry, my misunderstanding [] .

Re:Defective By Design. (3, Insightful)

neokushan (932374) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976032)

Last I checked, it was competing with free software remarkably well. In fact, it owns something like 70-90% of the market [] , depending on which market you look at.
Surely someone as open-minded, intelligent and non-biased such as yourself must stand back and admit that it must be doing SOMETHING right in order to maintain that lead, as well as for so many people to kick up a fuss now that it looks like it's going to be killed off.
Surely, I mean surely in the near-25-years that Microsoft has been developing windows, they hit the nail on the head and released a genuinely good Operating System at least once! Surely!
Or maybe not. Maybe nearly 90% of the users out there are all idiots or forced to use it because Microsoft has a proverbial gun stuck to their head. Those same users are also being forced to cry out loud "please no, please don't kill off XP! Please!". Or maybe it's just you.

Just a thought.

Re:Defective By Design. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976104)

Love the sig. Nothing says "please ignore me" like that dollar sign.

Activation? (3, Interesting)

ThatDamnMurphyGuy (109869) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975900)

The real test will be what happens when XP is officially dead. No sales. No support. What will happen with activation?

Re:Activation? (1)

earnest murderer (888716) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975932)

Ideally when MS really drops support a crack/patch will become readily available that MS won't bother to patch away.

Re:Activation? (1)

earnest murderer (888716) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975956)

Scratch that, Ideally MS would just remove WGA in an End of Life patch for XP.

Fat chance. 10 years from now we'd still see "Windows XP Compatable" stickers.

Re:Activation? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976220)

Ideally when MS really drops support a crack/patch will become readily available that MS won't bother to patch away.

*cough* reset5.exe *cough*

Or just wipe it down and install a real operating system ... the one that Microsoft is so afraid of that it will continue to offer xp on the cheap at the bottom end.

Re:Activation? (1)

Stonent1 (594886) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975978)

I had to reload XP on a system the other day and had the issue of having to call in the activation because it wouldn't activate over the internet. I had to explain that yes this install was not being installed on more than one PC etc and finally they gave me the unlock code. So what happens in the future? Who knows!

Re:Activation? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976056)

I've had to reactivate my legal copy of Windows XP so many times that I finally gave up and downloaded a pirate version...I expect many people will do the same...I purchased a copy of XP, I think it's reasonable that I should be able to replace my hard drive without having to contact Microsoft and convince them that I'm not stealing their product...If you treat your customers like thieves they just might meet your expectations...

Re:Activation? (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975980)

Hmm, better get your cracked copy on The Pirate Bay now.

Re:Activation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976124)

Hmm, better get your cracked copy on The Pirate Bay now.

That's fine. I have some linux distributions/live cds already downloaded and ready to go. :P

If more distributions are released/updated between now and when my XP gets fucked over with the activation crap after june 30th, I'll grab them as well.

If Microsoft decides that I'm suddenly no longer allowed to use the software I paid for, I'll start using a real OS. I won't keep clinging to a company that will almost assuredly do the exact same thing a few years further down the road when they release whatever new thing they've half-baked.

Re:Activation? (1)

leenks (906881) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976076)

Thats a long time off. Windows2000 is supported until 2010. XP is likely support for another couple of years beyond that. Plenty of time for everyone to move to Ubuntu or OSX! :-)

That could get MS into legal hot water (2, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976258)

People who cannot activate a product in 2020 or 2030 may have grounds to sue Microsoft for violating their perpetual "license."

Microsoft will have several choices:
* offer a full refund/buyback
* maintain some way to activate the product
* issue a patch so activation is not required
* get Congress to exempt them and others who use this technology from fair-trade and contract laws

In the interests of avoiding negative publicity, MS will probably keep their activation lines open for as long as they can without spending a lot of money, then issue a patch.

BT (0)

JackSpratts (660957) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975946)

users will continue installing xp until they feel something better has come along, regardless of redmond's plans. it will be as it has been, just a simple bt click away.

Re:BT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976100)

Only a fool would get Windows from a public warez BT tracker.

