Save XP! - Page 10 - General-Homebuilt

Last message on previous page:
Like most people, I'll switch to Vista eventually, not because I want to, but eventually I'll have to. The fact of the matter is, there is STILL no compelling reason to switch. XP does everything I want, even on my 5 year old laptop, not to mention my 2 year old P-4, and my 1 year old core 2 duo systems. Perhaps I'll go with Vista on my new quad core build this summer, after SP1 comes out.

When XP came out, I continued to use 98 for about 2 years, while the bugs were worked out of XP. I'll end up doing the same with Vista, but only on new builds. Its simply not worth the added cost to upgrade my older systems, which run quite well with XP.

The one thing MS didnt do with Vista, is give me a reason to upgrade. DX-10 just does not do it, especially when there are STILL so few games that take full advantage of it, and even then, only bleeding edge systems can take advantage of the visuals. Add in the DRM issues with Vista, and the net gain is a negative incentive.

It seems to me, that MS produced a product without there being a NEED. All of the improvements (and there are some improvements) could easily have been incorporated into XP, without the massive costs put into Vista.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to Mojoejojo

Register or log in to remove.

Once again the Vista fan boys come in justifying why they dont mind shelling out the cash for a new OP whenever M$ decides. I dont believe a Vista group hug was the reason for the OP starting this thread.

I have a fine computer with an operating system that I paid for. I believe that those who are resentful of Vista see it the same as I do. If it wasnt broken, then dont fix it.

And dont give me the crap about evolution with this Vista OP. I dont like anyone telling me what to put on my computer or telling me they aren't going to support it after I gave them my hard earned money.

EVOLUTION.......yeh, like a third eye.

Message quoted 2 times

Reply to dberthiaume555

dberthiaume555 wrote :

Once again the Vista fan boys come in justifying why they dont mind shelling out the cash for a new OP whenever M$ decides. I dont believe a Vista group hug was the reason for the OP starting this thread.

I have a fine computer with an operating system that I paid for. I believe that those who are resentful of Vista see it the same as I do. If it wasnt broken, then dont fix it.

And dont give me the crap about evolution with this Vista OP. I dont like anyone telling me what to put on my computer or telling me they aren't going to support it after I gave them my hard earned money.

EVOLUTION.......yeh, like a third eye.

I know 12 pages is a lot but please have the courtesy not to just jump in and make assumptions about what people are saying. Nobody has said that people should pay more money for Vista. I'm pretty sure I for one have said that I use Vista because I got it for free and XP would be the OS that costs me more. This is the same as anybody else who bought a new system with Vista not XP. Also the only reference to evolution (at least that I made) was not about the evolution of an OS, but real Evolution- if you don't believe in that then there is no point in discussing anything further.

Message edited by purplerat on 02-18-2008 at 09:53:15 PM

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

Quote :

It seems to me, that MS produced a product without there being a NEED. All of the improvements (and there are some improvements) could easily have been incorporated into XP, without the massive costs put into Vista.

True, but it's a double edged sword. XP is a fine OS by today's standards and Vista has pleny of room to improve. So while Vista isn't NEEDED, it's good that the two coexist so that we have both a developing OS and an established one. The longer the period of time between OSs the more difficult the transition will be (XP->Vista is the greatest for MS). Eventually XP WILL be outdated. Suppose MS had waited a few more years to release on OS and XP was then cleary outdate AND the new OS proved difficult to transition to. What a mess that would be.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

Businesses would likely upgrade to Vista when:

All their software work (esp. CAD,etc)
PCs that can actually RUN Vista PERFECTLY becomes cheap
When MSFT improves their bloated code
When not upgrading is no longer an option

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2617/3815217176_0a5be7955d_o.gif

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3553/3818083596_1a772f7162_o.gif

Reply to Shadow703793

MS OS and software development is run by Bozo the Clown!

It is time to get rid of all the 32 bit OS's and force everyone to build programs in 64 bit. They did this during the change from 16 bit to 32 bit. Now is the time to give up this 32 bit nonsense.

What is the use of having a 64 bit CPU and a 32 bit OS?

All servers are being devoloped in 64 bit!

Reply to piasabird

purplerat wrote :

Quote :

It seems to me, that MS produced a product without there being a NEED. All of the improvements (and there are some improvements) could easily have been incorporated into XP, without the massive costs put into Vista.

True, but it's a double edged sword. XP is a fine OS by today's standards and Vista has pleny of room to improve. So while Vista isn't NEEDED, it's good that the two coexist so that we have both a developing OS and an established one. The longer the period of time between OSs the more difficult the transition will be (XP->Vista is the greatest for MS). Eventually XP WILL be outdated. Suppose MS had waited a few more years to release on OS and XP was then cleary outdate AND the new OS proved difficult to transition to. What a mess that would be.

You make some good points, but I believe you miss some too. As you say XP is a fine OS by today's standards, and I believe that IT has plenty of room to improve, however, it is doubtful that it will be improved, beyond some security fixes, because MS wants to transition everyone to Vista. When XP came out, it offered MANY improvements over '98. Enhanced security, stability (eventually) and the biggie, 32 bit OS are just a few of the improvements offered by XP. The ONLY real carrot offered for Vista (32 bit) is DX-10, and even that, was not really supported by the game designers for over a year. The down sides of bloated code, intrusive, or at least agrivating DRM and "enhanced" security easily counter the improvements. Also, DX-10 COULD have been incorporated into XP. For most, the only thing Vista does is make their current system obsolete. It required twice the processor power, and twice the RAM to deliver the same performance.

Vista 64 bit certainly has the potential to offer some major improvements over XP once 64 bit becomes the norm, but forcing people to adopt Vista, simply because it is new, breeds a great deal of dis-satisfaction. Especially when the new kid was not ready for prime time. True, it has improved, maybe even to the point of being as good as XP, but how much better would XP have been, if they had devoted just some of the R&D resources of vista, into improving XP. The bottom line is, MS usually only sells one OS with each new system sold, or for that matter, built. I think the real reason they are pushing Vista so hard, is to make DRM mainstream. Certainly the hardware vendors like it too, since most systems that ran fine on XP, have to be upgraded or even replaced to run Vista.

Reply to Mojoejojo

purplerat wrote :

Er... maybe you should read your own post that I'm refering to.

