Pinterest Stumbleupon Whatsapp
Ads by Google

Windows XP was quite the operating system in 2001. It was also pretty good in 2007. Now, in 2014, it’s not so great. It’s old, outdated, and not able to handle much of what a modern computer user will throw at it. And yet Windows XP is still being used on around 30 percent of PCs Windows XP Lives, iPhone Catches Fire, Selfie Secures Sitcom [Tech News Digest] Windows XP Lives, iPhone Catches Fire, Selfie Secures Sitcom [Tech News Digest] Windows XP refuses to die, Yahoo's new search options, iPhone catches fire and burns a teenager, indie developers fight back against King's 'Candy' trademark, and ABC TV pilot based solely on selfies. Read More . And 3 million ATMs around the world. Is it time for Windows XP to be euthanized?

Age Is No Barrier

We want to know, Do You Want Windows XP To Die? Windows XP has, unfathomably, remained popular long after its best days were declared as long gone. In 2007 it was replaced by Windows Vista 4 Tips to Speed Up Your Windows Vista PC 4 Tips to Speed Up Your Windows Vista PC Read More , which, though a mess upon release, proved to be the basis of the sublime Windows 7. And now we have Windows 8, another misstep perhaps, but still an operating system built for the present day rather than the past.

Why not stick with Windows XP?” I hear you ask indignantly. Well, a lot has changed in the 13 years since XP was released. Have you got the same haircut now that you had then? Do you wear the same clothes? Or listen to the same music? Or watch the same television shows? You have probably (hopefully) allowed all of these elements of your life to evolve, so why not your operating system of choice as well?

This video may persuade you it’s time to move on from Windows XP. If not then a) visit a doctor and b) read on to be convinced.

Consider how much computing has changed since Microsoft developed Windows XP… Video conferencing is now the norm, file-sharing and working in the cloud is now a thing, chatrooms full of emoticons have been replaced with the likes of Facebook and Twitter, we connect to the Internet via Wi-Fi rather than dial-up, we stream music and video on a daily basis. This is a world that Windows XP was never meant to inhabit.

Ads by Google

We think Windows XP should be put out to pasture forever. The time has come to let it sail off to Valinor. We need not mourn its passing, just thank it for its long and dedicated service to the cause of computing and possibly give it a pat on the back on its way out of the door.

Do you agree? Do you disagree? Let us know what you think of Windows XP now and/or what you thought of it in its heyday. Is Microsoft doing the right thing killing support on April 8? Or should it once again extend this deadline so as not to leave 30 percent of its customers behind? We want to hear from you, no matter what your views are on the subject.

Have Your Say

All comments will be read and most will be replied to, before a follow-up post is published containing the We Ask You Results.One reader will even win Comment Of The Week, which will be included in the follow-up post!

We Ask You is a column dedicated to learning the opinions of MakeUseOf readers. This column is nothing without you, as MakeUseOf is nothing without you.

  1. Acou Vis
    June 21, 2015 at 4:19 am

    "Have you got the same haircut now that you had then? Do you wear the same clothes? Or listen to the same music?"

    Well, in my case I'm bald now (unlike 15 years ago), I do wear different clothes, and in general still prefer to listen to the same music I did back then.

    That all being said, in general there is very little that I do on my current PC (Running Win7) that could not be done on XP as well. True, if my PC was state of the art or running programs that were released in the last few years only I might be more concerned, but instead it's like my hair. After enough years went by my hairline receded and my interest in my hair went with it. Same with my OS.

    To be blunt, there is not enough to differentiate the latest OSes by MS from the old XP, and when they try to be different they simply fail even harder. With Metro the joy of a tablet on PC? Hardly. Hint: When I want a tablet interface I'll be using a tablet. When I want a PC interface I'll be using a PC. I wouldn't use Skype when I would write a letter so why should I use an icon interface when I'm using a PC?

    "Video conferencing is now the norm, file-sharing and working in the cloud is now a thing, chatrooms full of emoticons have been replaced with the likes of Facebook and Twitter, we connect to the Internet via Wi-Fi rather than dial-up, we stream music and video on a daily basis. This is a world that Windows XP was never meant to inhabit."

    Only issue with that entire paragraph: The vast majority of it is OS independent. Quite simply the OS doesn't matter. As for things such as some ATMs still running XP - oh well. I can go and use a 30 year old calculator and still use it for minor operations - or I could use a newer TI calculator that is accurate to 100+ decimal places, but for the vast majority of operations I use the 30 year old one would be more than adequate.

    The most I could say for this article would be more about updating your browser (if you're running IE 7 or something). That would have as big an impact as updating the OS for the majority of the arguments placed.

  2. Thomas
    April 29, 2015 at 5:17 pm

    WHY MICROSOFT PURPOSEFULLY DESTROYS SOFTWARE--AND CALLS IT AN UPGRADE.

    Windows XP Professional was the best OS Microsoft could make. XP followed the visual simplicity, clarity and point and click of Macs (that made Steve Jobs and Apple so successful).

    But then, MSoft realized it was at the end of the road and there was not much more it can do with an OS. So it had to come up with ways to keep selling the same OS over and over to keep making money. So it had to put the old wine in new colored bottles.

    Windows Vista and its progeny, 7 and 8 are basically DISABLED and mangled XP. See:

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_Vista

    They are neither easy nor user friendly. They are full of new bugs, and mutilated and disabled and disarranged (i.e. deranged) versions of XP. Many basic features are hidden away and takes a while to search and find them.

    Toolbars with Icons, the sine-qua-non of a GUI are disabled. What I could do in minutes in XP often takes hours in Windows 7. The task bar cannot be put down! It keeps coming back up (bug). Basic functions that could be done in 1-2 clicks in XP take an hour to find and 6-7 clicks to access, as they are buried deep and in confusing places. Even the close and minimize buttons have disappeared in Windows 8. So you cannot even close a window!!

    Vista and Windows 7 and later versions were, as if, built by a madman who takes a normal car (XP), smashes the dashboard and puts a shiny plate to cover it up, puts the brake pedal in the trunk and the gas pedal under the back seat and the steering behind.

    Why did they do that? Well, it is a racket to make money. Knowing that there is nothing more to design compared with XP, they had to find a way to keep making money. So the only way they can make it seem new is to make it somehow different--by disabling basic features.

    Then a couple of years later, they come up with a "new version" in which some of those left out features are put back in. This "upgrade" or new version is, however, secretly damaged in other ways and, in reality, is really a degrade. A few years later, another "new version" comes out claiming to fix those problems--and it does, but destroys something else in the previous version that was working!

    Microsoft even purchased Skype and destroyed it. The window is so huge, it does not even fit on the computer, though it is mostly white space, but the scroll bars are removed. The text is so tiny, you cannot even read. Buttons, text boxes and labels are all made to look alike, so I am not sure if it something clickable (button) or something I can type into (text box) or it is just telling me something (label).

    This "upgrade" racket makes you go round and round in circles, spending money thinking it is a real "upgrade", when, in fact, each "upgrade" is really a circular downgrade. Solution: Stick with XP or get Linux.

    Microsoft needs to be sued for fraud and racketeering. People should contact attorneys and state attorney generals and complain and inquire about filing class action lawsuits.

  3. Enes I
    March 21, 2014 at 3:46 pm

    If you have older machine that can't handle with W7 or never versions of Windows. Try Linux, especially Lubuntu, needs only 128 MB of RAM, and it's a beast :) Or Linux Mint you should have at least 1GB of RAM for normal OS running, 512 also will be enough :)

  4. kitty
    March 16, 2014 at 3:58 pm

    in case i didn't make it clear in my first post, no! xp should not be abandoned! yes, it's old, but "old" doesn't equal "useless".

    one thing that bothers me about the responses to this incendiary question is that those who are against xp insist that it be put out to pasture. some even go so far as to insult those of us who like xp. if you've found an operating system that works for you, use it. your distaste for xp doesn't have to mean that those of us who like it should be forced to take something we don't want. maybe it makes sense to you to kill something because you don't use it. that doesn't make sense to me.

    please consider the fact that the death of xp forces a huge segment of the windows-using population to spend hard-earned money buying a new os or, worse, a new computer. while this might be easy for some, it's a financial disaster for others.

    i will always see micorsoft's decision to kill xp as nothing more than a way to get huge sums of money. if, as dave parrack says, it's in 30% of pc's and millions of atms, thar's gold in forcing people to give up xp.

    i am not against microsoft's making money. i am against being swindled so they can do it.

    while i deal with this mess called windows 7, i am training myself to use linux. i've had it with microsoft's antics.

  5. cbuhka
    March 10, 2014 at 6:15 pm

    I will not tell anything against Win 7, but Win 8 is more performance than win 7(tested on Samsung N150)[now there is Crunchbang installed, because I'm unable to install there XP [No, no... I'm not lama bot, simply install is halting in text mode "Setup is now loading Windows"]]. Yes, of course Start menu is not like everyone wanted, but i don't use Start menu at all. I use Launchy or simply Start -> Run (Win+R). Make new path's in config and add all shortcuts you need, make it Linux /bin like.
    And yes, I'm not comparing GNU/Linux and Win. Win - it is a toy you have bought, Linux it is Lego you received as a gift.

  6. Patrick McDonald
    March 10, 2014 at 4:18 am

    DAVE P....Why do you start out this article as a call for opinions about keeping or scrapping XP, yet you argue against every single "I will keep XP because...." ?
    If you are so dead set for killing XP then just name the article "XP should die!"
    CLEARLY, there are millions of us out there who completely disagree with you and have good reasons FOR OURSELVES to keep using it for years to come.
    XP is stable, reliable and awesome. We know how to protect against Malware.
    DONE!