Enjoy your complimentary rootkit.

Re:BT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976144)

You have no idea how the scene works.

Someone buy microsoft (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22975964)

I don't know about you all, but I'm ready for someone to buy Microsoft and turn it around.

In other news... (5, Insightful)

Timmmm (636430) | more than 6 years ago | (#22975966)

MSDOS is even faster! Seriously you can't just say "Vista is slower so it must be worse". There are other factors to consider - functionality, aesthetics, hardware support, security, and so on.

Re:In other news... (4, Informative)

tftp (111690) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976034)

As it stands now, virtually none of ham radio applications run on Vista, and chances are slim that they will be updated. FlexRadio's PowerSDR, for example, works on Vista only if you have one of two supported $300 audio "cards" (external FireWire boxes, to be precise.) On XP it works with any audio card, even unsupported.

Re:In other news... (2, Insightful)

Necroman (61604) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976120)

But who's fault is that "hardware X" is not supported on Vista? OSes change over time and sometimes drivers need to be updated to support a new OS. I'd say the blame for incompatible hardware falls in the hands of both Microsoft and Hardware vendors. MS screwed up and didn't give people a backwards compatibility mode, as well, they didn't give hardware companies enough time/warning to fix the problems.

But at the same time, it's been over 1.5 years since software houses have known that the driver stack in Vista was changing. If they wanted to support their older hardware, they should have put out new drivers by now.

What's more (5, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976350)

It isn't as though MS changes driver requirements all that often. There has been a real long time between XP and Vista. MS isn't requiring people to release new drivers every 6 months, more like every 5-6 years. That isn't unreasonable. Have a look at how often nVidia has to change their Linux drivers and tell me who requires more.

Also, as you noted, it isn't as though there hasn't been some time. Vista has been on the open market for over a year now, and MS told their developers at Beta 2 that all the driver interfaces were stable. That's a lot of time to have developed a new driver. If you still haven't, well I have trouble feeling that it is MS's fault. If you can't learn the new (very well documented) interfaces in a year's time, well then there is something wrong on your end.

Computers change, that is simply a fact of life. If you can't deal with that, then you are in teh wrong business. You can't expect to release something and not have to change it for 30 years. Interfaces (serial, USB, firewire, etc) will change, buses (PCI, PCIe) will change. OSes will change. You are going to have to update to support those.

When Vista first came out, I told people to lay off the hardware companies. It takes time to build a stable driver on new architecture, especially the video card companies who had some really massive changes. Now, I don't defend the hardware companies at all. You've had a year, and just about everyone does have a stable, tested driver out. If you still can't, well that is your problem, not MS's.

Re:In other news... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976228)

They have been considered, and basically nothing is better but security. Security is important, but as you say, other things are too. Speed is one of the most important because your efficiency is reduced and stress muchly increased if your system is performing like.. well like Vista. Vista is slower, so yes it must have some seriously poor coding in there. I read here recently that KDE 4 has more flashy interface options than Vista, but consumes comparatively little resources. Haven't tried it out yet as I'm happy with OS X for the moment..

Re:In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976240)

Other factors? Like not functionality and hardware support ain't better for XP? As for aesthetics; it's like ones buttoms. Me for one don't like neither XP nor Vista. Security? XP is as secure as you'd want to have it - atleast in the corporate world. So there you have it -- four factors which is more or less irrelevant.


Amen: NT beats 2000 beats XP (1)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976318)

Date of test: Right after release of Windows 2000
Test: Windows 2000 vs. NT with latest service packs
Hardware: Current medium-end hardware
Test: Running "normal" business software published 1-3 years ago
NT "feels" faster.

Do the same with XP vs. 2000 or Vista vs. XP on the dates of their release.

It's only expected, for the very reasons you sited: The newer systems are simply doing more behind the scenes so foreground applications will get less use of the machine.