Apples and oranges. Threads take tangents which may or may not have anything to do with the threas title. You are taking three different subjects are trying to combine them...and you are still getting it wrong.....and you still haven't checked the prices.

Someone made a comment about how much Vista Ultimate costs. I responded to that post. That has nothing to do with the cost of what XP Pro costs versus what the Vista upgrade from XP costs.

1. The point I was making with the Ultimate post is that MS upgrades are ridiculously priced and we've swallowed this bit where we are not MS customers if we had our OS preinstalled by someone else. To MS, if you has a copy of any OS on your computer you are not an "existing" customer, the guy who built ya puter is the MS customer....so you can't upgrade, you have to buy new. You can't even upgrade from 32 bit to 64 bit of the same OS. Upgrading from Windows Home Premium OEM 32 bit to Windows Home Premium 64 bit retail even costs more than XP Pro. $250 is a lot to go from Windows XP to Windows Ultimate..... That might be the cost of you are crazy enough to buy from MS. But does anyone actually buy upgrades ? Lemme see, I can buy and upgrade license for $240.....or I can buy it as an OEM for $170 ?

Here's ones choices:

I have a retail copy of XP, I am eligible to buy retail version of Vista Ultimate for $240
I have a OEM copy of XP, I am eligible to buy retail version of Vista Ultimate for $350

Now those are two rather silly choices don't ya think when I could just buy a OEM copy of Ultimate for $170 ????

2. Vista Business is the equivalent upgrade path from Xp pro. If we were discussing how much an upgrade costs from an 8600GT to an 8800GT would you be quoting me 8800GTX's ? would you be quoting me prices in SLI ? Then why are we comparing the cost of the Windows Vista Ultimate with Windows XP Pro ? I get essentially 4 OS feature sets in the Ultimate package (Home Premium 32 / Business 32 / Home Premium 64 / Business 64) With XP pro, I only get one. They are not equivalent....they are not apples and apples.

3. On the machine I am typing from, OEM WinXP Pro cost me $145 / OEM Copy of Vista Business would have cost me $140. That clearly makes the equivalent version of Vista $5 cheaper than XP Pro.

Vista ultimate would have cost me $170....that's the equivalent of having XP Home, XP Pro and a bit of Media Center thrown in ..... and in both 32 bit and 64 bit versions. Price the six of those out for me, will ya, and tell me how much cheaper it is than $170. Heck just price out the 32 bit and 64 bit versions of any one of em and try to get under $170.

Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit and 64 bit) = $170
Windows XP 32 + Windows XP 64 = $280

Even if I get the 64 bit version free, it's been a while but the math I learned in school tells me that $170 for the OS Set in Vista Ultimate is not "twice the cost" of even just one version of XP at $140.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to JackNaylorPE

purplerat wrote :

It seems that you agree since you have copied my "The 21st century is supposed to be the computer age but we've only had 1 OS in that time. So yes resistance to change plays a large role." without giving me the due credit.

I didn't copy it cause I agreed with it, I copied it because I was going to respond and computer crashed. I decided to download the Vista Upgrade Advisor and it crashed while I was doing the install. Apparently, when I "restored" my firefox session, it posted what I had typed so far.

What I was going to respond is.....if people are so resistant to change, why aren't they all still using Windows 3.1 ? Why, with each and every OS release before, have we seen people eating the hype and rushing out to get the new latest and greatest ? Why did it suddenly stop with Vista ?

Was there ever a save Win3.1 Campaign ? ....a save Win95 campaign ? .... s ave Win2k campaign ?

Interesting sidenote....the InfoWorld "Save XP" site is down

Reply to JackNaylorPE

Mojoejojo wrote :

It seems to me, that MS produced a product without there being a NEED. All of the improvements (and there are some improvements) could easily have been incorporated into XP, without the massive costs put into Vista.

But there was a need....MS needed a cash infusion to pay for X-Box, Yahoo and all their other ventures ... not to mention Bill's retirement package !

Now if Vista did have all the goodies that were in the original plan, we'd have something there. But while they wasted development time taking out useful things (like defrag utility's analyze feature), adding DRM, adding security features that pale compared to free 3rd party equivalents and trying even more to make us use IE, WMP etc, instead of actually evolving to the next level, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Seven years to produce aero and something that can't compete with free 3rd party tools ?

Couldn't they just have beaten Checkpoint to the punch and bought ZoneLabs ?

Reply to JackNaylorPE

SAVE XP SITE IS DOWN !

But seems to have generated lotta press....I like the 1st one

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23048937/
http://antivirus.about.com/b/2008/ [...] ows-xp.htm
http://www.computerworld.com.au/in [...] ;16;fpid;1

Here's MS comments:

"We're aware of it, but are listening first and foremost to feedback we hear from partners and customers about what makes sense based on their needs. That's what informed our decision to extend the availability of XP initially, and what will continue to guide us.".....Therefore OEMs will continue to sell XP through June 30th 2008 and system builders will be able to sell XP through January 2009 as they cater to the small business markets. In emerging markets where XP Starter Edition is sold, it will still be available through June 30th, 2010."

Here's one that is also interesting:

"Globally we can confirm there have been over 100 million licenses sold and more than 42 million PCs now licensed under volume licensing agreements."

Volume licensing means that an XP purchase is recorded as a Vista sale and an unreported XP downgrade.

Reply to JackNaylorPE

dberthiaume555 wrote :

I have a fine computer with an operating system that I paid for. I believe that those who are resentful of Vista see it the same as I do. If it wasnt broken, then dont fix it.

It was broke, thats why you need an anti-virus program. And I don't believe they fixed it, they just improved it.

Reply to randomizer

not having patience to read through a 12 page thread, i ask this.
at what point does xp become abondon ware? it will no longer be sold or supported, so it does qualify. i know it's ms and they would fight it. seriously though everyone should fight to make it officially abandonware.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ -25 giving bonus points / +5 Chunder
Reply to albundy2

Has windows 95 (which is like 13 years old) become abandonware?

Reply to randomizer

JackNaylorPE wrote :

Apples and oranges. Threads take tangents which may or may not have anything to do with the threas title. You are taking three different subjects are trying to combine them...and you are still getting it wrong.....and you still haven't checked the prices.

Someone made a comment about how much Vista Ultimate costs. I responded to that post. That has nothing to do with the cost of what XP Pro costs versus what the Vista upgrade from XP costs.

