Thank Goodness! Something good this morning Microsoft. Good job.

I fail to understand why Microsoft is still allowing people to move to an old OS that's no longer a benefit to consumers.

Businesses should be able to use XP, but I believe a consumer should not. Really, it's just ending up being an extra driver that needs to be written for everything, and that slows down driver releases.

Preventing people from using XP would be promoting education and thinking for one's self. 2 things most of the world just can't muster anymore.

Learn the OS, don't trash it based on hearsay.

That's right! To hell with choice! We should force those lowly scum bag consumers to do what they're told!

Second thought... this isn't China or cuba or some other dictatorship... is it?

People need to put xp to bed.... It's over let xp go... lol

I'd agree with you all that xp should be put to rest, if M$ would just stop changing the UI everytime.

Most users aren't waiting for another change in the UI. It's a good thing they didn't change too much from the vista look, but vista look already scares a few people. Others don't see an advantage to the eyecandy vista is offering and would rather use the XP interface. Not just or not even for speed of the system, but just because they are used to it.

imho same with the office. M$ keeps forcing new UI's we don't want, some might, but some really don't. This is just a way they try to prevent users from pirating old xp cd's or changing to linux, not that a lot will change to linux yet.

Yeah, it's kind of getting annoying how some people just can't let go of XP and Microsoft keeps catering to them to hold software technology back. XP had a good run, but it's over. I don't want to hear another two years about how much better XP is than Windows 7.

I agree totally that MS needs to stop forcing a change in UI. At least they should have a "clasic interface" so that if we don't like the new UI we can still use newer products with some level of comfort. I really don't understand why they don't have a "clasic" view their new products. Vista can be made to look a lot like XP. It takes some doing, but it is possible. The new office is HORRIBLE!!! It has no options to look like 2003 or earlier. Why they did that makes no since whatsoever.

I fail to understand why people like you have to think that one size fits all. Why do we have trucks when people can drive cars, why have cars when people can use motorcycles, why have motorcycle when people can simply walk around? Sorry, but Windows Vista does not in any way shape or form benifit me as a customer. I do not want alot of stress from using my computer, and I have to say, the nagging nanny software that Microsoft put together called Windows Vista is just that, a nagging nanny that stresses me out for any and all tasks. Setting up network, a pain the the ass. Installing programs, a pain in the ass. Finding the simplest of task programs, a pain in the ass. The search, another pain. UAC, do not even get me started on how much a LOATHE that feature. Windows 7, no matter how much your devotion to your releigion of loving it is, does not much improve on Vista. UAC still there, same search feature, same layout for trying to configure your network settings. Same nagging nanny questions everytime you try to install a program, run a program or change any setting on the computer that marginally affects the "system". Go buy your copy of Vista and Windows 7 and stop your moaning about how, because you are happy with it, everyone MUST comply.

I can half-way understand downgrading to XP. People dont want to downgrade to Vista. Now, I think they should only do this for the first year or so of 7 being out. After that, its Windows 7 only... unless they screw it up like Vista (hope not).

I think Microsoft have all the rights to decide if or not they should continue to offer and support XP (or Vista, for that matter). However, they certainly can't stop anyone with a legal retail version of XP to install it on their new machine though. It's their software after all.

If want freedom of choice, buy yourself a retail version or go Linux.

I work for a company that puts out a large number of downgraded machines every week, and this is slightly disapointing news. The Microsoft downgrade program is so full of flaws it actually becomes an ineffective way to do business. Especially if you are a smaller computer retailer and do not want to go through the headache of being certified as a Microsoft "Gold" Partner.

If you are a Gold Partner, you receive a key that enables you to do as many downgrades as you like without the fear of "I'm sorry, we could not verify this installation". I won't go into details about the other alternative for those who aren't Gold status, but I will say it is very arduous and time consuming.

My only hope is they figure out a better protocol for retailers, making the service a more effective business tool for retailers.

This is a good and a bad. I love XP. It's been a great ride, but it's nearing the end of its usefullness. It's time to move on, time for 64bit to come to the forefront and time for a new design for .Net. The problem is we're going to loose some compatibility for some older software, but if we stay stagnant that's just more software that will become obsolete sooner rather than later.

Just my opinion.

You mean UPGRADES to XP. Any system without DRM is UPGRADE to vista/7.

i find no reason to not upgrade to win 7 because in this day and age with all the system resources unused and available, they might as well put it to use for something right? i mean in a year or two, 12gb ram will be standard, and quad core is pretty much the standard already. ssd's are blazing fast, and video cards don't hiccup as much as they used to.

i mean theres no reason to upgrade unless your still using parts from '04 and have no spare cash to upgrade... than you probably won't have spare cash to buy the OS anyhow.

If only you knew what DRM in an OS even does...

Sounds like they are taking the Sony approach. Continue selling their older products along with the newer products just in case people don't like the newer products but hope to not cannabalize their new products' sales.