    • Ralph
      March 10, 2014 at 3:43 pm

      Now I must pay (buy) a new OS to stay with it and I will just have to learn a new OS. I am happy with my XP and just need / want security updates.

  7. Willie
    March 9, 2014 at 7:17 pm

    Swaraj, it is the voice of a coward that calls people "afraid" when they are merely resisting a damaging change, being forced upon them by a power. It is an immature, fraudulent, and cowardous depiction. I'd like to hear your comments responded to by Jefferson. Mandela. Ghandi. Lech Walesa.

    And saying "[saving] hours of frustation and additional expenses" is utter swindle, when it is used as a response to the assertion that Win 7 and 8 AND Vista - all 3, did I stutter? - CAUSE hours of frustration and additional expenses. Disgusting - both Microsoft's action, and this and similar fraudulent defenses.

  8. Harsh
    March 8, 2014 at 4:48 pm

    See, Vintage cars are really precious, but do you see them while you're walking down the road??
    I believe that the time had come for Microsoft to end support to Windows XP, I don't say it was so much as outdated as Microsoft considers it to be, but there's a limit till which they could have supported it. I am a heavy Windows 7 User and I feel that if XP's time is slowly drifting away, Windows 7 still is on, and new OS' like Windows 8 should be discontinued. Windows 7 was better than XP on most terms, and we all expected something better from Microsoft, only to find something that did not actually support the tradition of XP. So better ditch XP to get something better, not worse. I'll suggest you all to go for Windows 7, or at least Windows 8.1, cause 8 was a disaster, with all that SkyDrive ( Hey, it's now called OneDrive :)) context menus and the Metro-cum-Modern UI...
    What do you all think about what I say, please comment. I am yet small enough to get carried away by small disasters, so if you suggest me something good, I'll surely look into it.
    Thanks!

  9. Swaraj Mohapatra
    March 8, 2014 at 6:16 am

    I think its time to move on. Some users do not want to migrate to the ocean from the river just because they will have to cross the river bank. 30 percent of Microsoft Windows users who still use Windows XP need to realize that for their own safety and comfort they need to migrate to Windows 7 or even 8. Of course I am not talking about the crappy Vista, but 7 is a really reasonable upgrade. And if they fear hardware support, Linux is always there. All they need to do is just contact their IT pros. Little do they realize that although this upgrade might be expensive, but this could save them (or maybe even could have saved them in the past) hours of frustation and additional expenses.

  10. cbuhka
    March 7, 2014 at 3:41 pm

    Buy ME a NEW hardware and kill XP, or... I will still be using XP!
    PS No one is "killing" XP, only MS support for XP will be killed.

    • Ralph
      March 10, 2014 at 3:51 pm

      I would have loved it if MS can support and help us XP users. Why pick now on supporters. Remember who supported MS through all the years ----us XP users.

  11. sergieyes
    March 6, 2014 at 6:39 pm

    I had XP from 2004, and learned to use appliications. MS liicensed Chheck Disk and Clean Disk from Norton as slightly crippleware, so I replaced them with CCleaner and Puran Defrag. The firewall issued witgh XP service packs was primitive, so I used Online Armor. Everything desirable could be approximated by using the XP community's best applications. Now some of those issues have been covered by Win 7, some faults are not covered well.
    Here is my suggestion: release the NT kekrnel to open source so that the freeware community can decode it and remoove all the snafu coding and then issue a PC improved by the freeware community--like Google improved on Safari to make Chrome.
    However, the a rchitecture of XP is based not on user convenience but on feara of pirates, hence the IE was woven like a golden thread into every functionality. A freeware NT? Possible. Will it happen--no, because Gates bases his actions, as do his successors on the Gates Theorem: software is private propeprty, salable like land and goods.
    Consumers will bhe subjected to crippled PCs from MS as long as the cows are out there in the pasture. When the cows come home, the freeware community will be given open source NT kernel and make a good competitor to Linux.

  12. Clyde A.
    March 6, 2014 at 5:33 pm

    I won't miss it. Windows 7 & 8 have much better security and stability.

  13. CopKiller
    March 6, 2014 at 8:44 am

    Why don't we euthanize the author of this moronic article.

    • Dave P
      March 6, 2014 at 6:46 pm

      A death threat? What an utterly pleasant and mature way of arguing that Microsoft should continue supporting Windows XP.

  14. Ralph
    March 5, 2014 at 12:14 pm

    What about incorporating a good (free) antivirus feature ?? Come on Bill. think and give something back to the people who made you .

  15. Ralph
    March 5, 2014 at 12:08 pm

    I stay with XP on my machine. Wife and friends with 7 or 8 have problems . I am the m%$#^ in for the decition made to "discard" XP . Bill is already ritchest man and want to stay that. I think I am a poor poor poor man and what now???
    Just update important security isues in XP and give it a new name if you must/want to make changes

    • Dave P
      March 6, 2014 at 6:47 pm

      What problems are those who switched to Windows 7 having? That's a more solid and stable operating system than you could ever hope for.

  16. Carl
    March 5, 2014 at 3:55 am

    I have used many, many operating systems. XP, although not my favorite OS, is my favorite windows OS. Before windows started tinkering with replacing XP with newer OS's, XP had the edge over other OS's because the learning curve to understand the OS was short. Now microsoft has lost that edge.
    I would say that the majority of computer users mainly use their computers to:
    1) Read email, 2) surf the web and 3) write documents.
    For this XP is perfect. The newer, more complex OS's just give these people headaches.

    This is not to say that windows 7 and 8 don't have an audience, they do.

    I for one, will still keep my XP computers for as l can. The one possible drawback to this is that once microsoft abandons XP, hardware companies might not supply XP drivers for the latest hardware. On a positive note, as long as people hang on to their XP computers there will still be need for hardware companies to make their hardware compatible.

  17. dragonmouth
    March 4, 2014 at 8:36 pm

    Inasmuch as I agree with most of the posts here that XP should not be killed (XP is not dying, M$ is killing it), the inevitability is that it will be killed. M$ will do whatever M$ wants to do and no amount of pleas, tantrums or threats from XP users will change the decision. The only argument M$ understands is money.

    Over the years M$ has been singularly unresponsive to its users. They implement features that they want to implement, not the ones users want or need. Now XP users have a chance to show M$ the error of their ways. Do not upgrade and keep using XP, or switch to Linux. Hit M$ in the bottom line. XP will not fall apart or become a great security risk just because M$ stops support. While M$ made perfunctory attempts to keep XP secure, it was after market software companies that really kept the malware at bay. Unless M$ holds a gun to their heads, these companies will continue to provide anti-malware software. 30% of the Windows market is a very attractive clientele.

    Give Linux a try, or another try. Linux is not what it was 10 or even 5 years ago. It has been improved tremendously. Just like in Windows, you don't have to see the command line if you don't want to. If anybody tells you different, they must be working for M$. If you are in love with the XP look, the various Linux desktops can be made to look exactly like it. Steam is bringing many of the familiar games to Linux. For each Windows application, there is a Linux one. Linux has applications that Windows doesn't. The change from Windows to Linux is not as you were told. To borrow a slogan "XP users of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your (M$) chains."

    As of the latest polls, Mr. Bill is again the Richest Man in the World He is worth only a measly $76 Billion. I guess he wants to make it to at least $80 Billion by selling copies of Win 8.x to all the XP users.

  18. Tcll5850
    March 4, 2014 at 12:45 am

    every time I read a comment about XP needing to die, I just want to blow up on the dufus who wrote it.
    and everyone who talks about 7 being the successor to XP is blind as a bat.

    7 was updated from Vista which was a scratch OS...
    there was never any XP support in Vista, and there's still none in 7.

    7 is an OS that forces it's users to wear shackles while relying on an interface that gives the illusion of better support, even though there exists no support for what users REALLY want, which is backwards compatibility.

    good luck making 7 backwards compatible... you're better off getting a VM and installing XP on that if you want to use the good old stuff...

    as for making XP foreward compatible, it's more than possible with a few exceptions of the interface limitations that can easily be worked around to add new support.

    M$ needs to pull their heads out of their A's and stop restricting their users.
    XP is still much better than 7 will ever be.
    (I refuse to program on a win7 interface because I can't hack the system and do cool things to it)

    M# wants to force EVERYONE to only be restricted to only using 1 environment to do everything on.
    yea... not possible microsoft... how much more sugar-coated monkey-poop you gonna keep throwing onto the public and mis-lead them into thinking it's candy?

    I can't wait for SteamOS so I can have an even better system to develop things on.

    might I cry for everyone who uses the Win8 atrocity.

    Bill Gates was the only thing that was actually "good" about MS...
    quite a shame he had to retire... -.-*

  19. Donald H
    March 3, 2014 at 9:27 pm

    So 30% of Windows users need to go out and buy a new computer to support the new bloated software? If my PC is functional and does what I want it to do, my software is licensed and paid for and configured to suit my needs, why do I have to replace it just because Microsoft decides they want a new revenue stream and refuse to update the software they forced me to buy loaded onto my PC. I wish more developers would port their applications to Linux; it is much more secure.

  20. asd
    March 3, 2014 at 4:15 pm

    it is good and not let it die

  21. expert pc
    March 1, 2014 at 11:30 am

    In the first I mean windows XP replace by windows 7 and in the second I mean windows XP and windows 7 continue together.