1. The point I was making with the Ultimate post is that MS upgrades are ridiculously priced and we've swallowed this bit where we are not MS customers if we had our OS preinstalled by someone else. To MS, if you has a copy of any OS on your computer you are not an "existing" customer, the guy who built ya puter is the MS customer....so you can't upgrade, you have to buy new. You can't even upgrade from 32 bit to 64 bit of the same OS. Upgrading from Windows Home Premium OEM 32 bit to Windows Home Premium 64 bit retail even costs more than XP Pro. $250 is a lot to go from Windows XP to Windows Ultimate..... That might be the cost of you are crazy enough to buy from MS. But does anyone actually buy upgrades ? Lemme see, I can buy and upgrade license for $240.....or I can buy it as an OEM for $170 ?

Here's ones choices:

I have a retail copy of XP, I am eligible to buy retail version of Vista Ultimate for $240
I have a OEM copy of XP, I am eligible to buy retail version of Vista Ultimate for $350

Now those are two rather silly choices don't ya think when I could just buy a OEM copy of Ultimate for $170 ????

2. Vista Business is the equivalent upgrade path from Xp pro. If we were discussing how much an upgrade costs from an 8600GT to an 8800GT would you be quoting me 8800GTX's ? would you be quoting me prices in SLI ? Then why are we comparing the cost of the Windows Vista Ultimate with Windows XP Pro ? I get essentially 4 OS feature sets in the Ultimate package (Home Premium 32 / Business 32 / Home Premium 64 / Business 64) With XP pro, I only get one. They are not equivalent....they are not apples and apples.

3. On the machine I am typing from, OEM WinXP Pro cost me $145 / OEM Copy of Vista Business would have cost me $140. That clearly makes the equivalent version of Vista $5 cheaper than XP Pro.

Vista ultimate would have cost me $170....that's the equivalent of having XP Home, XP Pro and a bit of Media Center thrown in ..... and in both 32 bit and 64 bit versions. Price the six of those out for me, will ya, and tell me how much cheaper it is than $170. Heck just price out the 32 bit and 64 bit versions of any one of em and try to get under $170.

Windows Vista Ultimate (32 bit and 64 bit) = $170
Windows XP 32 + Windows XP 64 = $280

Even if I get the 64 bit version free, it's been a while but the math I learned in school tells me that $170 for the OS Set in Vista Ultimate is not "twice the cost" of even just one version of XP at $140.

My post was in direct response to your post which was in response to a complaint about the price difference between XP Pro and Vista Ultimate. Why when somebody who agrees with your position made a direct compaison to the price of XP Pro and Vista Ultimate did you not correct/be little him?

Quote :

bobbknight wrote :

One of the things keeping many people from upgrading to Vista from XP is the cost of the upgrade. For most people $250 is alot to go from XP Pro to Vista Ultimate. I put mine off until MS offered the buy one get one free last month.

Instead of pointing out that XP Pro to Business or Premium is cheaper and a closer equivelant you not only agreed but pointed out how the full version (of Ultimate presumably) is even more if you can't upgrade. When did I once say Vista Ultimate is the equivelant of XP Pro? Please show me where you read that somewhere. No, I was only going based on the price points that were being discussed on the same page of this thread by YOU. It's not apples and oranges when I was directing the comment at something you said. You were just looking to be an a$$ with you're obnoxious response. Which is the same reason I pointed out that you left part of my post in ours. It just makes it even funnier to learn that it was because your computer crashed, considering the topic of this thread.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by purplerat on 02-19-2008 at 03:39:30 AM

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

i dont know, has it? seriously who would want it though? i'm sure there is someone out there hard core enough with enough old stuff laying around, but i'm talking with c2d and x2 systems.

it's tech and ms=wont happen in our lifetime. i still think they need to get called out on abandoning an os that permiates our lives.

if they no longer wish to deal with xp and want to move on, fine no prob. but you know they're going to keep battling piracy of it.

also how is it piracy if you no longer sell it? piracy indicates a loss, if you no longer sell it then you make nothing, hence no loss.

if they offered xp as freeware, they would kill linux almost overnight.
it would be thrown back to a hobby. ms would still make money, xp would become an intro to windows. it would then be up to ms to come up with new windows os that have features people want worthy of the high price of upgrading.

just a thought.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ -25 giving bonus points / +5 Chunder
Reply to albundy2

albundy2 wrote :

i dont know, has it? seriously who would want it though? i'm sure there is someone out there hard core enough with enough old stuff laying around, but i'm talking with c2d and x2 systems.

it's tech and ms=wont happen in our lifetime. i still think they need to get called out on abandoning an os that permiates our lives.

if they no longer wish to deal with xp and want to move on, fine no prob. but you know they're going to keep battling piracy of it.

also how is it piracy if you no longer sell it? piracy indicates a loss, if you no longer sell it then you make nothing, hence no loss.

if they offered xp as freeware, they would kill linux almost overnight.
it would be thrown back to a hobby. ms would still make money, xp would become an intro to windows. it would then be up to ms to come up with new windows os that have features people want worthy of the high price of upgrading.

just a thought.

I think you missed my point. If windows 95 is still covered by copyright, what chance does XP have? Piracy is taking something that you don't own or didn't pay for, in this case a licence to use the OS. Even if the software isn't being sold, downloading it (or aquiring it by other means) without paying for a licence is still piracy. You also have an illegal copy of the OS, which breaches copyright. Microsoft won't ever make an OS freeware, let alone even shareware.

Reply to randomizer

vtr99 wrote :

Yeah, I was thinking too. I bet most people who think certifications are worthless are the same ones complaining about the economy.

Huh? Yeah...

Oh and have that Federal Proof yet?

Jack- you're right. I forgot that the other XP flavors (tablet and media) came out later. I was thinking they all came out at once for some reason. Not that it matters since it's still less than Vista's choices.

Nice read all that contributed to page 12, hope this post doesn't ruin the page.

Shadow703793 wrote :

Businesses would likely upgrade to Vista when:

All their software work (esp. CAD,etc)
PCs that can actually RUN Vista PERFECTLY becomes cheap
When MSFT improves their bloated code
When not upgrading is no longer an option

seems almost too logical though :lol:

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by vangvace on 02-19-2008 at 07:56:04 AM

------------------------------ Why is it that the more somebody talks about what Certs they have the stupider they sound?