" The spokesperson went on to detail that this would not the first time that Microsoft has offered downgrade rights to a version other than its immediate predecessor "

You missed a word.

Enlighten us.

Right idea, but I don't think they care about cannibalization. They're in it for market share.




Learn to use a computer.




MS is selling a product. That's their business. If you don't like the product, use a different one.

If you want to degrade to a product that's older and inferior to their current offering, that's fine by them. Whatever it takes to keep you on the bus. MS would rather you keep using Windows, regardless of whether it's XP, Vista, Win7, etc, as long as you're not switching to Linux or OSX.

i guess everyone is not convinced about windows 7, maybe the big guys evaluated it, saw vista, or too much vista and balked so microsoft is still stuck with vista around it's neck, or as i like to say it maybe some of the windows 7 lipstick has come off the windows vista pig... ;-)

Learn to give criticism.

Let me see if I get your position correct. Because I do not desire to spend an additional 12 hours learning how to configure a new operating systems network settings, I do not know how to use a computer? Does this mean because someone does not work in C++, oracle, .NET, cannot do CGM, CG, knows how to bypass DRM or any other single ability of a computer that they do not know how to use a computer? I do just fine than you very much, and I perfer to do it in XP rather than Vista.

You on the other hand, likely because you cannot put a coherent argument forward, just reduce it to; "learn to use a computer"?

I have a coherent group of complaints about what Microsoft did with their software, and I will or will not buy it based on it's qualities. The fact that XP will be an option in the future assures that my copy will remain an effective tool for at least another two years, and likely closer to three, when Microsoft will once again be putting out a new version of it's operating system. Once again, at that time, or maybe even by the time they release Windows 7 or it's first service pack, it will have been modified to be more user friendly and I will give them some of my money for their valuable to me product. It has nothing to do with my ability to use a computer, it has everything to do with how much I am willing to invest in learning the tricks and hacks of the new operating system, in the case of Vista and it seems Windows 7, how much I am willing to suffer though multiple questions of whether I am sure I want to do what I want to do. These are ligitimate concerns I have with the software, none of your trash talk is going to convince me otherwise, nor is anyone elses trash talk going to. What would be usefull though was if you put up or shut up on your statements. If, I supposedly do not know how to use a computer, then maybe you could give me some of those tricks, hacks and other missing ingredients I am missing that would turn the worthless to me software into a gem I can use simply and with much less frustration. Since none of you Vista/7 fan bois are going to do so, or even more to the point able to provide this information because it does not exist, I kindly ask that you just shut up and stop defending the undefensable.

What you say is dictatorship.

Allowing the use of a 10 year old OS will NOT stiumlate the innovative minds of programmers. Why program better things when there's that old clunky OS that people alway go for, and seem to ignore the latest?

By your logic, we should still be selling analog phones. And vacuum tube computers. Not to mention Window 95, because hey, it runs fast!

Let XP die. It has outlived itself.

If you can't do something as simple as turn the UAC off, or take the Vista skin off, or do a simple Start > Computer > Properties > Advanced > Settings and optimize for performance, you shouldn't be on this board. Not at all.

One size does not fit all. That's why MS kept legacy support and various skins for Vista to use. Not to mention the 7 different SKUs.

You're the one that needs to get your head out of the sand. Do you want to continue using XP in 2020? Way to go, you stifled a whole generation of programmers.

ofcourse we can!
First we'll need to buy a 370$ Win7 licence. Then a downgrade pack of $80!

Ok… First of all, go kiss a fat baby’s ass.

Second. I was arguing against making people upgrade to a new OS if it is not their will. I’m fine with MS giving a product a certain life cycle in which it will continue to produce and support a given product. If they decide to eliminate production of XP, that is their choice. If you can read, please feel free to look at the comment that sparked my comment. You would find that I was questioning the logic of not supporting legacy OS’s as new as XP and Vista. I was also putting in a jab about forcing the consumer to do what the big business wants them to do in light of offering continued support for businesses but not for consumers.

I want to just go against what everyone just said,
I have XP,and think the OS can easily outlast another 5 to 6 years! Easily!
Heck, there are still computers I use with Win98;pentium 3 350 Mhz, and perhaps on system response,and boottime they could outperform most modern dualcores and quadcores running XP or Vista.

Learn to use more paragraphs? LOL.

I'd like to thank eddieroolz for saving me some typing:




Just replace "shouldn't be on this board" with "can't use a computer".

First of all, degrading your arguments to a flame against the other person is not mature and will not earn you points from onlookers. Respect is earned, not given. Even if given, you won't get any, because apparently anyone who disagrees should go kiss a fat baby's ass.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to the topic.

Why should MS have to continue supporting a legacy software that has outlived its usefulness? They discontinue support because it is simply too old, and unfeasible to continue to cater to a small number of users. Now, I do realize XP still has a huge user base, but large number of users do not justify stalling innovation for speed.

