• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Should Windows XP still be supported by most hardware and software manufacturers

Should WIndows XP still be supported by hardware and software makers?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Definitely Yes: Windows XP is still great and just as good if not better than Windows Vista and 7

  • NO WAY: Windows XP is ancient and slightly over 10 years old and needs to die already

  • Depends on the circumstance

  • Yes: For all but games so that way games can be made DX10/11 only

Results are only viewable after voting.
W

Wolverine607

Member
Now that Windows XP appears to have only have a little more than 2 years of support left from Microsoft for extended support being that it ends sometime in April 2014, it is time to ask this question. Should it still be supported in general by the majority of hardware and software makers meaning should they still ensure that their hardware and software is compatible with Windows XP. Or should most ditch XP support and make their stuff for only Windows Vista and Windows 7 by now for desktop computers when it comes to Microsoft Operating Systems?


Now here is my opinion. I think Windows XP 32-bit and 64-bit was a very good Operating System and still is to this day, although it is not as good as Windows Vista and especially not as good as Windows 7.

So having said that, I think Windows XP in general should be supported for a while longer with one obvious and notable exception IMHO. That would be for high end games so all high end games can be made for DirectX 10 and 11 only (since XP has no way of running DX 10 or DX 11) for superior graphics quality and performance. Other than that, I would say XP should be supported for the most part for at least another 2-3 years by most hardware and software makers with the exception of games or maybe other high end video editing software that somehow can take great advantage of DX 10 and DX 11.


What do you think of this. Please answer the poll
 
Last edited:
Didn't find a poll. I think you have the premise backwards. It's up to XP to adapt to hardware, not hardware to XP. XP will run on any hardware that runs Vista or 7, especially x86.

OK - found the poll and voted. 🙂
 
Last edited:
corkyg said:
Didn't find a poll. I think you have the premise backwards. It's up to XP to adapt to hardware, not hardware to XP. XP will run on any hardware that runs Vista or 7, especially x86.
Click to expand...

There is a poll now. It has you make the poll after you post it. ANd I agree with you about XP and hardware. I think XP should still be supported on all hardware for a while and all software except games for a while. I just think high end games should go for Vista and 7 only so they can be DX 10 and DX11 only for the best realism and experience. If only XP supported DX 10 and 11 which unfortunately it does not, thus why eveyrthing should support XP except for future releases of high end games for the PC.
 
Last edited:
There are at least 20 million pentium 4 type systems that would just run very slowly on win7, but run acceptably well on XP. These systems are mainly used by old folks to play pogo and watch youtube. There is no reason for them to upgrade aside from planned obsolescence and money-grubbing. What they really need is an ssd cache, which sadly is not available on XP...😱 I just cant figure out the mindset of companies like Nvelo (makers of Dataplex). I would buy 30 of them right now if they made it available for XP.
 
sm625 said:
There are at least 20 million pentium 4 type systems that would just run very slowly on win7, but run acceptably well on XP. These systems are mainly used by old folks to play pogo and watch youtube. There is no reason for them to upgrade aside from planned obsolescence and money-grubbing. What they really need is an ssd cache, which sadly is not available on XP...😱 I just cant figure out the mindset of companies like Nvelo (makers of Dataplex). I would buy 30 of them right now if they made it available for XP.
Click to expand...

why not just move them to lubuntu + chromium....?
 
N4g4rok said:
That would be a nightmare for corporate upgrade cycles.

and on that note, lets just be glad that banking systems, for example, weren't forced to run on Vista.
Click to expand...

Exactly not to mention organizations like school districts. We have 35,000 workstations all currently running XP. We are finally going to move to Windows 7 sometime this year but that is an expensive transition requiring a lot of back end changes and software updates for critical systems before it takes place and all of this has to be done with budgets that have been extremely tight for the past 4 years. it is a lot different than me moving my home workstations over to whatever Microsoft's latest OS is.
 
What puzzles me is when people buy windows 7 workstations and downgrade them to XP just because XP has been working for them just fine and they don't see a reason to use W7. One of the hardest parts was already done, the machines were already running windows 7, and now all you've done is create more work for yourself 2 years from now because "XP was working just fine". Not to mention that XP is old and tired and it's starting to lose software and driver support. It had a great run, but it's time to move on.
 
Last edited:
gmaster456 said:
One of the hardest parts was already done
Click to expand...

Well, not necessarily. Servers have to be reconfigured or reinstalled to accommodate new features and networking protocols. Although i'm not to sure of the specifics, the upgrade on our local campus required that all server 2003 OS's be upgraded to 2008.

User profiles are light-years different from XP to Win7, along with permissions, imaging, the list goes on. Basically, the notion of plug and play is non-existent when accommodating the Windows NT platform.
 
N4g4rok said:
Well, not necessarily. Servers have to be reconfigured or reinstalled to accommodate new features and networking protocols. Although i'm not to sure of the specifics, the upgrade on our local campus required that all server 2003 OS's be upgraded to 2008.