Reply to vangvace

XP being discontinued might be a good thing. It might get those lazy ass guys moding the ATI cards to finaly make a mod for Vista, selfish aint I ^____^

Reply to narutard

What do you mean?

Reply to randomizer

vangvace wrote :

Huh? Yeah...

Oh and have that Federal Proof yet?

Jack- you're right. I forgot that the other XP flavors (tablet and media) came out later. I was thinking they all came out at once for some reason. Not that it matters since it's still less than Vista's choices.

Nice read all that contributed to page 12, hope this post doesn't ruin the page.

seems almost too logical though :lol:

You have ignored every reputable article I have presented. Apparently you believe wishful thinking allows you to ignore the fact that Vista is an overloaded turd that a vast majority of knowledgable users don't want any part of. Do your own homework..... You're the one who disputed my assertion, where is your proof that a majority of federal agencies have adopted Vista, or plan to?

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by vtr99 on 02-19-2008 at 07:06:43 PM

------------------------------ Biostar Tforce P965,E6400@3.7ghz,Titan A04 cooling w/2nd radiator,3gb Crucial PC2 8500,8800GT 512mb,RaptorX C drive,RaptorX game drive,Dual Samsung 500gb Spinpoints,Hiper 880 PSU,dual Pioneer 20x DVDs,Hanns G 28" monitor,Sound Blaster X-Fi,Logitech THX Z-
Reply to vtr99

purplerat wrote :

My post was in direct response to your post which was in response to a complaint about the price difference between XP Pro and Vista Ultimate. Why when somebody who agrees with your position made a direct compaison to the price of XP Pro and Vista Ultimate did you not correct/be little him?

Cause I saw no need to. I was not addressing the fact that it wasn't an equivalent upgrade. As he has made the choice to get "Ult-A-Mite" as you call it, I can only assume that he knows the difference between versions and had a reason for making the choice. Just as I would assume soemone who was buying My sole reason for addressing his post was the fact that there is in fact is no upgrade path if you bought your computer with the OS installed. You can't upgrade. What does that have to do with choosing an OS on a new PC ? Where's the relevance ?

The subject of the discussion between me and bobbknight is not what we were discussing ..... the relative costs of a new PC with XP versus Vista. But the relative cost between upgrading from an OEM copy of a previous OS versus from a retail copy. Upgrading an existing PC and buying a new one are two completely different subjects.....I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Quote :

Instead of pointing out that XP Pro to Business or Premium is cheaper and a closer equivelant you not only agreed but pointed out how the full version (of Ultimate presumably) is even more if you can't upgrade. When did I once say Vista Ultimate is the equivelant of XP Pro? Please show me where you read that somewhere. No, I was only going based on the price points that were being discussed on the same page of this thread by YOU. It's not apples and oranges when I was directing the comment at something you said. You were just looking to be an a$$ with you're obnoxious response. Which is the same reason I pointed out that you left part of my post in ours. It just makes it even funnier to learn that it was because your computer crashed, considering the topic of this thread.

Again, my post was intended merely to point out MS's upgrade policies....a completely off topic discussion. How do you justify comparing the cost of:

-Upgrading a PC from Xp pro to Vista Ultimate
-Upgrading a PC from XP Pro to XP pro

with:

-Buying a new PC with XP pro
-Buying a new PC with Vista Ultimate

This doesn't give you the excuse you are looking for to blunt the fact that your basic premise is wrong. People are not choosing to buy XP because it's cheaper than Vista. Most people are paying more or the same for XP. You wanna win ya point, show us all where XP pro is cheaper than Vista.

This is simple.... Let's forget that you misunderstood the purpose of my post to bobbknight and inferred something from it that was not intended. Let's not go off on tangents and stick with your basic argument.

Yes or No ? Was it your position that one of the reasons for people buying the old OS (XP Pro) in record numbers was that XP was significantly cheaper ?

Contrary to that premise, the facts are:

-It is generally more expensive to buy a computer with XP Pro than Vista. You can find sites where it's the same cost.
-XP pro was more expensive for me to buy than Vista Home Basic, it was more expensive than Vista Home Premium and it was more expensive than Vista Business.
-Vista Ultimate is not a single copy of an OS.....it is a combo package. Vista Home Premium has features that Vista Business does not have. Vista Business includes features that Home premium does not have. Ultimate includes all the features of Vista Home Premium and all the features of Vista Business....essentially two OS's in one package. In addition, unlike all the other versions of Vista , you get both the 32 but and the 64 bit versions of Vista.
-The fact that MS gives you no credit for being an existing customer when you upgrade has no bearing whatsoever on the subject at hand which is buying a new PC with an OS.

You didn't say people are buying XP Pro cause it's significantly cheaper than Vista Ultimate....you made no such qualification. But again, the fact is Vista ultimate is NOT even significantly more expensive than XP Pro....it's ONLY $30. XP pro is only 17% cheaper than Ultimate and most would not consider that "significant" especially when you get both Vista Home Premium and Vista Business features and you get both 32 bit and 64 bit versions for that extra $30. Most importantly.....with MS's ridiculous upgrade rules:

Cost of buying Vista Home OEM 32 bit and then upgrading to Vista Home 64 bit - $180
Cost of buying Vista Home Premium OEM 32 bit and then upgrading to Vista Home Premium 64 bit - $220
Cost of buying Vista Business OEM 32 bit and then upgrading to Vista Business 64 bit - $290
Cost of buying Vista Ultimate OEM 32 bit and then upgrading to Vista Ultimate 64 bit - $170

That's why getting Vista Ultimate demands the $30 premium. You want to fairly compare Vista Ultimate with it's XP equivalent then include the purchase price of all 4 versions of XP (Home, Pro, 32 bit, 64 bit).

Reply to JackNaylorPE

albundy2 wrote :

not having patience to read through a 12 page thread, i ask this.
at what point does xp become abondon ware? it will no longer be sold or supported, so it does qualify. i know it's ms and they would fight it. seriously though everyone should fight to make it officially abandonware.

