One Foot In The Grave For XP: No More Preloads

[ViRGE]

Apparently this came and went without much bluster, but it turns out that last Friday (the 22nd) was the last day OEMs could preload new copies of XP on to devices. Starting this week, XP can only be installed as a Vista/7 downgrade. Or in other words, XP can effectively no longer be sold to consumers, as downgrades are primarily for business users.😀

Now if we can just get the other foot in the grave and cremate the corpse before it comes back from the dead...

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Rant away but, XP will never be dead until businesses stop using it.

 

[erikistired]

this is the 8th foot it's had in the grave. unfortunately businesses will keep it dragging along until microsoft stops updating it, and even for awhile after that i'm sure. hell, there are still dos boxes around, so there's that.

 

[Nothinman]

Rant away but, XP will never be dead until businesses stop using it.

Yep, stupid people rule the world.

We just had a hospital buy a bunch of new machines through us which all came with Win7 and we have to go back and put XP on them all. Luckily, I'll personally probably never have to deal with them directly but I still consider what we did for/to them a disservice.

 

[Genx87]

It is had two feet in the grave since Vista was launched. Win7 just filled in the grave to its neck. I hate WinXP and cant wait to replace it with Win7 here.

 

[Fardringle]

For anyone in a business environment, this is bad news. Downgrading to Vista or Windows 7 is prohibitively expensive in a large company, and paying support staff to handle the constant questions and complaints from average users about how it is "different" and they can't find things that they used to do easily will cost even more than the new software.

In spite of what some people say, XP is in fact a very stable and secure environment for the vast majority of people, and there is a LOT of business software that simply will not run in Vista or Windows 7 (even in compatibility mode) because of the way those operating systems handle file and application access. So now we have the cost of OS upgrades, the cost to support a new OS, and the cost of finding a completely new business software package as well as the cost to train and support users on that package.

Using XP is NOT because of company stupidity. Companies use it because they know that it works and it would cost far too much to change everything.

 

[lxskllr]

Using XP is NOT because of company stupidity. Companies use it because they know that it works and it would cost far too much to change everything.

XP is inherently insecure. Companies not wanting to change due to cost is BS. Unless they intend on folding sometime in the near future, they WILL be changing O/Ss. Instead of being myopic, and focusing on stock values for this quarter, they need to take a long view and use technology that's appropriate for today.

 

[RebateMonger]

Yikes. It look like Dell is, indeed, no longer offering preloaded XP Professional business desktops (with licenses for Win7 Professional included). That's going to add a couple of thousand dollars to the cost of a new computer for business folks running older versions of AutoCAD (which don't support Vista/Win7).

 

[Fardringle]

Instead of being myopic, and focusing on stock values for this quarter, they need to take a long view and use technology that's appropriate for today.

You say that companies should sacrifice profits for a quarter in order to upgrade the OS on all of their machines as well as all of the software that they use to run their business, and to train users and support staff for the new systems. Let's say for the sake of argument that you are right and a quarter of massive profit loss is worth the change. At what point is it not worth the cost? Say for example that it would cost 5 years or more worth of profits to make the change. Is it still worthwhile then? Some companies really would have to spend many years worth of future profits just to make a change that they neither want or need and that, according to you, would be outdated and have to be replaced again by the time it is paid for. RebateMonger gave an example of just one application (AutoCAD) that shows how my example is not an exaggeration, and that's just one program out of many that would have to be completely replaced on every workstation in order to make an OS upgrade possible.

To put it another way, let's say that you have a car that is 10 years old. It still runs perfectly well, has no mechanical, physical, or interior problems. Everything does what you need it to do both safely and efficiently. Do you really need to upgrade that vehicle just because the auto manufacturer says that you do? Sure, you might want a new "shiny", but what if you can't afford it? Now if that car no longer performs the way that you need it to, then a replacement is in order, but that is NOT the case with XP in a business environment. For many business, XP still is that car that works perfectly for everything that they need and there is absolutely no reason to upgrade (and plenty of reasons not to).

 

[lxskllr]

To put it another way, let's say that you have a car that is 10 years old. It still runs perfectly well, has no mechanical, physical, or interior problems. Everything does what you need it to do both safely and efficiently. Do you really need to upgrade that vehicle just because the auto manufacturer says that you do? Sure, you might want a new "shiny", but what if you can't afford it? Now if that car no longer performs the way that you need it to, then a replacement is in order, but that is NOT the case with XP in a business environment. For many business, XP still is that car that works perfectly for everything that they need and there is absolutely no reason to upgrade (and plenty of reasons not to).