By the way, someone did a "real world" test of computers dating back to the '80s. They loaded up a typical office machine with typical office software current when the machine was released. All the machines "felt" about the same. The differences were in function not speed:
The newest machines and their software have networking, security features, full color, real-time spell check, disk-wide indexing, real-time spreadsheet recalculation, and a host of other features missing from the oldest models and present in reduced form in the middle-aged models.

Remember 1983? If you were lucky you had a color other than green. Your spreadsheet probably didn't recalculate in real time. Spell-check was run on demand and was probably an external application. WYSIWYG printing? Not for another 5 years on Intel. Networking? Maybe, but probably only for the LAN, no Internet. Full-disk indexing? Not in that decade. Antivirus software? Thankfully that wasn't a major worry but it soon would be.

Re:In other news... (2, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976342)

That's a given. But if you don't show the user where his performance goes, he gets a tad bit upset.

When you switched from Dos to 95, you saw the difference. Quite literally. When you went from 98 to 2k, you noticed it (in a LOT fewer BSODs). Since then, though, it has become rather hard to explain the decreased performance.

Re:In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976364)

There are other factors to consider - functionality, aesthetics, hardware support, security, and so on.

I think you forgot we are talking about Vista.

Let it die (2, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976002)

Good riddance. With a new LTS release of Ubuntu coming up in a scant few weeks and support for the entire Adobe creative suite in Wine, I don't see as there's much reason to bother with it.

Re:Let it die (1)

shar303 (944843) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976188)

You've touched on an issue that must be quite important for a lot of people; as someone who uses CS3 day in day out, the only barrier to taking the plunge into Linux is whether or not wine can effectively do the job of running it - is there anyone who can vouch for this kind of setup and its workability?

The other thing is that while my experience of virtualisation (in xp) has been pretty good, if you have to install xp into a virtual machine, then doesn't that kind of defeat the object of moving over to Linux in the first place? I'd still have to pay for an xp license at the end of the day.

I'm probably going to give it a try anyhow, but it would be good to know if anyone has any thoughts (or particularly useful links.)

Re:Let it die (1)

chmod a+x mojo (965286) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976274)

Not sure about CS3 compatibility, sheck the WINE app database.

that said though some of the newer wine builds you have a choice of bugs wacom pressure sensitivity BUT your background / forground colors are switched ( background on pen tip, foreground on eraser) OR you can switch the X recognition of your pentip and erasor BUT lose pressure sensitivity...

Re:Let it die (-1)

.Bruce Perens (150539) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976206)

Oh please, I tire of this ridiculous and I've already seen it several times for this article. Look, Linux is a damn fine OS. And it can be a reasonable substitute for Windows IF you qualify PC use as "web, email, word processing and music." I can make a really fucking long list of shit I can't do with Ubuntu that I can do with Windows. And don't give me that Wine emulation bullshit, because that isn't realistic.

- Play Call of Duty 4
- World of Warcraft. Using my 360 controller so that I relax my big fat ass with my feet up.
- use X-Fire to find all my gaming friends.
- Run my boyfriend/lifepartner's gradebook for school.
- use AutoGK to compress all my porno movies to share on shady websites.
- Play GameTap
- Run 3DMark benchmarks
- Get SLI to work
- Have up to date video drivers
- Get any of that shitty video software that came with my digital camera to run.
- Use NetFlix video on demand.
- Use SnapStream Beyond TV as either a client or server. MythTV?! Fucking PUH-LEEZE. I want to watch TV, not fuck around with confuration files all fucking day.
- Pretty much run any fucking piece of software that's been released in the past 10 years. Yeah yeah, I know there's always an open source Linux equivalent, but you know what? It's not as fucking good!! EVER!! My CD copying program works great, my DVD copying program works great, my fucking everything under windows works fucking great. If I have a problem with the Linux shitty rip-off, I can pray that maybe the three other mutherfuckers who are using it have the same problem and maybe it will be fixed in about 100 years.
- Same thing goes for hardware. IF it works, it'll be missing half the fucking features it has under Windows.

So, enough of this bullshit. People use Windows because they do things with their computers. Only slashdot fags "use" an operating system. People want to do things, and they do it with software, and that software is on Windows. So eat a turd instead of posting that OMG Linuxx rulx!! bullshit next time, k?