MS could make people flock to their new OS but it goes against their other business models. If Vista was "modularized" having each service added / removed by clicking a checkbox . Then MSIE wouldn't be loaded while I am browsing in firefox for example. Don't make it so I can hide MSIE or WMP and all the other bloat, make it so I can completely unload it. Then peeps could have all the fluff or they could run lean and mean at their choosing.

But they want the cash flow from controlling web portals thru MSIE and whatever / however they get cash from their music / multimedia stuff.

There is a simple solution.....MS could simply go to a subscription model. Use any OS ya want....$50 a year. They get < $150 from each PC that gets delivered to someone's house and that PC gonna be there for 3 years or more.....how do they maintain cash flow then.....they need us to buy a new OS. Well they wouldn't need us to do anything at $50 a year. I buy a PC and activate it, three years later I get a pop up saying I have 30 days to reactivate or my ability to download from Windows Update ends. Peeps wanna keep their old PC's running ....at risk....can ignore it and run with whatever risks exists. Others who wanna run safe can pay the $50 and continue using it ....or they can download the new OS and use that at $50 a year instead. New OS creates and installs itself in its own partition and then after 30 days or so, peep gets asked:

1. You wanna keep new OS and dump old one ?
2. You wanna keep old one and dump new one ?
3. You wanna dual boot ?
4. You wanna go for another 30 days before deciding ?

Reply to JackNaylorPE

I'm not exactly a vista fan, but since I've got a qx9650 and I'll soon have two video cards that support DX10 and I want my PC to recognize more ram, I'm going to want to "upgrade" to vista in 6 months or so. On the bright side, hopefully Vista 64-bit will be supported more and I can just get that and have 8gb of ram. Remember the good old days before Vista and even XP? I hate XP as well, honestly.

The thing I hate most is when an OS treats me like I'm stupid. "Are you sure you want to access this system drive? You could **** it up because there's no way you'd be smart enough to do anything of use here" and "please contact your network administrator because you couldn't possibly be smart enough to be running your own network" or "here, we'll help you delete these icons from your desktop because your knowledge level is so damn abysmal that there's no way you'd be able to manage your own desktop."

------------------------------ Intel qx9650 @3.81GHz (10x multi) + EVGA 780i SLI mobo @381MHz FSB
2x EVGA 8800GT 512mb OC'd, OCZ DDR2 1066MHz 4gb
OCZ 850W PSU, Seagate 750GB HDD SATA 32mb cache CM Stacker 830 SE
Sound setup: FireFace 800, JBL 4328 speakers
Reply to resonance451

Quote :

The thing I hate most is when an OS treats me like I'm stupid. "Are you sure you want to access this system drive? You could **** it up because there's no way you'd be smart enough to do anything of use here" and "please contact your network administrator because you couldn't possibly be smart enough to be running your own network" or "here, we'll help you delete these icons from your desktop because your knowledge level is so damn abysmal that there's no way you'd be able to manage your own desktop."

Agreed, but 99% of computer users are that stupid (at least in those terms). So what do you think a company like MS is going to do; market to 1% or 99%?

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

vtr99 wrote :

You have ignored every reputable article I have presented. Apparently you believe wishful thinking allows you to ignore the fact that Vista is an overloaded turd that a vast majority of knowledgable users don't want any part of. Do your own homework..... You're the one who disputed my assertion, where is your proof that a majority of federal agencies have adopted Vista, or plan to?

Nope haven't ignored a single article you've presented. The MS-watch ones were very good reads. As for wishful thinking on Vista... Just was pointing out that similar complaints were made with other MS operating systems when they were rolled out as well. I have nothing to gain either way because, as a user and not having stock in MS, if I can do my job or play my games I don't really care what OS I'm running it on. Also that some rollouts went slow (nt4 to win2k for example). You've put up multiple links supporting your view on Vista in the business world and I have not disputed one yet. However, you have also stated that the entire(then some, then many, then entire again) federal gov't wasn't going to Vista. A claim you have failed to support to date while becoming childish and condescending to anyone who disagrees with you, which is a shame for someone who claims to be so... accomplished.

Your links...
http://www.google.com/search?q=cac [...] =firefox-a or http://iase.disa.mil/stigs/stig/wi [...] 052107.doc (same thing but one is html one is .doc)
http://www.gcn.com/print/26_06/43307-1.html
http://www.fcw.com/print/13_9/news/98050-1.html
http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2534972
http://www.gcn.com/print/27_4/45842-1.html

and once again I ask for your proof supporting your gov't statements.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Why is it that the more somebody talks about what Certs they have the stupider they sound?

Reply to vangvace

purplerat wrote :

Quote :

The thing I hate most is when an OS treats me like I'm stupid. "Are you sure you want to access this system drive? You could **** it up because there's no way you'd be smart enough to do anything of use here" and "please contact your network administrator because you couldn't possibly be smart enough to be running your own network" or "here, we'll help you delete these icons from your desktop because your knowledge level is so damn abysmal that there's no way you'd be able to manage your own desktop."

Agreed, but 99% of computer users are that stupid (at least in those terms). So what do you think a company like MS is going to do; market to 1% or 99%?

That 1% can be worth many millions, and there are millions of hardcore computer users out there now, so I'd say that's a pretty fair number of people, even if comparatively small. I don't see why Microsoft can't offer a stripped down version in the sense that it takes out all the stupid crap and adds in features for those who are more advanced computer users.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Intel qx9650 @3.81GHz (10x multi) + EVGA 780i SLI mobo @381MHz FSB
2x EVGA 8800GT 512mb OC'd, OCZ DDR2 1066MHz 4gb
OCZ 850W PSU, Seagate 750GB HDD SATA 32mb cache CM Stacker 830 SE
Sound setup: FireFace 800, JBL 4328 speakers
Reply to resonance451

Because it would cost more than it's worth to them. Sorry but that's just business.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

Quote :

Yes or No ? Was it your position that one of the reasons for people buying the old OS (XP Pro) in record numbers was that XP was significantly cheaper ?

Obviously the only things that you seem to pay attention to are my spelling mistakes. Since page 1 I've argued that for new systems Vista cost no more than XP. I also agreed with you that the cost to upgrade is often more than it's worth. I also agreed that companies like HP, DELL, Sony, etc are selling Vista and XP computers for roughly the same price. The only case where Vista really costs more is when it comes to the independent system builders. Even then it's not really the cost of one OS vs another, but there are other costs associated that make XP the cheaper option. You still haven't provided anything that shows 67% of new computers coming with XP (they may be but I'd like to actually see where it's coming from). Since you're so hung up on thinking that I said Vista costs more than XP, or directly said XP Pro and Vista Ultimate are equal please point it out.