If that car frequently got stolen, and sometimes used to run over pedestrians due to intrinsic flaws, then yes, it should be changed. How much money gets spent on malware mitigation that a newer Windows would have prevented? How many hours are lost due to the use of archaic software that doesn't have modern features. How much old tech gets purchased which is already obsolete just due to the fact that's all that'll run on the existing systems? The money breakdown isn't clearcut, but the fact that businesses WILL have to change is.

 

[bruceb]

I for one, will not upgrade. My current set of apps runs just fine on XP. And as pointed out, some apps are very costly to update, like Quickbooks or Autocad. Why should I spend money to change something that is still doing what I need it to do ? Same as my car, it is a 1999 and still ok for me. Now if it was falling apart or all banged up, it might get replaced.

 

[Lemon law]

As a home computer user of windows XP with full install licenses, its beyond me why I should rush out to shower microsoft with my money every time they diddly darn well feel like coming up with a new OS. Especially when every new microsoft OS becomes ever more bloated than its predecesor and offers me nothing in terms of must have new features.

The only feature I now like about windows 7 is better security, but I have already learned how to lock down XP computers with third party freeware and tweaks which has a knock on wood track record of keeping my XP computer and my wife's XP computers free of malware ever since win XP came out.

Sadly I have not had as much luck with my computer hardware which is why a full package is almost required. To retain the ability to transfer the license from a dead computer to a newer one. And if I buy a win 7 license now times three computers, oh goodie, in another two years microsoft will want me to buy their next upgrade. Its a very good way for microsoft to future proof their profits at my expense.

Sorry Bill Gates, I still don't have my money's worth from Win XP yet. And I hope someone will honestly or dishonestly take windows XP, and modernize it, and that I would pay for. Sadly Linux will not run windows software, but when and if some Linux like OS becomes available that does run windows software, microsoft will instantly go to the top of my never buy list.

 

[Nothinman]

For anyone in a business environment, this is bad news. Downgrading to Vista or Windows 7 is prohibitively expensive in a large company, and paying support staff to handle the constant questions and complaints from average users about how it is "different" and they can't find things that they used to do easily will cost even more than the new software.

In spite of what some people say, XP is in fact a very stable and secure environment for the vast majority of people, and there is a LOT of business software that simply will not run in Vista or Windows 7 (even in compatibility mode) because of the way those operating systems handle file and application access. So now we have the cost of OS upgrades, the cost to support a new OS, and the cost of finding a completely new business software package as well as the cost to train and support users on that package.

Using XP is NOT because of company stupidity. Companies use it because they know that it works and it would cost far too much to change everything.

This the kind of fear mongering and misinformation that's at the core of the problem. XP can be stable, but it's in no way secure compared to Win7 or really any other OS out there. And that will become more apparent shortly after MS kills security support and a dozen exploits get released. Of course most people won't see that unless they specifically become a victim.

Using software that's EOL and won't be supported is indeed stupid, just like not renewing your SmartNet on your Cisco devices and your hardware support for your servers. The minute you have a problem you're on your own and will be paying through the nose for someone smarter than you to bail you out.

I for one, will not upgrade. My current set of apps runs just fine on XP. And as pointed out, some apps are very costly to update, like Quickbooks or Autocad. Why should I spend money to change something that is still doing what I need it to do ? Same as my car, it is a 1999 and still ok for me. Now if it was falling apart or all banged up, it might get replaced.

I've considered XP in the falling apart and banged up category for at least 2-3 years now.

As a home computer user of windows XP with full install licenses, its beyond me why I should rush out to shower microsoft with my money every time they diddly darn well feel like coming up with a new OS. Especially when every new microsoft OS becomes ever more bloated than its predecesor and offers me nothing in terms of must have new features.

The new start menu and task bar alone are worth it to me. Of course I didn't actually pay for it, I only use it at work.

And I hope someone will honestly or dishonestly take windows XP, and modernize it, and that I would pay for.

Even if it happened, it'll never be legal in the US and probably Europe. Your best bet is ReactOS and that's probably decades away from being generally usable.