Re:Let it die (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976284)

You are wasting your time. These are people who have never worked in an actual enterprise-level company, who seemingly don't play games, who think OpenOffice is "good enough" and that's what companies "should" use, and on and on. They don't understand that the OS is fucking irrevelevant most of the time - what counts is the software it runs, pure and simple. And for a great deal of functionality, from games to enterprise software, the only game in town is Windows.

Irrelevant (0, Troll)

tnmc (446963) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976028)

Who cares when M$ stops selling XP, the only truly important date is when the last bugfix for XP is released.

Microsoft - Make Linux into Windows 7 (5, Interesting)

penginkun (585807) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976040)

This is going to sound crazy, but bear me out. So here's what Microsoft does. They take the OS and develop a Windows GUI for it. They pour a billion dollars or so into WINE development and research (while providing WINE's coders with full access to existing Windows APIs) and they bring WINE's performance and compatibility to dizzying heights. And then they sell it. Call it Windows, sell it as Windows and do what Apple's done with Darwin. Keep the proprietary stuff proprietary and the OSS stuff OSS. You'd wind up with a rock-solid OS, and your users could run their old software until their apps received an update to the new system. Eventually WINE would no longer be needed.

This all sounds a lot like Apple, MacOS X and Classic, doesn't it?

Anyway, there we go. I'm sure there are a thousand valid reasons why this couldn't/wouldn't work and naturally it will never happen. I understand that. I can dream though, can't I?

Re:Microsoft - Make Linux into Windows 7 (2, Informative)

eapache (1239018) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976112)

Honestly, I think that would work. There's a proverbial snowball's chance in hell that it could happen, and it would delay Windows 7 considerably, but in the long run it would work. Wine is already shipping with the default setting to use XP, and given the relative development rates, it's catching up at an alarming rate. My guess is that by the time Windows 7 rolls around, XP apps on wine will be near-perfect, and Vista apps will run with only a few problems. With theoretical access to the existing Windows code and support from Microsoft's deep pockets, Vista support could be done by 2009. But unfortunately, it will never happen.

Re:Microsoft - Make Linux into Windows 7 (1)

Lennie (16154) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976126)

That's a bit silly, Microsoft doesn't need to pour that much money in WINE, they can legally use there own dll's.

Re:Microsoft - Make Linux into Windows 7 (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976260)

Microsoft are just too proud. Plus, they have no clue when it comes to writing good solid efficient code.. the sooner they die the better. Sadly a lot of companies still think of Windows as the shizzle and are probably going to keep rolling with Vista and Windows 7 rather than doing the decent thing and developing for Linux. Seriously, if they're going to be developing for a new OS anyway, they should really take Linux into consideration too. My dream is that people at work would discover a Linux CAD application that they consider a worthy replacement for Autodesk Inventor..

Re:Microsoft - Make Linux into Windows 7 (2, Informative)

thtrgremlin (1158085) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976298)

I remember an article some time ago about Microsoft incorporating Gnu tools into windows. Since Windows7 is being rewritten from scratch and without any backwards compatibility (I am sure for the few "but I LIKE Vista" morons will be excited about), I believe it may already be in the works.

Ignoring the Microsoft PR BS for a moment, internal documents leaked from Microsoft (See Halloween Documents on wikipedia) say that Microsoft has been trying to play catchup with Linux since 1997!!! DirectX10, Great! DirectX10 > OpenGL, maybe... Compromising the functionality, security, privacy, and dignity of your entire system to realize those benefits, really just to play a few new games that suck so much they don't even ge the attention of the Wine Devs? Hellz to the Naw!!

Want to know why your crappy airport/wintel card that sucks under Windows doesn't work under Linux? Because real techs buy Linksys/Cisco products.

Why would anyone waste their time developing a driver for a products that anyone with half a brain or experience would tell you not to buy in the first place? 'Linux compatible' hardware works better under Windows too. A good lesson I learned before I made the switch.