Finally before the next time you post "ULT-A-MITE", read the following sentence aloud and tell me how f@cking idiotic it sounds:

Quote :

To MS, if you has a copy of any OS on your computer you are not an "existing" customer, the guy who built ya puter is the MS customer....

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

purplerat wrote :

Because it would cost more than it's worth to them. Sorry but that's just business.

Grrrrrrr :fou: ......I hate Microsoft's Business model. Btw, who needs all those different versions of Vista.

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

You do. So spend, spend spend!

Reply to randomizer

resonance451 wrote :

That 1% can be worth many millions, and there are millions of hardcore computer users out there now, so I'd say that's a pretty fair number of people, even if comparatively small. I don't see why Microsoft can't offer a stripped down version in the sense that it takes out all the stupid crap and adds in features for those who are more advanced computer users.

Windows 7 will do exactly that...

------------------------------ Biostar Tforce P965,E6400@3.7ghz,Titan A04 cooling w/2nd radiator,3gb Crucial PC2 8500,8800GT 512mb,RaptorX C drive,RaptorX game drive,Dual Samsung 500gb Spinpoints,Hiper 880 PSU,dual Pioneer 20x DVDs,Hanns G 28" monitor,Sound Blaster X-Fi,Logitech THX Z-
Reply to vtr99

vangvace wrote :

Nope haven't ignored a single article you've presented. The MS-watch ones were very good reads. As for wishful thinking on Vista... Just was pointing out that similar complaints were made with other MS operating systems when they were rolled out as well. I have nothing to gain either way because, as a user and not having stock in MS, if I can do my job or play my games I don't really care what OS I'm running it on. Also that some rollouts went slow (nt4 to win2k for example). You've put up multiple links supporting your view on Vista in the business world and I have not disputed one yet. However, you have also stated that the entire(then some, then many, then entire again) federal gov't wasn't going to Vista. A claim you have failed to support to date while becoming childish and condescending to anyone who disagrees with you, which is a shame for someone who claims to be so... accomplished.

Your links...
http://www.google.com/search?q=cac [...] =firefox-a or http://iase.disa.mil/stigs/stig/wi [...] 052107.doc (same thing but one is html one is .doc)
http://www.gcn.com/print/26_06/43307-1.html
http://www.fcw.com/print/13_9/news/98050-1.html
http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2534972
http://www.gcn.com/print/27_4/45842-1.html

and once again I ask for your proof supporting your gov't statements.

Since I was involved with our migration from Win 2000 to XP, I can tell you matter of factly that the concerns with XP were EXTREMELY MINIMAL compared to Vista. XP is very similar to 2000, which was quickly adopted by most large corporations. The early concerns with 2000, and XP were nearly all security related. This is a vast contrast to the reasons Vista is not being accepted, so get a clue!
Yes, it's hard not to sound condescending when you are obviously so green. Not everything that develops in the IT world is posted in some blog, or article on the Internet. I have been involved with IT for many, many years, and have extensive contacts. For instance I know Herb Grosch, and participated in a project with him for over 5 years. Do you even know who he is? You don't believe the architect of our two hundred million dollar network knows things you don't? How many conferences do you attend per year? How many CIOs do you know personally? You apparently think MCSE, CCNA, CCNP, and CCIE certifications are worthless, and that alone is enough to tell me you don't deserve my respect.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Biostar Tforce P965,E6400@3.7ghz,Titan A04 cooling w/2nd radiator,3gb Crucial PC2 8500,8800GT 512mb,RaptorX C drive,RaptorX game drive,Dual Samsung 500gb Spinpoints,Hiper 880 PSU,dual Pioneer 20x DVDs,Hanns G 28" monitor,Sound Blaster X-Fi,Logitech THX Z-
Reply to vtr99

purplerat wrote :

Quote :

It seems to me, that MS produced a product without there being a NEED. All of the improvements (and there are some improvements) could easily have been incorporated into XP, without the massive costs put into Vista.

True, but it's a double edged sword. XP is a fine OS by today's standards and Vista has pleny of room to improve. So while Vista isn't NEEDED, it's good that the two coexist so that we have both a developing OS and an established one. The longer the period of time between OSs the more difficult the transition will be (XP->Vista is the greatest for MS). Eventually XP WILL be outdated. Suppose MS had waited a few more years to release on OS and XP was then cleary outdate AND the new OS proved difficult to transition to. What a mess that would be.

I agree on all points, except I still think the transition from Win 3.1 to 95 was greater. When 95 was new, the hardware required to make it run fast didn't even exist. It didn't matter how much money you had. The most powerful machines ($4000+) ran like garbage. (we installed it anyway, just so we could play Diablo =D )

To me, going to 95 was the worst OS change I've ever had to make. No matter how much cash I threw at my PC, it was painfully slow.

When Vista was released, you could easily buy enough hardware to make it run very well. Of course people had been used to computers getting bastardized down to $350-$500 by Dell/HP, which was fine for XP, but not Vista. People were mad their new $400 PC ran like crap and they would have to spend $1200 on a machine to get Vista to run nice (of course their 1st XP machine was probably more...people have short memories sometimes). I can understand the frustration, but the majority of users today never went through an OS change. Think about it. PCs really became popular for the average person after XP came out.

I personally don't think its a big deal because I've gone through lots of transistions (I like Vista 64) and PCs are a hobby. But the average person has not and to most a PC is closer to a need than a want or a hobby.

I went from VIC-20>286-25>486-66>486-100>Pentium Pro 180>PII-333>Dual PII-333>Dual PIII-450@558>PIII-1GHz>P4 1.6A@2.1>P4-2.4>P4-3.2>X2 4400+>Opteron 165@2.9>Q6600@3.2

VIC's OS>DOS 5.0>Win 3.11>Win95>Win98>98SE>NT4.0 Workstation then Server Ent.>WinME>(Skipped 2K. Didn't like lack of DX support at the time)XP Pro>Vista 32 then 64

I think I'm over $100,000.00 seriously. I found some receipts the other day, and I don't keep most of them, and they add to over $40K. I changed/upgraded components inside these machines almost monthly. So I guess I'm not your average user, so maybe I'll never really understand why people get so worked up over what to me is just nothing more than keeping up in PCs.