Let's compare MS to Apple.

Apple discontinued support for Panther completely, with only security updates for Tiger. Tiger was released in 2005. They have stopped supporting a 2005 OS that is pretty much same underneath as the Leopard.

I don't see you taking jabs at Apple for forcing users to migrate to their latest OS X to receive updates and support.

Please do not give a half-assed reply and tack on a verbal attack in the opening to impress onlookers. It doesn't work on the interwebz.

@ eddieroolz

First: I am surprised that you found a fat baby so quickly. Good for you.

Second: I have to ask if you are literate. Are you? If so, are you insane? Are you too lazy to read my posts before responding? Anyways, my main point was about forcing anyone to do anything. I would much prefer we all act of our own volition. That said, I don’t think it stifles anything for MS to continue support for a product as recent as Windows XP. If anything it gives consumers confidence that they won’t be let out in the cold if MS moves to a newer product. That confidence figures into our buying habits… thus our patronage of MS… thus new development. I don’t want anyone to force anyone into anything. I have an old computer that runs windows 98 SE behind me (runs an old bit of engineering software that I am too cheap to upgrade). If MS moves on, it would do well by its base to continue support. That is it that is all.

P.S. why would I take jabs at Apple for anything? Are they really relevant? Not yet...

First of all I think that Microsoft should stop supporting older programs with Windows 7. One of the nice things about windows is being able to run programs written in Visual C++ 6.0, but that's also one of the bad things. Yeah windows 9x was bugg, and sometimes programmers took advantage of that buggy behavior. Instead of coding patches into windows to replicate buggy behavior in certain programs it would make more sense to run them in a sandbox that replicates an older operating system. Yeah it would run slower but it would have more compatibility. Really do you think a slight slowdown on Quickbooks 2004 matters much on a modern dual core?

Second, just continue to sell XP. People want it, and Microsoft doesn't really have to try to add new features for it. They are charging $100 for an OS that's long since been paid for so why not? People want it, so people buy it. When sales of it slow down, just charge users for updates like a subscription cost. Gotta pay for that bandwidth after all. Eventually users will have to upgrade to the new OS because that's what Microsoft will be placing development resources for. Let's face it, alot of modern software developers are tied to Visual studio. If programs compiled with the default settings run on Win 7 and Vista, but not XP, well then the program goes on Vista and Win 7. If it's difficult enough that port to XP that a measurable amount of coding hours has to be devoted to it, the accountants at the software dev company are less likely to approve hours for those changes. If the users really want to run that new program then, they will have to upgrade their OS.

Turned the UAC off and it did nothing to prevent three instead of four specific requests to continue each and every time I tried to install a new program or run a program, even a MICROSOFT PROGRAM.
I could care less about the SKIN. I am INSIDE PROGRAMS, not looking at the pretty windows. I play games, I share my files across 5 computers, my wife converts music and videos for her PMPs and surf the internet. The skin has nothing at all to do with the problem. The problem is the fact that nothing works as it used to. Not that I do not want invation and change, but i do want to NOT LOSE OLD CAPABILITIES.
What exactly does "optomise for performance" do for anything I have complained about? Does it lower the number of "continue?" prompts? Does it make it so that my shared hard disk space is visible to another computer without a doctorate degree in screwing around in Vista network settings while still keeping your private data safe? In a nominally normal english worded method that lets you know what the hell the radial buttons mean? No, it does not. You see, when I go to network settings in XP, it is pretty simple, easy and concisely worded so I know what is going to happen. When I go into the Vista one, I have no clue what is going to happen. I tell it to connect to the internet, it shuts down file sharing. I turn on file sharing, somehow my printer sharing is lost. I turn on printer sharing and it is now asking for freaking passwords to connect to my fileshare when I did not explicity tell it to turn on password protection, it just enabled it for no reason. I turn off password protection, and I am disconnected from the internet. All the while, for each and every time it decides what I want, instead of doing what I wanted, I have to click 2 to 3 times a "Continue?" prompt.

So, did your education teach me anything? Yes, that you have no real solution for what causes me to not like Vista. UAC does not stop the god forsaken "continue?" prompts as it only gets rid of one of the three to four depending on if it was downloaded from the internet or not. Changing the background does not fix the crappy way they did network settings page where hitting one button changes two or three other not even remotely related buttons. Sorry but Vista = fail in my book. Windows 7 still = Vista.

Get rid of the nagging nanny "continue?". Revamp completely the networks settings page. Is that so much to ask for? I mean seriously, now I have to absolutely positively use a setup disk to get my computers to talk to eachother? Why can I not just have a simple to use workgroup like before? Why is is automatically required to have a password, I do not want one. Why can Vista not talk with XP but XP can talk with Vista? VISTA= FAIL, 7 = VISTA, 7 = FAIL. That is simple.