Sadly Linux will not run windows software, but when and if some Linux like OS becomes available that does run windows software, microsoft will instantly go to the top of my never buy list.

Actually it does and has for years via WINE. It's just picky about what software it actually runs. And there's really no point since most of the free Linux alternatives are better than the commercial crap out for Windows.

 

[RebateMonger]

RebateMonger gave an example of just one application (AutoCAD) that shows how my example is not an exaggeration, and that's just one program out of many that would have to be completely replaced on every workstation in order to make an OS upgrade possible.

I recently built a Win7 PC for a friend who's been using a Dell 400 SC as a desktop for six years now. The Dell has been working perfectly, but I'm running low on replacement Dell motherboards, so we figured it's time to replace it before we have a serious hardware failure.

This person is a financial analyst and has been happily running XP Professional for years with zero problems. She's never had a malware infection and her PC happily runs dozens of simultaneous documents with dual 24-inch monitors with instantaneous response.

Upgrading to Win7 Professional turned out to be a bit pricey from a software replacement standpoint. Her versions of Quickbooks, Quicken, and Adobe Acrobat Professional all had to be replaced at a total cost of several hundred dollars. There was nothing functionally wrong with her current software, so it was sorta' a waste.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

As a home computer user of windows XP with full install licenses, its beyond me why I should rush out to shower microsoft with my money every time they diddly darn well feel like coming up with a new OS. Especially when every new microsoft OS becomes ever more bloated than its predecesor and offers me nothing in terms of must have new features.

The only feature I now like about windows 7 is better security, but I have already learned how to lock down XP computers with third party freeware and tweaks which has a knock on wood track record of keeping my XP computer and my wife's XP computers free of malware ever since win XP came out.

Sadly I have not had as much luck with my computer hardware which is why a full package is almost required. To retain the ability to transfer the license from a dead computer to a newer one. And if I buy a win 7 license now times three computers, oh goodie, in another two years microsoft will want me to buy their next upgrade. Its a very good way for microsoft to future proof their profits at my expense.

Sorry Bill Gates, I still don't have my money's worth from Win XP yet. And I hope someone will honestly or dishonestly take windows XP, and modernize it, and that I would pay for. Sadly Linux will not run windows software, but when and if some Linux like OS becomes available that does run windows software, microsoft will instantly go to the top of my never buy list.

Do you ever plan on running a SSD? How about 4+gb of ram? Those two things alone justify moving to 7 64bit.

For the record I realize that XP x64 is out there but it has limited support and still doesn't have TRIM.

 

[Mem]

Sooner XP goes the better IMHO,it was a decent OS in its time but has been superseded by superior operating systems ie Win7 etc...not to mention its biggest weakness security holes that a lot of XP users forget about.

Its a shame that business users are always last ones to change and adopt to newer better operating system,lets be honest here XP is about 10 years old and you have to let it go sooner or later ,Microsoft can help a lot by dropping support etc for XP.

Some argue its not broke so why fix it,bottom line its dated ,full of security of holes and not really good enough for the modern times.

As a customer I would rather trust/prefer a business company using Win7 or Linux etc.. then XP that has more holes then you'll find in space.Good business company should be able to adapt to modern times,XP frankly is not.

 

[RebateMonger]

The reality is that small businesses, at least, aren't going to abandon XP any time soon. The bulk of small businesses stopped buying new computers and new servers four years ago, and I see no sign that's going to change anytime soon. The bulk of small businesses are still downsizing and have no interest in new computers. They have plenty of leftovers from laid-off employees.

Take a look at posts in the AnandTech technical forums in 2006 and compare them with more recent years. In 2006, there were almost daily questions about buying new servers for small businesses. Count how many comparable posts were made in 2008 or 2009. There differences are astounding.

Here's a count of ALL posts in the AnandTech Forums with the words "new" and "server" in the titles:
2009 - 18
2008 - 22
2007 - 27
2006 - 30
2005 - 45

 

[Nothinman]

The reality is that small businesses, at least, aren't going to abandon XP any time soon. The bulk of small businesses stopped buying new computers and new servers four years ago, and I see no sign that's going to change anytime soon. The bulk of small businesses are still downsizing and have no interest in new computers. They have plenty of leftovers from laid-off employees.

Take a look at posts in the AnandTech technical forums in 2006 and compare them with more recent years. In 2006, there were almost daily questions about buying new servers for small businesses. Count how many comparable posts were made in 2008 or 2009. There differences are astounding.