  22. The Old Pelican
    March 1, 2014 at 12:32 am

    Still have the same haircut and still listen to old favorite music. When MS produces a functioning, simple, and clearly interpretable system please let me know. XP until then. :)

  23. J. Anthony Carter
    February 27, 2014 at 12:18 pm

    I got the CD to install XP Professional to my PC shortly before I got my broadband connection when I was living in New Mexico. I was out in the boonies and my dial-up was so slow because I was being stepped down so other people in from of me could get bandwidth too. XP was the only thing holding my PC together. I finally got a satellite feed from a local ISP and my speed increased phenomenally! XP was there and worked like a champ! It never flagged. The system I had wasn't anything to speak of but it managed my resources and did so without hogging all my not to be envied processor power. In '07 I bought a laptop with duo core processors and Vista. All I could think of the whole time I had it was "I so want to upgrade to XP from this sad crap!". That's what getting XP on my laptop would've been to me, an upgrade! It was smooth. I never had any problems with it and it worked for me no matter what my bandwidth. I still look back quite fondly on those days even though I'm running Win7 now. Hell, I still have my XP Pro CD!! You never know!! ;-)

  24. Oswaldo Bellido
    February 27, 2014 at 2:15 am

    I have an 8-yr old laptop running on XP. I don't think it could be upgraded to Windows 7, because its RAM memory maxed out at 1 GB. There must be like a million aging machines out there with similar issues. So what's Microsoft's advice for them? Upgrade the machine, of course! It might work for me, but there will be still a lot of people that will keep using their current machines, as long as they can.

  25. Don
    February 26, 2014 at 11:57 pm

    Yes keep xp ,Just update and call it
    ,XXP

  26. Bob
    February 26, 2014 at 3:55 pm

    Keep XP! I use a tablet to do all of the new whiz-bang Internet stuff. The natural replacement for XP is Android and MS knows that since Windows 8 incorporates much of it. XP does what I want, it lets me write letters, do spreadsheets and use programs (now called apps) that I need to use. I do not wish to throw out everything that I have to start over with something that will soon be replaced by a tablet. I already use Linux running on another machine, and when XP dies I will be running Linux and Android.

    Microsoft should keep XP for those that still use and love it, the numbers are 30% - that is a lot in case you are counting. XP users are loyal and form the Microsoft base layer of users. When they abandon us, we will have to find someone else. It might not be Microsoft because we will remember that they abandoned us. Again.

    The new systems (7 & 8) are clunky and weird with too much CPU draining pretty things. I like keyboards, mice, and regular (non-touch) screen monitors. I am a massive computer geek, not a luddite as some might say. I like to use my comfortable system to do my own stuff and it works like I want it to work. I do not wish to keep learning new ways to do the same old thing. XP is how computer geeks can work on computers at work and work on computers at home - one is work and one is play. They are different.

    Worst case: If Microsoft were thinking at all, they would sell a $20 annual update key and keep supporting XP. I think 30% of their customer base would subscribe and learn to trust Microsoft. I have 3 or 4 (very fast) legal machines that run XP, I would expect to update all of them each year with that. Forget all of that registration crap that they phased in when I was a student. They whined about piracy, but kids did not have money, so they used Linux. Boy, that was really smart of Microsoft. (sarcasm) They finally got smart and put in student editions, but you needed a letter from the president of the university to get it. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

    In the beginning, I taught many people to use WIndows from the early days. I was an unpaid Microsoft employee. I still get calls from people complaining or crying that their machine just crapped out on them. If it is not running XP, I tell them to return the machine to the store where they bought it.

    When Microsoft dumps XP, they will soon become irrelevant in the computer world. Too bad, I liked how they used to be when Bill had shaggy hair and Michael Dell had "PCs Limited" in his dorm.

    Yes, you can see that I am a desktop historian, and someday I will tell my grandchildren about the desktop PC, where you could run programs and use a keyboard and mouse to work or play, do letters and spreadsheets, write books (yes, they will still have books because people will still buy them) and play games with joysticks. They will look at me questioningly and ask "What happened?" and I will say "Microsoft killed XP". Then the children will ask "Who is Microsoft?"

  27. Mohammad Hamzani S
    February 26, 2014 at 6:10 am

    as for me.. IM VOTE FOR XP TO STILL IN USE. im not see 30% of worldwide user using XP. i think it much more then that.. if u lived in development country like US and many more.. yeap XP is outdated and old fashion. but, in other countries that technology are behind. XP is the most use in house or office.

    why is that?

    Xp is clean and easy to use with u need to learn it by attend course. just use it everyday and u will know how and what. is just simply OS that suit ur need without neglegting the funtion and such. just for example, a system with Pentium 2 Core 2.5ghz with 1 GB Ram can operate faster with xp rather then Win7. when u go to task manager, when the idle state of the PC also consume much more CPU anf PAGEFILE Usage. with the so call EYE CANDY interface, it consume lot more resource and ram compare if u use win XP. what we or i seek is usage and performance rather then sleek interface that reduce the experience in using pc.

    yeap i agree that using such old OS with risk u to many unsecure and treat and may cause u became victim to hacking and virus. but, who said using win 7 or win 8 will not let u been in such case? no matter what OS u use, if u not use if wisely and know what u are dealing with, nothing can help u from became victim.

    so in short word. i LOVED WIN XP and WILL STAY USING IT UNTIL I CANT USE IT ANYMORE OR the installer i have corrupt and no where to find fresh copy of it including via pirate method.

    no matter how old something, it value never decrease. i just wonder when there are plenty show in US that "RENEW" old thing into Brand new same thing like Overhauling, King Of Restoration, Counting Car, and some show invovle with transform human that "ugly' to "beauty". So, why not do the same for win XP rather then release something new that totaly rubish and confusing? what we want is performance with lower budget system that have high end speed with RIGHT OS. And not to mention, we want something that even kid know how to operate rather then grown up also confuse. what we want is OS that do the work and not we doing the work for OS.

    XP still will lived long after it "Deceased" dated set by it Creator. if u wonder in undeveopment country, the XP saviour for them will other just a Dictator. just like i said in many other topic and posting, WHY NOT let WIN XP lived forever as a OS that focus on "newbie" for PC that will just get confused with such retro OS. it just like Xp will Became "Kindergarden" to beginer to learn how to operate a PC before using some high end system and OS. just let it be Coporate Social Responsibility CSR for Microsoft. or better, just "transform" it to new OS with the same SOUL that everyone know with a new "power". without the OLD, Nothing NEW can be born.

  28. kitty
    February 26, 2014 at 3:05 am

    buying windows 7 was a huge mistake for me.

    i've had xp since 2005 with no problems. my sister has 7 and using it is such a hassle, she hates to go near it. i've heard her gripes about it for years, but didn't know what she had until i bought 7 after the warning about xp losing support. when i complained about it to her, i asked if she has 7. she checked and, sure enough, she does and many of her experiences matched mine.

    my installation was ok, but things went downhill after that. i was turning the computer off for the night and saw the update message. i turned off the monitor and was sure the computer would go off by itself before morning. at 8am, i went to it and it showed it was installing update #63 of 148 updates!

    it was like this for a while, so i decided to just leave it. over 5 1/2 hours later, it was still on #63. against the warning, i turned it off.

    turned it on again and eventually got it to give me a way to search for an anti-virus program. searches are painfully sloooow. also, it wouldn't allow me to install avast, avg and one other program because everything on the monitor is too big and some windows that cannot be reduced were appearing neatly placed in the upper left corner with anything to the right edged out of viewing range. they could not be repositioned so i could accept user agreements or move on to the next phase of the installation. i just had the same problem as i tried to install a driver for my printer. in one instance, i was able to use the bar at the top of the window to move it up a bit, but could get it to go just so far before it popped back into place, again hiding the button i needed to click. eventually, i was able to install bitdefender.

    about that "too big" issue, i tried to reduce the size of the page so i could see everything without having to scroll back and forth. using ctrl and -/+, i could reduce it, but when i could fit all onto the page, the print became small and fuzzy. on control panel, i can't change resolution because the display height is less than 600 pixels. i can't change that because it's ghosted.

    a lot of this can probably be solved by a tech-savvy, more experienced user. i just don't like the idea of something being so messy, right out of the box.

    i understand that times change and things need to be upgraded, but i have the sneaking suspicion that part of the reason microsoft will no longer support xp is that anyone who wants to continue using windows will be forced to buy another microsoft product.

    xp is probably not good for people who, unlike me, have a lot of things going on electronically. i do a lot of reading on my computer, write and play a few games. there's no camera or anything special attached; just my printer and a couple of external hard drives where i've stored music and some documents. i couldn't be more low-tech if i used an old black rotary-dial telephone.

    i am not happy with windows 7. i am, however, happy for those who have found it to be exactly what they need.

  29. beyondthesidewalks
    February 25, 2014 at 4:46 pm

    I think that XP represents something that will not be repeated by Microsoft again, the ability to copy the operating system without their control. Install any of the later versions and you need a connection to Microsoft. They have ultimate control. With XP the user had some of that ultimate control.

    XP will die. We cannot stop that. It's becoming obsolete. The real question is where do we go from here? I don't like the control that Windows 7 and 8 will have over me. I used SCO Unix and Qnx back in the late 1980s and had a very dim view of Linux based on that experience. I recently tried Linux Mint and was pleasantly surprised. It's really easy to install, use and you have the control again. Also, as has already been pointed out, old Windows programs can be run using Wine with surprising functionality. It also runs amazingly well on both old and new hardware. Resistance is futile...

  30. Somebodyy
    February 25, 2014 at 12:21 pm

    On software side there's not so much that will be lost. I use Win98 SE for every software (mostly games) that doesn't run on WinXP. When XP "dies" I will either dualboot it with some other os or have one dedicated computer for XP. Off course I don't use Internet with them, but I might connect them to internet for some reason. There might be some software patches and updates that cannot be downloaded from other machine than the one where the software is installed. I want to play games that don't work with Win98 or Win7/8, but there is not so many of them.

  31. Patti
    February 25, 2014 at 3:24 am

    it lead us here but does that mean it has to stop ? whats wrong with choices ?