Oh yeah, and as far as Microsoft supporting Wine (directly), ask Novell about Microsofts great third party software development support for their API.

XP won't die (3, Interesting)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976048)

That's the last day when large computer makers -- the Dells, HPs and Lenovos of the world -- will be allowed to preinstall Windows XP on new PCs. It also marks the official end of XP as a retail product.
I wouldn't bet against anyone who thinks torrents will be flooded with cracked XP copies when this happens. Windows XP is actually selling remarkably well now that people agree Vista isn't what it once promised. Now that Microsoft is cutting off the supply, people will see piracy as a more viable option and say that it's either that or OSX/Linux.

Re:XP won't die (0, Troll)

bob shade (1158621) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976300)

At what point does XP become abandonware and free to share your copy with others? []

Time for Linux? (1)

qmaqdk (522323) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976108)

Anyone else think that June 30 is an excellent chance to push Linux to the desktop?

Not the problem (4, Insightful)

Perseid (660451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976116)

The problem is not the increase in resource use. This is nothing new. Every release of Windows, most releases of OS X and even some new flavors of Linux have increased resource use because they do more. The big problem for Microsoft this go-'round is that Vista really doesn't give you enough reason to accept the increased resource use. XP is a perfectly fine OS and to get people to move away, especially if that move is to a resource hog, you really need to drop the hammer and give people a kick-ass must-have OS. MS clearly failed to do that in Vista and they're paying for it now.

Time for Damn Small Windows? (2, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976338)

Maybe it's time for Damn [] Small [] Windows [] .

History repeats itself... (4, Insightful)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976128)

Seriously, can we just stop doing this everytime there is a new release of windows? When XP was released it was "OH MY GOSH, NOBODY LIKES XP!!! WINDOWS2000 WILL BE AROUND FOREVER!!!!". Now we're doing it all over again with Vista. There isn't a pattern or ANYTHING. Like maybe large enterprises that move at a snail's pace tend to adopt one rev behind. []

Re:History repeats itself... (0, Troll)

Butisol (994224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976320)

Vista is the new Windows ME. It can't be compared to XP in the way you are attempting. Windows Vista really is a piece of crap, so stop trotting out the same old argument. It's boring.

Win2K still in use in small businesses (2, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976358)

Windows NT and 2000 and their server versions will still be around for many years to come. Unfortunately, it's not safe to put them on "the Internet" which is a shame, because they make darn good machines for certain applications.

I think the going rate for NT Server with 5 CALs is $30-$50 at computer fairs. It's been out of support for ages. If it were truly worthless it would be in the dollar pile.

Microsoft dictates what people get and that's that (1, Troll)

Locutus (9039) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976244)

not matter how bad it is or how many company's software won't work in it, Microsoft is the decider. They want you to use Vista and you will use Vista one way or another. SURPRISE!

BTW, because Microsoft has VERY lucrative contracts with PC OEMs, they have little to no choice in what PC operating system gets pre-loaded on the computers. If they were to stick Linux on any of those computers, some part of those deals would be rescinded and the OEM would lose money one way or another. It is what it is so if you play in the Windows game, you're stuck playing by their rules and Vista is what they want you to use.

this is the way it is and no dumb-ass petition to save XP is going to change that. The only way to change that is to do something which changes Microsofts control on the market and that means using someone elses operating system or at the very least, start moving off of all other Microsoft software on their operating system ASAP. IMO.


the real solution to this problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22976252)

if steve mcqueen was still alive he'd kick you in the balls for being such a dope.

Vista issues for gamers and laptops (4, Insightful)

sentientbrendan (316150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976314)

What I'd like to see is a more concerted effort to address the problems with Vista. Microsoft could make Vista as fast and usable as XP today if they would just get through their thick heads that some of the policies they came up with for vista are bone headed.


1. Drivers. There's no reason Vista can't be made compatible with XP's faster video drivers, except that Microsoft is being stubborn.

