When will MS axe XP support?
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
XP Mode is one of the most pointless features of Weven. I haven't run into anything yet that requires me to use XP Mode.
Maybe you don't have any hanging around but support for 16 bit programs is probably the main consideration.
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes -
It is because it evolves over a period of time. When something has evolved, and is very stable, MS comes out with another version which isn't as good.
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
MS comes out with another version which isn't as good
Windows 7 is at least as good as XP!
-
512MB of RAM just to run operating system (for win7) compared to 32MB of RAM to run XP is just terrible. How could one operating system still be operating system, since it uses so much memory? Even with better PC, win7/vista do much more work, than normal OS must normally does. Now we are all starting to give tip and trick for their optimization. Anyway win98 was not stable, but XP is.
IlluminateBG wrote:
512MB of RAM just to run operating system (for win7) compared to 32MB of RAM to run XP
Where did you get those figures from? I started with 128MB on XP and had to upgrade to 256MB and then to 512MB to make the machine responsive while developing.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Well if I wanted security I would be using Linux
Linux (the kernel) is pretty secure these days, but you usually want more than the kernel and that's when the problems start. A typical Linux desktop distro is no more secure than Windows.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
A typical Linux desktop distro is no more secure than Windows.
Yes it is! What hacker / virus writer would target an O/S run by less than 10% of users when you could target an O/S used by more than 90% of users.:)
-
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
MS comes out with another version which isn't as good
Windows 7 is at least as good as XP!
I agree. I like 7 very much as well. But my reply was to defend the whole of the mass who hated Vista in specific (which includes me). :)
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
Todd Smith wrote:
patches for security related issues
If one has a firewall on their router, and uses Mozilla instead of Outlook and IE, I doubt an average person should be concerned about security patches.
@dmitri_sps http://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/[^] I'd actually regard IE 8 in secure mode as one of the safest browsers around. Simply because MSFT have had more time to practice being secure after taking hits for so long. :P Safari auto loads and runs .dmg files.. FF has had 2 critical vulns this month alone. :P <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">dmitri_sps wrote:</div>I doubt an average person should be concerned about security patches</blockquote> Ya know that really big worm everyones going on about? Conficker? That worm that has the pentagon worried because of the sheer amount of computers that it has under it's control? Yea, the security patch for that was released before the bug came out. :P Several months before actually. MSFT is really good like that, they release patches very often, and release emergency patches for critical vulnerabilites. It's Apple that says 'we'll get around to doing it later'. (.dmg vuln is found in Safari, Apple says they will be releasing a patch a month later) Lesson to learn here, apart from how I dislike Apple :P, patch your computers. Run a firewall for sure, but make sure your programs, OS, etc are fully up to date. No offence, but you're an idiot if you think you can get by without patching. Back to original post, MSFT will axe support as soon as they can direct businesses onto 7. :P I personally prefer Vista over XP. I'm running Win XP Pro, upgraded to Vista Ultimate and everything ran better. Better being an understatement.. Speed improved, everything ran smoother, I had better compatibility with devices.. And it looks cooler. XP is just blocky. Unfortunately, Vista didn't like my activation number and, after several hours on the phone with MSFT and emailing the supplier, I'm back on XP. But even with that issue, I still rate Vista as higher quality than XP. Customer support is pathetic but the OS is good. :P Vista is also much more secure, if only because of XP's age. Quite a few new attack vectors have been found since XP was released, and while it's an extremely stable OS, it's getting a bit frayed round the edges. And the more people using XP = the less people using 7, which means less revenue, and the more security issues MSFT has. At least if they officially axe support then people can't blame them for downloading a virus. At a guess, I'd say it will be 6 months or
-
IlluminateBG wrote:
512MB of RAM just to run operating system (for win7) compared to 32MB of RAM to run XP
Where did you get those figures from? I started with 128MB on XP and had to upgrade to 256MB and then to 512MB to make the machine responsive while developing.
It is the minimum. If you have 16MB of RAM you cannot install XP. If you have for example 384MB of RAM you cannot install win7. (unless special patch/edition). That is required by the kernel and main system processes and the computer will be responsive if you do not execute any programs. Obliviously you need some more RAM to run programs normally. I wonder when will microsoft realize that for good OS most things must be in user environment, not in system environment. That's why their new OSes so heavy.
-
XP Mode is one of the most pointless features of Weven. I haven't run into anything yet that requires me to use XP Mode.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Let me introduce you to the safest kernel on earth:
void main()
{
printf("Hello World!");
return 0;
};)
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
This machine will never run. Error on line 4: void function returning a value. ;P
printf("Error: No keyboard found!"); printf("Press any key to continue");
-
Do you think nerds around the world will riot when this happens? Will the entire interwebs come crumbling down in defiance or will XP just go softly into the night? Weven takes more resources than XP to run correct? I can't imagine all those grandmas are going to upgrade their computers still running XP just because Gates and Seinfeld come back with another horrible commercial.
Todd Smith
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
A typical Linux desktop distro is no more secure than Windows.
Yes it is! What hacker / virus writer would target an O/S run by less than 10% of users when you could target an O/S used by more than 90% of users.:)
Steve Thresher wrote:
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: A typical Linux desktop distro is no more secure than Windows. Yes it is! What hacker / virus writer would target an O/S run by less than 10% of users when you could target an O/S used by more than 90% of users.
Any hacker sick and darn tired of listening to Linux weenies who decides to poke a hole in their who-wants-to-waste-time-on-me balloon. Note me :D I'm too busy writing software on the Dark Lord's system.
-
This machine will never run. Error on line 4: void function returning a value. ;P
printf("Error: No keyboard found!"); printf("Press any key to continue");
:-D !
You can't turn lead into gold, unless you've built yourself a nuclear plant.
-
Do you think nerds around the world will riot when this happens? Will the entire interwebs come crumbling down in defiance or will XP just go softly into the night? Weven takes more resources than XP to run correct? I can't imagine all those grandmas are going to upgrade their computers still running XP just because Gates and Seinfeld come back with another horrible commercial.
Todd Smith
Actually I am one of those crazy folks who keep installation media and for some OSs even running machines around just for the fun of it. And - I never really had a strong need for MS support. Their operating systems just work. As long as there were security fixes - fine. When they stopped providing them the hacker crowd wasn't interested any more in hacking the specific OS. So - who cares. I support Windows NT 3.1, 3.5, 4.0, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows 2003, Windows whatever (the oldest one I still have somewhere on floppy in my basement is Windows 2 - maybe I can even find a copy of Windows 1) I am not using most of them actively but I like to keep them. Old fashioned - European.
modified on Monday, August 3, 2009 5:14 PM