  32. TImothy
    February 25, 2014 at 2:55 am

    The only legitimate reasons somebody can have to dislike Windows 8 is if they don't understand how to use Windows or a keyboard in the first place. Windows 8 is amazing if you know how to properly use Windows at all, or even a PC for that matter.

    XP was good for it's time, but is horrible by today's standards. 7 was decent, but 8's performance upgrades blow it out of the water.

    • dragonmouth
      March 4, 2014 at 7:28 pm

      "8?s performance upgrades blow it out of the water."

      The period belongs after the word "blow"

  33. Tejasvi
    February 22, 2014 at 10:15 am

    Win XP is a good product... WHY KILL ????

  34. ipitrader
    February 21, 2014 at 7:40 pm

    NOOooooooooo!!! Never!!
    XP Pro is the most robust OS ever. And who wants W8.1?
    No one.
    Enough said.

  35. Joan Lucì Labòrda
    February 21, 2014 at 5:08 pm

    Yes Windows XP needs to die but don't replace it with another windows version, no need of it, linux is sufficient for all that we can do with a computer !

  36. drjackcv
    February 20, 2014 at 8:55 pm

    Oh! And it is wonderful to notice that there are other people who refuse to be mouseketeers, but love the "old fashioned" keyboard with its shortcut keys. I forced my employees to learn a half dozen shortcut keys (Ctrl-S, Ctrl-Z, Ctrl X, C, V) as soon as they came into my department and within 3 weeks they were 30% faster than staff in other departments.

    • dragonmouth
      March 4, 2014 at 7:25 pm

      "I forced my employees to learn a half dozen shortcut keys "
      Forced labor is against the law. I shall report you to the proper authorities! :P

  37. drjackcv
    February 20, 2014 at 8:50 pm

    Like the millions of people around the world who just want their cell phone to make cheap phone calls, millions of us just want a computer to email, keep records, and search for information.

    We are not interested in playing inane, hi-tek video games. We do not want to zoom in on naked bodies. We do not need hi-def streaming movies. We certainly are not interested in replacing a bunch of our working-just-fine-thank-you programs with new, costly, hi-tek, flakey programs.

    If Microsoft was building cars, we would have to figure out next year that the ignition is in the trunk and the brake pedal is behind the gas cap. This is wonderful for the computer industry (who are probably the geniuses responsible for my friend's car that has to lift the engine to change one of the spark plugs, or my car that has the water pump inside the engine with the timing belt and the gas pump inside the gas tank.)

    XP is reliable and simple. It is all we need, and all we want. BRAVE NEW WORLD was a great read, but a bad system. If it works, and it's cheap, you've found the solution. Don't replace it, especially with Frankensteins like Vista and Windows 8.

    • dragonmouth
      March 4, 2014 at 7:24 pm

      "This is wonderful for the computer industry (who are probably the geniuses responsible for my friend’s car that has to lift the engine to change one of the spark plugs"

      Sorry to disappoint you but you can't blame that one on the computer industry. Chevy Monza in the mid 1970s had to have its engine lifted to remove the back spark plug.

      While we can't blame the computer industry for the spark plugs, we can blame them for evrything else, from acne to zits. :-)

  38. c hadley
    February 19, 2014 at 8:06 pm

    Windows XP is a great OS, but I think it needs to be retired and replaced by Windows 7.

  39. RC
    February 19, 2014 at 2:43 am

    keep XP, it is the cleanest most" unconvoluted" system ever. If it needed to be upgraded for the NOW times, then just do that but don't change the platform. Keep supporting it.

  40. Chris Barry
    February 17, 2014 at 6:01 pm

    What was wrong with Windows 2000? Probably lots of things, but I'm not sure that any have been fixed by subsequent versions. It seems to me that each release of Windows and Office in the past decade (the only MS products which I cannot avoid) has been worse than the previous one. I don't mean bugs. Bugs are found and, mostly, fixed but bad design goes on for ever. Take menus that are activated just by passing over them. A truly inane idea which forces you to carefully navigate two sides of a triangle instead of going directly to the next submenu. And if you wander of the track you have to go back to the beginning. A user interface should not be a test of hand-eye coordination.
    Or take progress bars. Not a bad idea, although a window telling you what is happening would be better. So now we have coloured blobs that move to and fro or round and round giving no indication of elapsed or remaining time or whether the process has stalled entirely.
    Or what about the helpfully underlined accelerator keys in menus and dialogs. First you had to explicitly enable the feature, now it's gone completely. Clearly "helpful" is not considered a virtue by the Microsoft design department.
    Someone else has already pointed the flaws of the control panel. What about menus that are activated just by leaving the mouse cursor over the option. It takes of the order of 200ms to click a mouse button. If I don't do so it is not because I have a debilitating disease of my nervous system , it is because I DO NOT WANT TO SELECT THAT OPTION. (Sorry. Please pass the dried frog pills.)
    Or translucent windows. If W7 wasn't so incredibly slow then it might be reasonable to waste a bit of CPU time time on such frippery.
    As for Windows 8. To take an interfaced enforced by the exigencies of a small screen and no keyboard and use it on hardware with no such constraints... Words fail

  41. Jim Ullrich
    February 17, 2014 at 3:47 pm

    XP is obviously better than its replacements, which just introduce more new problems and even more bloated software. Computer security isn't an issue if people would stop shopping online and stop using credit cards. We can fight back. Sorry I don't have a fakebook or twatter account so no posts thru those sites.

  42. Jon Brackmann
    February 16, 2014 at 11:32 pm

    I probably don't like change - I remember wanting to Keep 3.14. But my wife bought a preloaded 8; it is just horrid, a good friend with no ability has 8.1 its better but still obnoxious. And even on my XP and 7 machines other vendors follow suit and replace one key stroke with three and call it progress. If XP is to die then Microsoft should have a keyboard only version for those of us who deliberately don't have touch screens. The whole world is not in their twenties.

  43. Zoid42071
    February 16, 2014 at 10:16 pm

    How about Windows 7? Should it die too? Because as I look for a retail version of Windows 7 to replace my XP os (which I am remain content with) it appears Microsoft is busily hastening to kill Windows 7 as well. I'm having a very difficult time FINDING a retail version of Windows 7. Windows 8+ is the only option MS is leaving on the table. I don't understand why those of us with different computing preferences are having Windows 8+ forced on us without options.

    Speaking metaphorically, this is like having no choice but one clothier, who decides that whether you live in Siberia or Death Valley, the only clothing they will offer is 70lbs of fur-lined extreme-cold weather parka (because it's way more profitable than a skimpy bikini), and while people in Death Valley may desire a bikini over a cold weather parka, well, that's just tough. Try to get over your stubbornness and learn to appreciate the superior texture of the fur, and the extraordinary warmth afforded by the state of the art materials used as an insulating filler, why don't you? It's way superior to those cheap and skimpy nylon-wares of yesteryear. Why are you sweating? Dying, even? Oh geez, can you believe the incapacity some people have to adapt!

    I like old games and fear that they will not run on a newer OS. I'm not opposed to buying new games (although they all seem very much the same, another FPS boasting latest graphics), but I still love some of the old ones that feature unique strategic play, and I don't feel like that is a consideration when they're developing new OS's. I'm not opposed to buying a new OS either, as long as it leans in the direction of my preference. While XP leaves plenty of room for improvement in terms of memory capacity, etc, Microsoft's offerings since XP have taken a path divergent from my own priorities.

    Linus is not a viable option -- I've tried several variants on different occasions and they never work for me. Personally, I'd rather have something looking more like MS-DOS marked by an improvement in resources than something looking like a smart phone marked by rigidity and a decrease in versatility, compatibility, etc. Windows XP was the best compromise to date, in my opinion.

  44. swt7
    February 16, 2014 at 12:28 pm

    Windows XP has it's use for people who run older software that is no longer being updated. And that software may be essential for job specific operations. Also it will be used by people who cant afford to upgrade or have acquired a used computer.
    Windows 8 on the other hand should be killed. Windows 7 is less cumbersome to use. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

  45. David Wright
    February 15, 2014 at 10:04 pm

    no question that 7 is a decent successor to XP, but for my Mother, my Grandmother, running older equipment and XP doing what they want, I see no reason for them to pay to upgrade until their hardware dies and they buy a new system with the latest. MS should do a "minimal" support of XP, maybe an "Open source" like network.

  46. GodSaveTheXP
    February 15, 2014 at 2:36 am

    Wow thanks guys I didn't know about Zorin for replacing Windows XP. I was looking for a while at ReactOS but its been years since update so thats probably dead.
    As for my voice, why do I want Windows XP? In short, because I'm not a conformist. While you guys keep tossing M$ money and they drain all that huge surplus into useless non-professional software that I will NEVER use my Windows XP is a clean small 2GB installation on my valuable and very limited SSD storage space but thanks to that I save myself from tossing 26GB of uselessness = Windows 7 fresh installation and 24GB Windows 8. You guys will tell me, get a 1TB HDD problem solved! So you want me to dish out money to M$ conform with their bloatware and dish even more money to get more space? Is that even sane? And now all these programs come with auto starts and background services so they even take performance even when Im never launching them. Think about it, Aero? I dont need. Microsoft Essentials? There are tons better for free. Media Center? Three letters for you, V.L.C. Internet Explorer? Firefox. Just about every badly made "feature" that M$ include in Windows has a free replacement that's actually done professionally. What do I like on Windows XP if it too has bloatware? It's so freaking easy to uninstall all of them. Can you uninstall Metro on Windows 8? You can disable it but M$ domineering demands that you CANT.
    Windows XP = outdated, totally true!! And thats because its been THAT long since M$ has made anything worthwhile. Say Windows 7 all you want its still full of uninstallable bloatware and I'm not gonna get it.
    Windows XP pros:
    MEGA Compatible with everything from software to hardware
    Stable, I never seen it crash
    Small, Size in my SSD 2.8GB
    Unintrussive, when was last time UAC warn me... err it doesnt have UAC
    Safe, I don't visit all trash sites around every corner and besides the new ones are towards Win 7 and 8
    Productive, lets me work without interruptions or forcefully shutting down my PC for a windows update
    Light, I got so much RAM free I don't need 16 sticks to make something run
    Windows XP cons:
    Its old, really that's all there is to it.