User profiles are light-years different from XP to Win7, along with permissions, imaging, the list goes on. Basically, the notion of plug and play is non-existent when accommodating the Windows NT platform.
Click to expand...
You make a point. I forgot to consider that. It probably helped us that we got 2008 r2 during the jump to W7.
 
gmaster456 said:
What puzzles me is when people buy windows 7 workstations and downgrade them to XP just because XP has been working for them just fine and they don't see a reason to use W7. One of the hardest parts was already done, the machines were already running windows 7, and now all you've done is create more work for yourself 2 years from now because "XP was working just fine". Not to mention that XP is old and tired and it's starting to lose software and driver support. It had a great run, but it's time to move on.
Click to expand...
It's called, freedom of choice. If somebody insists on using XP. Let it happen 🙂
 
gmaster456 said:
What puzzles me is when people buy windows 7 workstations and downgrade them to XP just because XP has been working for them just fine and they don't see a reason to use W7. One of the hardest parts was already done, the machines were already running windows 7, and now all you've done is create more work for yourself 2 years from now because "XP was working just fine". Not to mention that XP is old and tired and it's starting to lose software and driver support. It had a great run, but it's time to move on.
Click to expand...

Magic Carpet said:
It's called, freedom of choice. If somebody insists on using XP. Let it happen 🙂
Click to expand...

I doubt it has anything to do with freedom choice and a lot to do with not wanting to pay the code monkeys extra to port over and bug fix XP apps to Windows 7. In other words the mentality is "If it ain't broken, why fix it?"
 
DucatiMonster696 said:
I doubt it has anything to do with freedom choice and a lot to do with not wanting to pay the code monkeys extra to port over and bug fix XP apps to Windows 7. In other words the mentality is "If it ain't broken, why fix it?"
Click to expand...
Now... what's wrong with the "don't fix what ain't broken" mentality, lol?

Computer is a tool, just like anything else. If people don't want to have "the latest", "the greatest" and "the most secure" as long as it does the job, then so be it ;-p
 
Last edited:
Magic Carpet said:
Now... what's wrong with the "don't fix what ain't broken" mentality, lol?

Computer is a tool, just like anything else. If people don't want to have "the latest", "the greatest" and "the most secure" as long as it does the job, then so be it ;-p
Click to expand...

I wasn't casting any judgement on the point itself.
 
7 > XP > Vista.

I've upgraded some pretty old systems to 7 from XP and in just about every case they ran better with 7. The only problems I've seen are drivers for older/arcane hardware, not OS performance itself.

XP was a great OS for its time, and its great that its still working for people, but from this point forward, its time to move forward. (Well, at least forward with Windows 7. Fisher Price Edition 8 is another matter.)

I don't blame hardware makers for not supporting XP unless their books tell them a significant number of sales are from XP users to make it worthwhile.
 
gmaster456 said:
What puzzles me is when people buy windows 7 workstations and downgrade them to XP just because XP has been working for them just fine and they don't see a reason to use W7. One of the hardest parts was already done, the machines were already running windows 7, and now all you've done is create more work for yourself 2 years from now because "XP was working just fine". Not to mention that XP is old and tired and it's starting to lose software and driver support. It had a great run, but it's time to move on.
Click to expand...

A lot of businesses are doing that, and I think the 'techies' are just afraid of the can of worms they'll open trying to get Win7 workstations working on their domain. Tip: Read up about 'v2' profiles before attempting 🙂

With XP having about 2 years patch support left, it seems stupid not to bite the bullet sooner, rather than wait for a newly-released OS and the problems that can come with that.
 
N4g4rok said:
That would be a nightmare for corporate upgrade cycles.

and on that note, lets just be glad that banking systems, for example, weren't forced to run on Vista.
Click to expand...

It already is a nightmare, but mostly because those corporations have stuck with XP for so long. And why would I care if banking systems ran on Vista? It's more secure than XP.

Linflas said:
Exactly not to mention organizations like school districts. We have 35,000 workstations all currently running XP. We are finally going to move to Windows 7 sometime this year but that is an expensive transition requiring a lot of back end changes and software updates for critical systems before it takes place and all of this has to be done with budgets that have been extremely tight for the past 4 years. it is a lot different than me moving my home workstations over to whatever Microsoft's latest OS is.
Click to expand...

Yes, but you've had at least a decade to prepare for the transition so IMO there is no excuse for still being on XP at this point.

N4g4rok said:
Well, not necessarily. Servers have to be reconfigured or reinstalled to accommodate new features and networking protocols. Although i'm not to sure of the specifics, the upgrade on our local campus required that all server 2003 OS's be upgraded to 2008.

User profiles are light-years different from XP to Win7, along with permissions, imaging, the list goes on. Basically, the notion of plug and play is non-existent when accommodating the Windows NT platform.
Click to expand...

No servers have to be upgraded for clients to run Win7, they'll join a Win2K3 level domain without issue and you can mix Win2K3 and Win2K8 servers and even DCs without issue.

The profiles are in a different location, but from a non-technical user's perspective the changes are very minor.

Magic Carpet said:
It's called, freedom of choice. If somebody insists on using XP. Let it happen
Click to expand...

Which is fine until they expect someone to support them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top