Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Party's Over, Windows XP: No More on New PCs

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 94 comments

Time to go modern like.

Looking to buy a new PC with Windows XP? Two things:

  • Get with the times
  • It's too late

Alright, so maybe you prefer your new PCs with Windows XP – that's just a matter of personal preference, but Microsoft's mandated that new PCs from here on must be preloaded with something newer than an OS from 2001.

On the first birthday of Windows 7, PC makers are now no longer allowed to load Windows XP on new PCs – which in this case are mostly comprised of netbooks.

This does not affect the rules for Windows XP downgrade licenses, which will carry on until 2015, according to ZDnet.

Which version of Windows would you prefer to run on a netbook?

Discuss
Display all 94 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 40 Hide
    mister g , October 24, 2010 9:03 PM
    In other news: illegal copies of XP suddenly rose to 90%.
  • 31 Hide
    victorintelr , October 24, 2010 9:36 PM
    cruiseoveridePeople still use Windows?

    Ups...
    He's either being sarcastic,
    A linux user (that's good)
    Or a Steve Jobs servant/minion (screwed up)
  • 28 Hide
    ct1615 , October 24, 2010 8:53 PM
    XP had a hell of a run! it was still a viable OS even when Vista had all its issues and kicked apples OS butt
Other Comments
  • 28 Hide
    LuckyDucky7 , October 24, 2010 8:37 PM
    And maybe if Windows 7 Starter wasn't so terrible (no changing the desktop wallpaper? Come on!), we'd actually want to switch.
  • 22 Hide
    razercultmember1 , October 24, 2010 8:40 PM
    LONG LIVE 7
  • 26 Hide
    darkchazz , October 24, 2010 8:42 PM
    Win 7 all the way!
  • 28 Hide
    ct1615 , October 24, 2010 8:53 PM
    XP had a hell of a run! it was still a viable OS even when Vista had all its issues and kicked apples OS butt
  • 19 Hide
    mitch074 , October 24, 2010 8:55 PM
    A free one - so that I don't have to ask for a refund on the OS when I install a Linux distro on it!
  • 40 Hide
    mister g , October 24, 2010 9:03 PM
    In other news: illegal copies of XP suddenly rose to 90%.
  • -4 Hide
    Haserath , October 24, 2010 9:22 PM
    XP is still better than 7 for netbooks. 7 uses 1.5GB just sitting on the desktop, that is way too much for a netbook.

    Linux would be better than both for a netbook anyway.
  • 23 Hide
    vittau , October 24, 2010 9:23 PM
    XP is awesome, but it's about time to move on...
  • 31 Hide
    victorintelr , October 24, 2010 9:36 PM
    cruiseoveridePeople still use Windows?

    Ups...
    He's either being sarcastic,
    A linux user (that's good)
    Or a Steve Jobs servant/minion (screwed up)
  • 26 Hide
    d-block , October 24, 2010 9:42 PM
    nforce4maxThat is the same for Vista. People love Win7 even though it is nothing more than Vista with a spit shine.

    7 is what Vista should have been.
  • 21 Hide
    Ramar , October 24, 2010 9:44 PM
    HaserathXP is still better than 7 for netbooks. 7 uses 1.5GB just sitting on the desktop, that is way too much for a netbook.Linux would be better than both for a netbook anyway.


    U mad. Have you tried using XP versus 7 on a netbook? It is night and day, son. 7 runs much better.
  • -9 Hide
    groveborn , October 24, 2010 10:19 PM
    Microsoft has generally done a good job at giving its customers what is wants. XP was fine, is fine, but it will not be enough for soon to come PCs. I see a major issue with Windows as it is; there are more devices that aren't *precisely* a PC that run Windows.

    It's time for several different types of Windows. Windows for PC/Laptops, Windows for Servers, Windows for MIDs... There is no reason for a one size fits all Windows. And there is certainly no need for varying levels of crippled OSes.

    I dispise the current pricing scheme. Windows Starter? If you pay an extra $50 you can change your wallpaper. Seriously.
  • 5 Hide
    nevertell , October 24, 2010 10:22 PM
    All the dudes stating that windows 7 eats too much ram whilst idling, it's because of memory prefetching. It would be rare to run out of memory even on a netbook with a gig of ram if you're running just a browser (except for chrome) and a music player, therefore it's a viable option for a netbook, in my opinion.

    It's just sad that memory prefetching is just a feature in windows, it doesn't actually work, unlike linux.
  • 5 Hide
    pocketdrummer , October 24, 2010 10:28 PM
    Not a big loss unless you're trying to record. Drivers are still lagging for Audio Interfaces. It's a pity too, I like Windows 7 much more...
  • 0 Hide
    nevertell , October 24, 2010 10:28 PM
    grovebornMicrosoft has generally done a good job at giving its customers what is wants. XP was fine, is fine, but it will not be enough for soon to come PCs. I see a major issue with Windows as it is; there are more devices that aren't *precisely* a PC that run Windows.It's time for several different types of Windows. Windows for PC/Laptops, Windows for Servers, Windows for MIDs... There is no reason for a one size fits all Windows. And there is certainly no need for varying levels of crippled OSes.I dispise the current pricing scheme. Windows Starter? If you pay an extra $50 you can change your wallpaper. Seriously.

    I agree with you on one thing. One-size fits all is not what people need. But there is also no need for 3 seperate windows's that would then be divided into 3 different versions (starter/home/ultimate BS). They should redo their kernel, make it modular, so that the user can add/remove modules, there should be at least 2 desktop envirnoments, 1 for a MID, 1 for a desktop, there should also be an option to not use one at all.
Display more comments