  47. Willie
    February 13, 2014 at 4:12 am

    Speaking as an extremely high speed, high productivity user: on XP I am purely, with no exception, as fast as, or faster than, Win 7 for every task that I have encountered. Win 7 means more keystrokes, if anything. That means that my productivity was at best unaffected, and at worst damaged by interface changes since XP. I find that comments like "change with the times" reveal only two conditions - cluelessness or hidden agenda. Productivity matters, and ignorant dismissal of it speaks volumes of the proclaimers.

    I want an XP emulator since the heartless (did I mention clueless) bastards in Redmond have issued their edict and have decided they are content with the bloodshed - stifling progress and science and the quality of life among humans.

    And this pales compared to the unfathomable productivity assassination from Office 2007 and later.

    • Alene
      February 16, 2014 at 5:53 pm

      My XP just died. It did what it needed to do for me easily and quickly. If I could, I would replace it with another XP.

    • beyondthesidewalks
      February 25, 2014 at 4:59 pm

      XP emulator? It's called Wine and it runs on Linux

  48. Willie
    February 13, 2014 at 12:02 am

    I am one of the very, very fast users. Every time average humans make a click, I've hit 4 to 8 keystrokes/shortcuts. So later versions are not "perfectly fine" for highly productive users. The point is,in each and every case - did I stutter? in each and every case - Win 7 takes an equal amount or more strokes than XP.

    So I long for an XP interface emulator? (Ya, I know, VirtualBox...)

    And even more: if anyone knows an Office '03 interface emulator that truly works, that would advance civilization galactically. UbitMenu is dogspit. It does not let you go alt-D, then F, and visually choose which one to run from that point.

  49. Anthony Percy
    February 12, 2014 at 5:50 pm

    Windows XP is the one for me. I do not care if Microsoft carry on with their support!
    The other MS OS are big bulky & sluggish. The only one I may consider would be Win7.

    I will use Windows XP until my computer falls to bits.

  50. Brian
    February 12, 2014 at 1:02 am

    Just let it die, and offer up cheap licenses to 7 and 8.1 to encourage people to actually upgrade. It's been long enough and much of it is horribly outdated.

    • dragonmouth
      March 4, 2014 at 7:35 pm

      Based on the comments, the change from XP to 7 & 8 would be a DOWNGRADE.

  51. f
    February 10, 2014 at 9:58 pm

    I have windows 2000 workstation.
    I was just getting ready to UPGRADE to XP Pro.

  52. Mikki M
    February 10, 2014 at 9:46 am

    LONG LIVE XP!!!!!!!!

  53. DM
    February 10, 2014 at 5:15 am

    Instead of Redesigning XP, 7 should be made more touch freindly !!!

  54. JB
    February 10, 2014 at 4:04 am

    Saying XP needs to die means you don't live in the real world. There are many situations XP Pro is quite ok. Mentioning those things that have become the norm since then makes you look like a noob. That is for using those as a reason. If you are into IT at all XP can be very secure.

    XP is still a very valid OS. Just to upgrade to upgrade is not a solution. If that's the case your simply falling into trap OS creators have established for consumers. Until a specific OS no longer supports specific things a user needs to do or hardware only then should one consider otherwise. But simply saying it needs to be put out to pasture complete rubbish.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:32 pm

      I'm not a n00b and I do live in the real world. Is Microsoft a n00b not living in the real world too? Because the company itself wants it to die.

  55. Craig M. Rosenblum
    February 10, 2014 at 3:47 am

    I still have a dual boot win xp and debian.

    I saw that Windows 7 nor 8 will support my older hardware.

    And like many people can't afford new pc hardware.

    So I will leave winxp on my dual boot, because it still allows me to play games as needed.

    But personally, when I saw Windows 8 come out, I knew right away it was time to move away from Microsoft Windows. I see it as a dilupidated piece of crap OS, that has clear performance, security and millions of other problems.

    While I am not a linux fan boy, I like it's security and performance, especially on older hardware.

    I do not agree that it is time to end WinXP when it clearly serves a need for use on older hardware.

    I think this endless obsession for planned obsollence is highly destructive. It leaves the landfills with endless piles of electronics, and us not learning how to take good care of pc's, so that they last longer.

    Use what works, if it doesn't work, then fine, then move on. But until then, just because it's new, does not mean it is better or improved. Doesn't mean it's crap either, but just because it's old doesn't mean it's crap either.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:31 pm

      I certainly agree that old hardware shouldn't be thrown out. Refurb it and load Linux on to it and it could do a job for someone with a limited budget and the willingness to learn. But Windows XP shouldn't be part of the equation, in my opinion. It isn't crap, OK, but it's outdated and once Microsoft ends support, likely to be vulnerable too.

    • dragonmouth
      March 4, 2014 at 7:54 pm

      "I certainly agree that old hardware shouldn’t be thrown out. Refurb it and load Linux on to it "

      Why install Linux only on old hardware? Use it to replace Windows on ALL computers. Then it won't matter if M$ decommits support for XP.

  56. A. Lawrence
    February 9, 2014 at 6:29 pm

    XP was great for its day. While, I'm not a big Windows user I don't get the hate for Windows 8. Hey folks you can make it look like Windows XP or 7 or even OS X if you want. Download a custom shell. Many are FREE. XP was never all that secure and with MSFT pulling updates. Watch out! Users with limited budgets should consider using Linux. If your system has a gig or less of RAM. Lightweight versions like Lubuntu, Bodhi or ARCH ( a bit more difficult to use) and others are fast and easy on system resources.

    What people may not understand is their computer will still work but their system may be compromised without their knowing. It opens them up to credit card theft and other problems. More modern machines can be found on Ebay. A dual core with 2gb RAM runs Windows 8 or 8.1 and can easily cost under $200.00 with 160gb hard drive.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:27 pm

      I agree completely. Windows Xp is going to be very vulnerable come April, and with a 30 percent market share you know for a fact malware authors will attack it specifically.

  57. suzybel
    February 9, 2014 at 4:33 pm

    I have an old laptop and desktop, both of which have XP. The desktop has several old graphics programs on it which will not work with newer os. I refuse to give them up. The laptop works great and I use it regularly. The only os I could put on it is Linux (it has a 40g hard drive) which I probably will, under duress.

  58. JayDee
    February 9, 2014 at 2:44 pm

    No.. XP is not dead in my House.. it rules...Yes I am using Win7 right now as I write this comment. But a fresh install of XP with ALL updates and without any 3rd party software bloat I can have XPpro on a partition and it uses under 5gig of hard drive. Just run it in limited user mode along with avast antivirus and comodo firewall.....my baby is fast.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:25 pm

      Is it faster than Windows 7 or Windows 8 though? Remember you can remove the bloatware from those OSes too.

  59. Tom W
    February 8, 2014 at 11:37 pm

    Should it die? Maybe. It depends entirely on the context.

    Windows XP is not suitable for business users, people who use modern software, people who want to multi-task, people with a lot of files (in other words, almost, but not quite, every computer user). But, for people who only use it for web browsing, emails, and documents, it suites their needs just as well now as it did in 2001.

    That's the easy part of the argument. The other part is all of the hidden copies of Windows XP out there. The ones in electronic advertising screens, billboards, flight departure boards, point-of-sale systems, ATMs (as you mentioned), and all manner of other devices. These devices are so prevalent that it would cost a fortune to replace them all before their natural end of life, more than is economically viable for the people who are responsible for their maintenance. This is especially important when you consider that XP does what it needs to do in these cases. XP is a stable operating system, and it will continue running the software in these machines until the heat death of the sun, or the machines break (whichever comes first).

    There is also a third situation where XP is commonly used. Large businesses that have complex and highly customised software that was written for XP often find that they cannot upgrade without having to commission a developer to write the software again from scratch. If the computers in this instance are isolated from the outside world (either not networked or part of a network that isn't connected to the internet), it puts them in the same category as the devices mentioned above: too expensive to replace considering they do their job fine.

    From an academic point of view, all of those devices above should be re-written, re-wired, re-configured, etc. to use a more modern, more stable, more up-to-date, more secure operating system. This will allow XP to die an honorable death, and proper progress can continue. In reality, for the devices mentioned above, spending all that money to update won't create a noticeable improvement to speed, security, stability, or usability.

    TL:DR; no, Windows XP shouldn't die. Not just yet anyway.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:24 pm

      I'd still rather use Chrome OS for day-to-day browsing rather than XP.

      You're correct, for all those other devices XP does all it needs to do, but I doubt whether the people who own things such as ATMs are going to bother upgrading them because Microsoft is ending support.

    • Tom W
      February 11, 2014 at 12:44 pm

      I agree that Chrome OS is probably a better option than XP, but most people still using XP are likely to be so afraid of change that they wouldn't be any more likely to upgrade to Chrome OS than they would be to upgrade to Windows 7.

      I don't think those devices will ever be updated, to be honest, but I was interpreting "die" to mean that it would just stop working everywhere, because that gave me more to think about for the answer.

  60. Kevin N
    February 8, 2014 at 11:34 pm

    Yes it need to die, if your pc so old, and can't even run windows 7 or 8, there are some really nice linux distros

  61. Nick
    February 8, 2014 at 10:54 pm

    My music and TV have expanded, but ALL the other, yes: Same Hair, Clothes,.