Reply to vic20

Quote :

I agree on all points, except I still think the transition from Win 3.1 to 95 was greater.

I meant strictly in terms of length of time between OSs. I agree that 3.1 to 95 was much greater change in the term that you describe. However the length of time between XP and Vista is massive compared to anything else in MS history.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS4 v2.0
Intel Core2 Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz
4GB OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 @ 915Mhz
EVGA 8800GTS 512MB G92
Reply to purplerat

purplerat wrote :

Quote :

I agree on all points, except I still think the transition from Win 3.1 to 95 was greater.

I meant strictly in terms of length of time between OSs. I agree that 3.1 to 95 was much greater change in the term that you describe. However the length of time between XP and Vista is massive compared to anything else in MS history.

Sorry I took your comment incorrectly. I agree

Reply to vic20

Ok basically I only have one thing to say here...

Vista does need some tuning for the AVERAGE user.. however if you are halfway decent with a computer Vista works very well.

I have it running on the system in the sig that I built in 2006. Thanks to these boards that helped me build it

The ONLY thing I have upgraded in that sig..(which I need to update) is the Monitor and Video Card. Overall Vista runs sweet and very responsive.

I have had very minor issues pop up the first few weeks using Vista, but nothing a quick google search didnt fix.

All in all... not a bad OS once you figure it out.

------------------------------ Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 Conroe 2.93GHz AC7 Pro
Corsair XMS4x1024 DDR2 800 6400C4 (2x)Western Digital Raptor 74GB (Raid-0)
EVGA 680i (2x)eVGA Geforce 7900GTO 512MB (SLI)
OCZ ATX12V 7
Reply to k2gremlin

vtr99 wrote :

Since I was involved with our migration from Win 2000 to XP, I can tell you matter of factly that the concerns with XP were EXTREMELY MINIMAL compared to Vista. XP is very similar to 2000, which was quickly adopted by most large corporations. The early concerns with 2000, and XP were nearly all security related. This is a vast contrast to the reasons Vista is not being accepted, so get a clue!

"Get a clue?" Because I said that all MS OS go through a slow transition? BTW...

Quote :

Windows XP use surged to 38 percent by the first quarter of this year, up from 6.6 percent in the third quarter of 2003. However, the popularity of Windows 2000 has remained high, with the venerable operating system still in use in 48 percent of business PCs during the first quarter of 2005, down just four percentage points from the third quarter of 2003.

Vista's growth is damn slow for good reasons but to imply that XPs **** didn't stink as well is...

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5746046.html Post SP2 article
http://www.betanews.com/article/Wi [...] 1118943913
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513-5151137.html
http://www.linux.com/feature/44104

Quote :

Why Windows 2000, when XP, built on the 2000 code base, is out and has more features? Because those nifty whiz-bang glittery features aren't worth the performance drag and instability they tend to cause.

vtr99 wrote :

Yes, it's hard not to sound condescending when you are obviously so green.

Since you missed my background the first time...

vangvace wrote :

Actually I never said I had an IT background nor make it sound like god's gift to my workplace... I just have a network background. I'm not and never claimed to be a server guy nor tech support. I just mess with telephone switches, network switches and routers for a living.

Current job puts me supporting about 4000 measly users maximum. Not bad for $2916.30 a month base pay. :pt1cable:

vtr99 wrote :

Not everything that develops in the IT world is posted in some blog, or article on the Internet. I have been involved with IT for many, many years, and have extensive contacts. For instance I know Herb Grosch, and participated in a project with him for over 5 years. Do you even know who he is? You don't believe the architect of our two hundred million dollar network knows things you don't? How many conferences do you attend per year? How many CIOs do you know personally?

WOW... have a cookie for all that you do and who you know. Is your bring this up your way of saying that you were wrong on the Federal Thing? If not I'm still waiting...

vtr99 wrote :

You apparently think MCSE, CCNA, CCNP, and CCIE certifications are worthless, and that alone is enough to tell me you don't deserve my respect.

Certs are worth something... job interviews and resumes. After that most people don't sit around getting paid doing nothing because they have a cert. They have to, I don't know, work for a living. Call me crazy it's a novel idea. Also I plan on getting a handful of certs to go along with a degree. Chances are though I'll be working in jobs using my degree but it's always good to keep options open.

BTW I do believe my sig rings true thanks to you

------------------------------ Why is it that the more somebody talks about what Certs they have the stupider they sound?

Reply to vangvace

This thread has just turned into very serious business.

PS- the main reason I'm not upgrading yet is because of possible compatibility issues. I need to be sure that all of my RME FireFace800 drives will be operational, as well as Reason 3.0 and Sonar 7. When I upgrade to Reason 4, that part of the worry should go away.

------------------------------ Intel qx9650 @3.81GHz (10x multi) + EVGA 780i SLI mobo @381MHz FSB
2x EVGA 8800GT 512mb OC'd, OCZ DDR2 1066MHz 4gb
OCZ 850W PSU, Seagate 750GB HDD SATA 32mb cache CM Stacker 830 SE
Sound setup: FireFace 800, JBL 4328 speakers
Reply to resonance451

No one was arguing windows vista was the best os ever made. Do you remember a idk around 10 years ago when this was a common phrase nothings worked right since windows 95. This was with windows 98 yes lack of support force the update to windows 98. The lack of a major os change has allowed for computers to get cheaper and more software to be developed that otherwise would not have gotten made if they have to restart the project halfway through because of a new operating system. This is one reason why macs os has been so successful because it hasnt really had a major design gui change from each version. Windows xp is a great operating system ill give credit were its due, but most people dont like windows vista for the same reasons they dont like linux and reasons why people dont like osx. Its diffrent its a change from whats familiar and its not faster then the old os.

Ps name dropping makes you sound like a tool.

Reply to xnamerxx

Google-- Toms Hardware Save XP

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

purplerat wrote :

I meant strictly in terms of length of time between OSs. I agree that 3.1 to 95 was much greater change in the term that you describe. However the length of time between XP and Vista is massive compared to anything else in MS history.

Also the performance drop from W4WGs to Win95 was 40%. MS hasn't managed to dupe that feat since.....not even with Vista. You needed a Pentium 90 with Win95 to equal the performance of W4WGs on a 486/66.

