When will MS axe XP support?
-
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