    This video should be removed. Tried to watch it, snorting, giggling, 5 year old is not a reason to switch. The 'applications' it shows, were crap in 2002, so to say they are crap now is not a reason to switch. There are enough freeware and open source applications that have evolved, work on XP, and 7.

    Why Switch? No more Microsoft security updates. That is the only reason. Windows 7 has some definite advantages, but they are not a reason to switch. Windows 8, only if you have a tablet. Right now, it is changing too quick because it is such a mess.

    I could go on an on, but the reality is, if you have to get more 'Modern', Linux is a much more viable option, otherwise, Windows 7.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:10 pm

      That video is an extreme example, for sure, but it proves the point; the world has moved on since Windows XP was released.

  62. Bob Myers
    February 8, 2014 at 7:08 pm

    Bob Myers
    February 7, 2014

    It ain’t broke, don’t fix it, don’t throw it away. It’s like a pair of well worn, comfortable genes. No longer stylish, but still useful.

    Ref: Well, a lot has changed in the 13 years since XP was released.

    - Have you got the same haircut now that you had then?
    No, but I don’t have the same hair either.

    Do you wear the same clothes?
    Pretty much, but I was in the military for 39+ years, what do I know about fashion?

    Or listen to the same music?
    Yep, type and vintage!

    Or watch the same television shows?
    Same show, no, unless they’re in syndication.
    Same type? Yes

    Dave P
    February 8, 2014

    My examples may have been lacking somewhat. But technology does generally improve over the years, which isn’t the case with creative pursuits (TV, music, fashion etc.)

    Dear Mr. Parrck,

    TV has evolved in it's technical ability. In my opinion, it's devolved in content. That's why I watch older shows, even in monochrome, or new shows of the same type.

    Music has followed a similar path, with more and more songs being unintelligible.

    Fashion seems to be repeating itself with newer materials

    Sales seems to be the driving force. A new OS comes out and the next years are spent correcting the faults that should never have been in the first issue. Faulty software has become the norm. The Affordable Care Act Registration is a cogent example.

    An example of non evolvement is this program, it doesn't have a spelling error correction function. The words programmed into the list are incomplete. The user is on their own to determine the correct spelling. Why? I expect there is no money in providing that function in this venue.

    Most direct to end user product "evolvement" is sales driven. Addition of "features" that a smaller portion of the users use is a sales gimick.

    Bob Myers

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:09 pm

      OK, so maybe I used bad examples. You have helped make my point though, because while content may have devolved, the technology has evolved. I'm afraid Windows belongs in the tech bracket. You may be watching old television shows, but are you watching them on an old TV set?

    • Bob Myers
      February 11, 2014 at 9:44 pm

      Your comment on the post Do You Agree That Windows XP Needs To Die? [We Ask You] has a new reply
      Here is your comment:
      Bob Myers
      February 7, 2014

      It ain’t broke, don’t fix it, don’t throw it away. It’s like a pair of well worn, comfortable genes. No longer stylish, but still useful.

      Ref: Well, a lot has changed in the 13 years since XP was released.

      - Have you got the same haircut now that you had then?
      No, but I don’t have the same hair either.

      Do you wear the same clothes?
      Pretty much, but I was in the military for 39+ years, what do I know about fashion?

      Or listen to the same music?
      Yep, type and vintage!

      Or watch the same television shows?
      Same show, no, unless they’re in syndication.
      Same type? Yes

      Dave P
      February 8, 2014

      My examples may have been lacking somewhat. But technology does generally improve over the years, which isn’t the case with creative pursuits (TV, music, fashion etc.)

      Dear Mr. Parrck,

      TV has evolved in it's technical ability. In my opinion, it's devolved in content. That's why I watch older shows, even in monochrome, or new shows of the same type.

      Music has followed a similar path, with more and more songs being unintelligible.

      Fashion seems to be repeating itself with newer materials

      Sales seems to be the driving force. A new OS comes out and the next years are spent correcting the faults that should never have been in the first issue. Faulty software has become the norm. The Affordable Care Act Registration is a cogent example.

      An example of non evolvement is this program, it doesn't have a spelling error correction function. The words programmed into the list are incomplete. The user is on their own to determine the correct spelling. Why? I expect there is no money in providing that function in this venue.

      Most direct to end user product "evolvement" is sales driven. Addition of "features" that a smaller portion of the users use is a sales gimick.

      Bob Myers
      Bob Myers —— 2014-02-08 19:08:31
      Here is the new reply:
      OK, so maybe I used bad examples. You have helped make my point though, because while content may have devolved, the technology has evolved. I'm afraid Windows belongs in the tech bracket. You may be watching old television shows, but are you watching them on an old TV set?
      Dave P —— 2014-02-10 20:09:45

      Dear Mr. Parrack,

      I apologize for spelling your name incorrectly previously. Like all physical things, I wear out and occasionally mis-perform or finally fail to perform.

      No Sir, I watch old movies/series and new similar movies/series on a modern TV set. It still shows original B&W videos in B&W. The first colorization was yucky! It's technology improved somewhat. Colorization is an idea, not a physical thing that car wear out and fail.

      XP is also an idea that still has uses. There is no need to discard an idea if it's still useful. Steam automobiles are an idea that is no longer practical and they are not made any more. They still have use as technological examples and are being kept and restored.

      My hair is physical and is wearing thin. I don't shave it off. It still preforms some of it's original purpose of protecting my head.

      XP doesn't degrade. it's still as useful as it ever was. It works better than when it was first written, unlike my hair.

      Bob

  63. Steven
    February 8, 2014 at 12:22 pm

    Just take the XP out of that statement and I agree "Windows needs to die"
    XP was the height of Windows desktop OSs it has been downhill from there. I admit 7 was upgrade but an upgrade from what? Vista.
    and 8 starts back downhill again.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:07 pm

      Windows needs to die... to be replaced with what, exactly? OSX isn't everyone's cup of tea, and Linux is never going to appeal to the mainstream.

    • Steven
      February 12, 2014 at 1:45 am

      With Linux.
      I have been stuck with windows on my home computers for years.
      I have used.
      CP/M (before dos)
      AppleDos
      MSDos
      Mac (4,5,6,7,X)
      windows (3.x, 95, 98, NT 3.0 4.0, XP, 7)
      I skipped using (me, vista, 8) I have no intention of using 8.

      I have tried to use Linux at home instead of windows many times, and I went back to Windows just because it was easier.

      Until 6 months ago I built a new computer and I tried to install windows 7 on it........

      It failed with some strainge message about unreconizable hardware.....
      over and over.
      I installed XP it installed with no problems.
      but as good as XP works it is missing features and it was and still is Ugly.

      I installed Linux Mint......
      Very easy NO problems.
      I am not going to go back(wards)

      If we castrate the 800lb Gorilla (ms) we might be able enjoy life in the Jungle.

  64. David L
    February 7, 2014 at 6:40 pm

    Sure. When they get something that works even half as well for individuals, business, government and military. Really, how hard can it be for people as smart as those working for MS to realize that people are holding onto (ancient in tech terms) XP devices for a reason and go back to the old drawing board to see what worked for the end-user rather than them.

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:06 pm

      But Windows 7 does work as well as -- better than, in fact -- XP. It's not Microsoft's fault people can't bring themselves to move on from 12-year-old technology.

  65. June
    February 7, 2014 at 6:15 pm

    I like windows XP. What harm would it be just to have and support it? I use other OSs too, like Android,Apple, Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 so I know what's out there.

    If there are people that have computers who do not want to buy the newest thing that comes along, so be it. It should be about freedom of choice.

  66. Tigers
    February 7, 2014 at 6:00 pm

    I use XP (Da only OS I use!) to surf the web, without updates for many years and I always disable the anti-virus.. This OS ROCKS!

    • Dave P
      February 10, 2014 at 8:04 pm

      Why would you do that? I assume you're only visiting sites you trust implicitly?

  67. dragonmouth
    February 7, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    Let's face it, the only reason for different versions of Windows is Microsoft's greed. There was/is no technological reason that the changes that made W2K, XP, Vista, Win 7 and Win 8.x unique could not have been incorporated into Windows NT. Other O/Ss (Linux, BSD, Unix, etc.) have had no problems in updating the same kernel as it became necessary. NT, W2K, XP and Vista did not have to become obsolete, M$ made sure they become obsolete.

    XP will die not because it is not wanted, it will die because of Microsoft neglect. And that is a shame because it finally has become a usable and useful O/S. Third parties have made it fairly secure, fixed most of its shortcoming and/or developed dependable work-arounds for those shortcomings.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:28 am

      Sure, Microsoft is greedy, but so is every other sizable company on the face of the planet. Including Apple.

      Microsoft moved on, as is its way. You may have a point about NT being updated exponentially, but it's just not the way Microsoft operates.

    • dragonmouth
      February 8, 2014 at 3:28 pm

      "Sure, Microsoft is greedy, but so is every other sizable company on the face of the planet. Including Apple."

      That is a great rationalization. How many times did your mother ask you "If everybody else jumped off the bridge, would you?" Actually, M$ and Fruitco, along with Oracle, have the most rapacious and ruthless of the software companies. Even IBM, which has been guilty of a few dastardly deeds, at its worst was never as bad as the other three.

      "You may have a point about NT being updated exponentially, but it’s just not the way Microsoft operates."

      Which is precisely my point. Red Hat and Canonical are also for-profit companies. One would think they would follow M$'s example and release incompatible versions of their software every couple of years just to guarantee themselves a steady revenue stream. But they have been updating/upgrading the same O/S for years without suffering financially.

  68. Rutul P
    February 7, 2014 at 2:46 pm

    Let it die respectfully!