2. 64 bit support. Microsoft has willfully hamstrung Vista 64 by not providing compatibility with 32 bit drivers, and by making the Vista 64 driver model more restrictive than the Vista 32 bit. If you look at Apple's systems, they have a much better model where 32 bit drivers work *fine* on a 64 bit system. There's no reason your video card driver needs to be 64 bit anyway...

3. Background tasks. Here's a hint: Let us easily turn them the fuck off. There should be some kind of Windows performance control panel that provides a central place to switch off file indexing, and the endless other miscellaneous tasks that spin the drive on Vista *constantly*.

Until those issues are addressed, it's stupid to expect gamers who need good graphics drivers, and laptop users who can't have the spinning harddrive wearing down the battery constantly to take a second look at Vista.

I gave Vista a good 6 months, and really did appreciate things like not having to run as administrator constantly. I felt much more secure running with lower privileges user like I do on my Ubuntu and OSX installs. However, dispite the fact that I tweaked the hell out of my system (including turning off file indexing and switching off aero in favor of the win2k look), and the fact that my system *should* be ridiculously overpowered by looking at the hardware specs, the background services made my system run like a *dog*.

I've switched back to XP, and it is like night and day. Suddenly, my machine no longer locks up doing some stupid task in the background. Suddenly, the stutter is gone from my games. Suddenly, everything is snappier.

What's more, I now actually get to run with file indexing ON, by using the google desktop. This gives me all of the same search functionality as I got on vista, but with no noticeable performance overhead. Hell, I could probably start running as a non admin user on XP, now that applications have finally been forced to learn to live with reduced permissions for Vista compatibility...

not Dead (1)

DoomfrogBW (1010579) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976316)

XP can still be obtained on OEM PCs until 2016 if they have the licensing to do so. We were going to move to XPe for our POS systems instead of XP Pro, but we have been guaranteed until 2016 to be able to get XP Pro.

Vista is slow? This is news? (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976346)

I just started a new job. Well, a job I was at before, but I'm returning as a "new" employee.

    Part of the fun was, I needed a new workstation. My old machine had been absorbed back into the pool, and adopted by someone else.

    We headed down to CompUSA (yes, closed, and some reopened under TigerDirect). I found an AMD64 3800+ with 512Mb RAM. Since I intended to install Linux on it, that sounded great. We're still ordering more memory, it just hasn't arrived yet.

    This machine came with Vista Home on it. For giggles, I let it start up Vista. Shall I say "oh my god" slow. It felt like running Win95 on a 486/66. This nice fast machine was way underpowered. I spent some time looking it over, since my Linux disks were at home (first day, I didn't bring everything with me). 128Mb was shared with the video card, which left 384Mb available. It didn't use more than 344Mb, and wasn't using any swap. I tweaked a few things out, which made it run better, but it was still unbearably slow.

    This isn't just some crappy machine. It's brand new, out of the store, and onto my desk. I should rightly expect that it should just work, as any regular consumer would. Not that it will be so unbearably slow that I'll want to throw it away. If I knew I was staying with Vista, I would have refused it.

    I shrank the partition that it was running on, and installed Slamd64 in the newly empty space. I didn't even set up swap space, and now it absolutely flies. I haven't even begun any tuning. It's the stock kernel, with just about stock everything. Windows pop open. Everything moves like it's a nice fast machine. The only thing I've run into, which was a known problem, is that there is no flash plugin for the 64 bit Firefox. I installed the 32bit version of Firefox, and still, it runs great.

    This would have been a great machine to run XP on. I've done it before with similar machines, with great results. Well, great for Windows.

    At this company, things move around a lot, which is why I left Vista on there. At some point, someone else will probably want my machine, and I'll get another one. No problem, then using Vista will be their problem. Until then, I'll be happily running in Linux. :)

Who cares about what they say in the press? (3, Informative)

Mycroft_514 (701676) | more than 6 years ago | (#22976376)

What matters is what goes on in the trenches. When major corporations still prohibit the installation of Vista on any machine that connects to their network, Microsoft will continue to sell XP. My Corporation is Fortune 10 and we still prohibit Vista installs!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?