Those are also the businesses with the most to lose from a break-in. One innocent mistake on a bad website from an employee and they could lose their ass.

 

[Genx87]

I recently built a Win7 PC for a friend who's been using a Dell 400 SC as a desktop for six years now. The Dell has been working perfectly, but I'm running low on replacement Dell motherboards, so we figured it's time to replace it before we have a serious hardware failure.

This person is a financial analyst and has been happily running XP Professional for years with zero problems. She's never had a malware infection and her PC happily runs dozens of simultaneous documents with dual 24-inch monitors with instantaneous response.

Upgrading to Win7 Professional turned out to be a bit pricey from a software replacement standpoint. Her versions of Quickbooks, Quicken, and Adobe Acrobat Professional all had to be replaced at a total cost of several hundred dollars. There was nothing functionally wrong with her current software, so it was sorta' a waste.

Which versions of the software was she running? Running Acrobat 7 on this Win7 as I type.

 

[RebateMonger]

Which versions of the software was she running? Running Acrobat 7 on this Win7 as I type.

She was probably running Acrobat 7, but she doesn't know where she got it from. Her last disks were from Acrobat 6. She, like most small business folks, don't upgrade software unless absolutely necessary.

 

[Lemon law]

Puddle Jumper asserts, "Do you ever plan on running a SSD? How about 4+gb of ram? Those two things alone justify moving to 7 64bit."

I have considered a SSD but not 4 GB's of ram. In terms of a trim command, new SSD controllers may obsolete the need for a trim command.

But we have to ask other question, why can't microsoft modernize XP to have a trim command and better security? Meanwhile, I need a brand new clean install of win7 and can't take my old programs with me.

What is this microsoft arrogance to start out with almost a total clean piece of paper approach? If my old hardware is not supported at the expense of providers of printers, scanners, motherboard makers, and that a tiny list of old hardware, well I have to buy new hardware. All to keep us on the microsoft upgrade path which inconviences everyone in the world and benefits only microsoft.


When and if I am forced to change my OS, I very much doubt it will be a microsoft product.

 

[ViRGE]

But we have to ask other question, why can't microsoft modernize XP to have a trim command and better security?

They did. That's Windows 7. All the modernizations people want are the things that break software, which is why they won't upgrade in the first place.

 

[bruceb]

Can 32 bit applications install on a 64 bit OS ? ?

If they do, would they run in normal mode or do they need to go under XP Mode ? ?

Would things like Printers or Scanners work in both or would they need to be installed in 32 & 64 bit modes ? ?

 

[lxskllr]

Can 32 bit applications install on a 64 bit OS ? ?

Yes. If there's limitations it's generally due to the O/S. If it won't run in Win7-64, it isn't likely to run in Win7-32

If they do, would they run in normal mode or do they need to go under XP Mode ? ?

Natively

Would things like Printers or Scanners work in both or would they need to be installed in 32 & 64 bit modes ? ?

Drivers have to have the correct bitness. Drivers have to have the same bitness as your O/S whichever that is.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Puddle Jumper asserts, "Do you ever plan on running a SSD? How about 4+gb of ram? Those two things alone justify moving to 7 64bit."

I have considered a SSD but not 4 GB's of ram. In terms of a trim command, new SSD controllers may obsolete the need for a trim command.

But we have to ask other question, why can't microsoft modernize XP to have a trim command and better security? Meanwhile, I need a brand new clean install of win7 and can't take my old programs with me.

What is this microsoft arrogance to start out with almost a total clean piece of paper approach? If my old hardware is not supported at the expense of providers of printers, scanners, motherboard makers, and that a tiny list of old hardware, well I have to buy new hardware. All to keep us on the microsoft upgrade path which inconviences everyone in the world and benefits only microsoft.


When and if I am forced to change my OS, I very much doubt it will be a microsoft product.

TRIM isn't irrelevant yet and most people would rather use modern software than expect new hardware to be designed with an ancient os in mind.

Windows 7 is anything but a clean slate, you would likely be shocked at the amount of legacy code that lives on from older versions of Windows.

You need to keep in mind that for every person who hates MS for killing XP their is another that would hate them for keeping it. I know that if I hadn't had the option to upgrade from XP to Vista and later 7 I would have switched to Linux a long time ago.