    It's time to move on because:

    - Bad multiprocessor support,
    - Weak system files' security,
    - Outdated driver support,
    - Outdated kernel,
    - No built-in support to mount ISO files, PDF files etc which matters to me,

    My old desktop PC can only run XP (that too sluggishly) and based upon my eXPerience, it also doesn't support my LAN card. And most of all, many many PCs are having pirated XP installed which are almost all 'provided' with backdoors and trojans (nothing is 'free').

    It was a great OS which made me love computers, it has a special space in my heart but it has to die. :)

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:25 am

      Spoit on, sir, spot on.

  69. Nathanael
    February 7, 2014 at 1:09 pm

    Why in the world would you scrap the best, most useful operating system that Microsoft has released in a long time? Windows 8 stinks, Windows 7 has problems, and Windows XP is the last time they got it all right. Seriously!

    I quote from the article about liking it or not:
    If not then a) visit a doctor and b) read on to be convinced.

    I would flip that around. Visit a doctor if you are in love with a dysfunctional OS called Windows 7 or 8. Read on to be convinced simply means to go ahead and read an article with reasons that obviously can still be done on an XP computer. Chat rooms and Facebook? Check. Cloud computing and WiFi? Check. the ONLY wrong thing with XP is that I do not like the look. It has the ugliest skin ever, or it is just my Mac shining through. Anyways, XP should stay. I made the mistake of upgrading to Windows 8 fro hearing how great it was. That, my friends, was definitely one of the worst decisions I have ever made. If you have XP: Keep it until there is a much better OS that is released by Nadella and the guys at Microsoft.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:25 am

      How is Windows 7 dysfunctional?

      XP may be the last time Microsoft got everything right, but it was made for 2002, not 2014.

    • Nathanael
      February 8, 2014 at 4:18 pm

      Windows 7 has device management problems, and it stinks when it comes to sleep and power management. And pinning anything to the task bar? Come on!

      XP IS the last time Microsoft hit a home run, and it was made for 2002 but there is no doubt that Microsoft could give it a slightly cleaner look WITHOUT changing functionality that people do not need or want. They could update processor requirements and device capability as well to give it a newer look/revamping.

  70. Kush
    February 7, 2014 at 7:43 am

    I still use it....

    I dont care if Microsoft supports it or not bcos i dont use windows Update it is such a pain in a**

  71. Nishanth
    February 7, 2014 at 7:33 am

    Because "Everything that has a beginning has an end"!

  72. Bob Myers
    February 7, 2014 at 1:23 am

    It ain't broke, don't fix it, don't throw it away. It's like a pair of well worn, comfortable genes. No longer stylish, but still useful.

    Ref: Well, a lot has changed in the 13 years since XP was released.
    - Have you got the same haircut now that you had then?
    No, but I don't have the same hair either.

    Do you wear the same clothes?
    Pretty much, but I was in the military for 39+ years, what do I know about fashion?

    Or listen to the same music?
    Yep, type and vintage!

    Or watch the same television shows?
    Same show, no, unless they're in syndication.
    Same type? Yes

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:23 am

      My examples may have been lacking somewhat. But technology does generally improve over the years, which isn't the case with creative pursuits (TV, music, fashion etc.)

  73. Aaron
    February 6, 2014 at 9:43 pm

    Let it die. It's slow and aging and not as secure anymore, and Windows 7 & 8 (maybe) are suitable replacements.

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 4:10 pm

      "not as secure anymore"
      It never was secure. Neither is W7 and W8.x. At least not in comparison to *nixes and BSDs.

  74. Bill Fleet
    February 6, 2014 at 9:20 pm

    Right now, I have one Win7 box and a number of old WinXP laptops for my kids. The rest of our machines are Macs and iPads. The only thing WinXP really lacks is a current version of IE (It tops out at IE8), but seriously, we use Chrome. Everything else is still up to date, and rock-solid stable, stable, stable, especially on old hardware.

    The laptops are ex-business machines from Goodwill. I have over the years acquired a site license for WinXP, so no issues with registration there. New installs are essentially free.

    And don't forget all that lovely 3- to 8-year-old computer hardware for super cheap at Goodwill and other outlets. It's great for slower applications, media servers (not players), and 10-year-olds doing homework. Pop in a new HD, install XP and off it goes.

    Once XP is officially retired by Microsoft, I imagine it will become 'free' (unofficially) and live on for decades. New licenses for Win7/8 are very expensive or not simple to find cheaply. Since XP already covered ALL of the basic functions of a modern PC (Business correspondence, Web/Email, Basic Media/Gaming), there's often no reason to upgrade.

    Contrast this with Macs, where one pays through the nose for hardware, but gets the OS and all the major apps for free. (OSX is best-in-class, as are its apps, and if one peels back the pretty interface, there's a BSD command line underneath it.)

    XP won't go away. It's too useful.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:22 am

      So, you get the Windows 7 machine and the kids have to make do with XP ;)

      XP covered all the basics 12 years ago, but it's seriously lacking these days. I prefer Chrome OS to XP now.

    • Bill Fleet
      February 9, 2014 at 5:38 pm

      Actually, my Win7 box is a PVR/server that I don't interact with much. I just needed the current DRM in WMS to talk to Time Warner, now that everything they stream is encrypted. This, incidentally, the only thing that compelled me to move to 7, and I'm not even sure I couldn't have done it in XP.

      As for the kids, there's nothing they need or want that they can't do in XP with Chrome. They also have iPads.

      I also have a chromebook, which is great. It's cheap and light, and better for lugging around every day than my heavier (and more precious) MacBook Pro. That is a platform with a lot of future ahead of it.

  75. Kevin
    February 6, 2014 at 9:16 pm

    Let it die. XP was the reason I switched to Linux years ago.
    1. The 3/1 RAM split was bad, Linux had 64 bit and recognized more RAM way before Windows.
    2. Drivers for everything and it recognizes nothing.
    3. Making it virus resistant (not proof) slowed it down to a crawl. (Same with the newer offerings from Windows.)
    4. The bloatware (Also the same with the newer offerings from Windows.)
    Side note: Even Linux needs updates, I went though 3 Mints and 1 PClinux OS since my switch in 2007. Just maintaining my Windows 7 gaming pc is beyond frustrating, hope Steam o.s. can eliminate that need.

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 4:07 pm

      "Even Linux needs updates"
      Why shouldn't it? It must be kept current.

      "I went though 3 Mints and 1 PClinux OS since my switch in 2007"
      It certainly wasn't because each release of Mint was incompatible with the previous one. Unless you sswitched desktops or changed from Ubuntu-based mint to Debian-based Mint.

    • Kevin
      February 7, 2014 at 10:19 pm

      “Even Linux needs updates”
      Why shouldn’t it? It must be kept current.
      (Exactly, as much as I love Linux, you do have to upgrade from time to time.)

      “I went though 3 Mints and 1 PClinux OS since my switch in 2007?
      It certainly wasn’t because each release of Mint was incompatible with the previous one. Unless you sswitched desktops or changed from Ubuntu-based mint to Debian-based Mint.
      (Correct again. I loved Mint 7 and 9 but 13 was not as stable as I liked. PClinuxOS on the other hand is the best OS I've ever used. I use Mate and my wife uses Full Monty. I'd never use 10% of what Full Monty offers!)

  76. likefunbutnot
    February 6, 2014 at 8:57 pm

    I wish that it could die, but some of my clients have apps that won't run on anything but a physical computer that has XP on it. Even XP Mode annoys me since it's another layer of complexity for a client system, but the worst are random line-of-business apps that for one reason or other don't play nice in a VM *and* won't run in compatibility mode. I've been telling some of these customers to find a new application to fit their needs, but not every every organization can afford to spend the money on custom application development or a team of IT people to handle implementation and training.

    Even worse, the "free" XP Mode license only exists for Windows 7 Pro, Enterprise and Ultimate. It's not a licensed feature in Windows 8. If a company is actually striving to maintain legal software licensing, virtualizing XP clients is far more expensive with any other version of Windows.

    I also have customers that still have a hard requirement to use IE6 for some of the sites they use, which is another circle of hell entirely.

    So in short, yes, I'd be happier if I didn't have to widely support XP systems any longer, but in reality I can't see it vanishing any time soon.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:18 am

      I didn't even touch on IE6, which is another case of people (or businesses) needing to move on.

      How is Microsoft ending support for XP going to affect you personally?

  77. Adrian
    February 6, 2014 at 8:19 pm

    Should it die?...NO!

    It's simple and gets the job done. Why do I need to go to something more complex and different...just to put more money in Microsoft's pocket?

    I don't think so.

  78. Thedreaming
    February 6, 2014 at 7:06 pm

    Tie it up to a pole, pour gasoline over it, set it ablaze and drop an asteroid on top of it while nuking it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:16 am

      I would pay to see this cataclysmic event take place.

  79. Nick
    February 6, 2014 at 6:50 pm

    I agree with some of the others. Let's keep it and ditch Windows 8.1.

  80. JAD
    February 6, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    I love and use Windows 7 - but despite having virtual machine XP, it still doesn't do all that XP could. I use a MIDI synth which I hook up to a PC - but seeing Win7 doesn't even recognise a gameport I have to resort to XP - which does what I need very well. Sure I could just get a USB MIDI adapter - but why should I when I have a working alternative. You don't go buy a new car because it ran out of gas !
    I am lucky in that I have an old PC laying about that I can use as a dedicated XP machine. Also marketting people hate me - I'm not rolling in cash. It took me a while to cough up the money to get a Win7 license. Sure I could get Linux for free - but Windows is the defacto norm if you want certain software. I shall be holding on to my XP and Win7 CDs and keys as long as I can get use out of them. If Microsoft want to drop me because I don't want to pay them money - then so be it. I have an OS that does what I need. If I need to get another OS I'll get a free copy of Linux if it does what I need. So glad I saved my money and didn't jump on the marketting bandwagon that was Windows 8 - look where that went...