Reply to JackNaylorPE

^Ah........the days of DOS to Win95. But considering that 95 implements a new GUI, the performance drop could be slightly justified.

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

I wonder how many people actually voted because of this thread

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

Shadow703793 wrote :

Found this at PCWorld:http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/006408.html Basicly what its saying is that XP will stop shipping on January 30th.

Quote :

Microsoft is planning to discontinue most sales of Windows XP on January 30th--effectively ensuring that just about any Windows machine you buy from July 1st onwards will run Vista, whether you want it to or not.

Lots of folks would prefer to maintain the XP option. And our colleagues at InfoWorld have set up a clever site called SaveXP.com to serve as a gathering place for XP supporters. It's got a save-XP petition which more than 70,000 folks have signed, articles, podcasts, links, and a lot more.

Head over there to check it out and, if you so choose, put your name on the petition. Or take our little survey on XP and its fate--I'll report back on the results once a quorum of folks have voted...

Here is the link to the survey:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ws_xp.html

Sorry if I posted this in the wrong section , but this is one of the more popular sections.

2/10/2008:
Save XP Petition count update:

Quote :

Join the 84,152 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 8) who have had signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

2/12/2008
Save XP Petition count update:

Quote :

Join the 90,381 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 12) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely

1/14/2008
Save XP Petition count update:

Quote :

Join the 92,439 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 14) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

How many of the people on THF has signed the petition I wonder....
Please post "I have voted" if you have voted on the petition

@turpit could you please sticky this? Pretty Please

2/20/2008
Save XP Count update:

Quote :

Join the 94,690 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 19) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

2/22/2008
Save XP Count Update:

Quote :

Join the 95,766 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 22) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

2/25/2008
Save XP Count Update:

Quote :

Join the 96,424 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 25) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ave_x.html

3/2/2008
Save XP Count Update:

Quote :

Join the 97,280 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 28) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ave_x.html

3/11/2008

Quote :

Join the 99,391 people so far (as of 9a PT on March 10) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ave_x.html

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

Shadow703793 wrote :

Found this at PCWorld:http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/006408.html Basicly what its saying is that XP will stop shipping on January 30th.

Quote :

Microsoft is planning to discontinue most sales of Windows XP on January 30th--effectively ensuring that just about any Windows machine you buy from July 1st onwards will run Vista, whether you want it to or not.

Lots of folks would prefer to maintain the XP option. And our colleagues at InfoWorld have set up a clever site called SaveXP.com to serve as a gathering place for XP supporters. It's got a save-XP petition which more than 70,000 folks have signed, articles, podcasts, links, and a lot more.

Head over there to check it out and, if you so choose, put your name on the petition. Or take our little survey on XP and its fate--I'll report back on the results once a quorum of folks have voted...

Here is the link to the survey:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ws_xp.html

Sorry if I posted this in the wrong section , but this is one of the more popular sections.

2/10/2008:
Save XP Petition count update:

Quote :

Join the 84,152 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 8) who have had signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

2/12/2008
Save XP Petition count update:

Quote :

Join the 90,381 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 12) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely

1/14/2008
Save XP Petition count update:

Quote :

Join the 92,439 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 14) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

How many of the people on THF has signed the petition I wonder....
Please post "I have voted" if you have voted on the petition

@turpit could you please sticky this? Pretty Please

2/20/2008
Save XP Count update:

Quote :

Join the 94,690 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 19) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

2/22/2008
Save XP Count Update:

Quote :

Join the 95,766 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 22) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

2/25/2008
Save XP Count Update:

Quote :

Join the 96,424 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 25) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ave_x.html

3/2/2008
Save XP Count Update:

Quote :

Join the 97,280 people so far (as of 9a PT on Feb. 28) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ave_x.html

3/11/2008

Quote :

Join the 99,391 people so far (as of 9a PT on March 10) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-x [...] ave_x.html

3/18/2008

Quote :

Join the 100,595 people so far (as of 9a PT on March 13) who have signed our online petition to demand that Microsoft not stop OEM and shrinkwrapped sales of Windows XP as planned on June 30, 2008, but instead keep it available indefinitely.

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

russki wrote :

Do you have any idea of what you are talking about?

I don't think he does. People will always encounter situations where they have to reinstall and Microsoft will not "shut down" legal copies of XP. They will stop selling it, and stop paid support for it (which doesn't affect home users anyways) but they won't stop people from using it.

------------------------------ Phenom 8750, ASUS M3A78T
4 gigs Kingston DDR2 800 two 1T SAMSUNG HD103UI
Sapphire 4870x2, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM
Antec Neo 650 PSU Antec Nine Hundred, Acer H213H 1080p LCD
Reply to yipsl

bump

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------

Reply to Shadow703793

I still love my XPs. I also can still get them here at college because they "suggest" (they won't help if Vista Screws you over) you use XP for engineering. I do plan on trying Vista out this summer ( :non: ), but that is because it is free through my college (as is XP and Office). Man, I can see why people stay here forever :lol:

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Intel Core i5 750 > Gigabyte GA-P55-UD4P > 2x2GB GSkill 1600MHz @ 1333MHz 7-7-7-21 1.5V > Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB >
Antec 300 Illusion > Asus 4850 512MB w/AM Cooler > Corsair 650HX > CM Hyper 212 Plus > Other: PII 940/Gigabyte 790GX/4850 1G

Reply to EXT64

Shadow703793 wrote :

bump

Shadow have you started a thread recently that didn't turn into turn into a multipage epic saga? :lol:

------------------------------ Why is it that the more somebody talks about what Certs they have the stupider they sound?

Reply to vangvace

EXT64 wrote :

I still love my XPs. I also can still get them here at college because they "suggest" (they won't help if Vista Screws you over) you use XP for engineering. I do plan on trying Vista out this summer ( :non: ), but that is because it is free through my college (as is XP and Office). Man, I can see why people stay here forever :lol:

I got vista through my university, but it's a european N SKU so it has no WMP or movie maker, quite a PITA, and you can't install them. I don't know why it's a european licence, I live on the other side of the world :heink:

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to randomizer

Focus On

Save XP! - Page 10

Forum Homebuilt Systems : General Homebuilt - Save XP!