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:16 am

      The incompatibility between XP and Vista/7 is a problem, I grant you, but as you say there IS a solution. At some point XP has to die, right?

  81. Glenn G
    February 6, 2014 at 6:11 pm

    Nope, use it every day. Works great.

  82. Jerry
    February 6, 2014 at 5:59 pm

    I have been using Windows since version 1.0. I still have 1.0 on floppies in the garage. I was using MS DOS before that and a few of those were a disaster. I have used 99% of the windows versions released. By far XP was the most stable and probably the fastest. I have some older computers that work just fine with XP. Many business use software running on top of XP. It would take little effort to continue support for one of the best versions created. Vista, Mellenium, and a few others were a disaster. Keep XP going!!!

  83. DrBOP
    February 6, 2014 at 5:07 pm

    I have never understood why ALL companies can't get it through their heads that you can update the old and keep selling it, while offering the new to those who want it. Isn't total sales/profit the name of the capitalist game? And how about this freedom of CHOICE that we keep hearing about?

    It would be simple enough for MS to bring out a XP2014 (especially for those who DO NOT see the world through a not-so-smartphone), while bringing out new OS's who want that. And guess the no-brainer?

    = MORE sales = MORE happy customers = MORE profit.

    DUH!

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 3:56 pm

      " Isn’t total sales/profit the name of the capitalist game?"
      Obviously you do not understand M$ brand of capitalism. Why settle for incremental profits by selling XP upgrades when they can force EVERYBODY to buy a new versions of the O/S and applications?

      XP Upgrade=$99 new O/S= at least $199

      No brainer - new O/S wins by a landslide because it brings in twice the money per unit.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:14 am

      But what would a Windows XP 2014 be like if you had your way? If very little is changed then the original is fine, and Microsoft has already made the changes it wanted to... with Vista, 7, and then 8.

  84. Roger C
    February 6, 2014 at 4:17 pm

    F#@# all of the Windoze versions and switch to Mac OSX. (someone had to say it)

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:12 am

      No, they really didn't. This thread isn't for you, Apple Fanboy ;)

  85. Meelis
    February 6, 2014 at 4:13 pm

    It should live because its good and popular.

  86. Erwin
    February 6, 2014 at 4:07 pm

    Keep suppport for win xp. It is still very useful on our older laptops. We don't need all the new capabilities to perform our routine work. Planned obsolescence is not good for everyone. We paid good money for xp and the computers and Microsoft should continue support until the usage drops significantly from the reported 30%.

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 3:47 pm

      "Planned obsolescence is not good for everyone. "
      It is good for the vendor, in this case Microsoft, and that is all that counts as far they are concerned. That is what you get for signing your soul over to the Evil Empire.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:11 am

      It's a catch-22 though... That 30 percent market share won't drop until Microsoft ends support, and people like yourself think such a hefty market share warrants continued support!

    • dragonmouth
      February 8, 2014 at 4:56 pm

      "people like yourself think such a hefty market share warrants continued support!"
      Linux, which is balkanized into hundreds of distros, supposedly has less than 10% of the market and it is being supported. :-)

      Microsoft couldn't care less if home/individual users need or want to keep using XP. For them M$ has already issued a ukase that, from now until W9 is released, they WILL use Win 8.x. The people M$ has to convince to upgrade from XP, are their corporate clients because that is the sector which brings most of M$'s steady income.

  87. Phil Nolan
    February 6, 2014 at 4:06 pm

    Ancient technology is ancient. It was time to die long ago. They should focus more on showing people how awesome 8.1 is.

    • Unclouded by stupidity
      February 6, 2014 at 6:44 pm

      Awesome..? Windows 8(.1)..? There, there... Thanks for trying... Now go and chew on some Crayons.

    • Phil Nolan
      February 6, 2014 at 10:06 pm

      I see someone else needs to actually try it (and give it a fair chance).

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:09 am

      I suspect Microsoft would like to focus more on the future, hence the need to persuade people to upgrade from XP!

  88. Sarath
    February 6, 2014 at 3:58 pm

    Windows XP can die once Microsoft figure outs what people need & how to make them get the real experience (like Windows XP). My old desktop computer still runs on Windows XP like a charm !

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 3:43 pm

      "Windows XP can die once Microsoft figure outs what people need"
      What makes you so sure M$ cares about "what people need"? M$ TELLS people what they need. What makes you so sure that M$ cares about "real experience"? M$ will TELL you what you WILL experience and right now, you WILL experience Windows 8.1.

  89. Casey Wood
    February 6, 2014 at 3:39 pm

    It's definitely time to go... So obviously outdated and way too susceptible to modern vulnerabilities.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:08 am

      A rare voice of reason (who agrees with me) in this thread :)

  90. Skun QS
    February 6, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    Thank god I switched to Mac OS X in 2006 and can't tell you what a genius move that was! Vista was a fail just again as Windows 8. Why did they make a desktop OS with a Touch friendly interfacee?

  91. Chris Garfield
    February 6, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    all windoze should die (xp, 7, & 8)
    virus protection just slows machine down; so why run it? as its not necessary in a properly written os & programs. replace with *nix [gnu/linux, bsd ...]

  92. Patrick
    February 6, 2014 at 3:10 pm

    Disagree: Windows XP is perfectly stable and usable even in 2014. Microsoft is dumping money into Windows 8 and eventually 9 but what if you can't afford it. Windows XP is there as a standard. Vista was a mistake and while 7 was good, and is good, there isn't a version of Windows before 7 that's as stable as XP. If you buy brand new today you'll be forced to use 7 or 8. Ok, fine. But if you're unfamiliar with all of the changes, if your programs from your old computer are not compatible, you're screwed.

    XP was great in its time and remains a clear marking point for describing the abilities of a computer. Hand someone a laptop and tell them it's running Vista and watch the cringe. There's little hope or help for them at that point. XP is a welcome smile as it might not be the most up to date but it won't give you headaches either.

    Bottom line, keep it around. It's the foundation for better operating systems and without that the whole thing collapses.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:05 am

      It's usable, sure, but it's not exactly a fluid experience these days. I couldn't go back to it now, even if you paid me to do so.

  93. Donnie S.
    February 6, 2014 at 3:07 pm

    XP has a few good years left in it, particularly in standalone machines and embedded systems on internal networks. Production desktops and workstations, however, should be migrated to a desktop OS with more robust hardware support and frequent security updates.?

    • rich
      March 7, 2014 at 11:52 pm

      Si fractum non sit, noli id repere. Old advice (Google it) but it still has validity

      today.

      Kids with long hair and short pants always have lots of advice for their seniors,

      worth what you pay for it.

      My first computer had a non-Intel CPU, its own unique OS but could also run CP/M,

      64K (not mega or giga) of memory, 16 colour graphics and used a TV set as a monitor.

      It was also a bit cranky and crash-prone. But it was good enough for H&R Block to use

      it in their tax preparation offices, had built-in word processing with more advanced

      available, played myriads of games many of which are still popular today, could

      connect to the internet if 300 baud was tolerable (the monitors of the day couldn't

      quite keep up with 1200 baud) and generally did the basic things we use computers for

      today. And of course there were all sorts of third-party upgrades available. At the

      most fundamental level, it is still a usable computer today, though it would quickly

      try one's patience - Moores Law has yet to be repealed.

      Just as, back around 1940, the American Bantam automobile company responded to a

      government tender for a light general purpose (GP)vehicle for the armed services,

      which was accepted. Even though the company faded shortly after some samples of the

      vehicle are still around, though demand shortly required the production scale only

      Ford, with an assist from Willys, could provide. When the war was over Willys carried

      on with the production, adding civilian models.

      Cars have changed a lot since 1945. But the GP model carried on, adding new models,

      complying with new regulations, adopting new advances as they came along, keeping the

      basic idea and structural theme and purpose, just updating every time the chance came

      to make it do its thing better. In fact it is still rolling off American production

      lines today, under the name the U.S. Army soldiers adapted from the Popeye comic

      strip to smooth out the GP.

      It's called the Jeep and it will still run the Rubicon Trail successfully, the track

      representative of the terrain and conditions it was designed to work on so long ago.

      Ir's said there are two kinds of fools. There are those who say "this is old,

      therefore it is good". And those who say " is new, therefore it is better".

      I was already an experienced, though very amateur, computer user when I put Windows

      3.1 as the GUI for DOS on my Everex 386-16. It was eventually replaced with Win95,

      which introduced me to the delights of the BSoD. And later Win98 though by then I

      was savvy enough to wait for the second edition, though even so I was quickly

      introduced to new and even more sophisticated crashes. Maybe that's why I never had

      trouble I couldn't cope with when I went to XP.

      I won't say Win7 was a mistake on my part, but I don't find it an improvement either.

      It's an ungodly resource hog. It won't let me use some of my most cherished old

      programs. It is very difficult to tamper with, to ease the glitches and make things

      run more smoothly. I hate the libraries of stuff in six different places, down a file

      tree umpteen layers deep. And while I have Win8 licenced, download, and as ready to

      install as it is likely to get - well, let's say I'm 83 and the only way it will get

      on my computer as when my estate installs it to sell it to some sucker who doesn't

      know better.

      The Win7 machine is new, powerful and pretty. But I suspect the older XP laptop will

      change to Linux soon so I'll have an exit handy when Microsoft perpetrates its next

      disaster. And the one with XP Pro will be fully updated through the last patch,

      defended by a fully updated third-party antivirus from one of those who will continue

      to support XP , plus full firewall of course (and hardware firewall on the router of

      course) as well as such supplementary shields as Win Patrol, Super Anti-spyware,

      MBAM,sandboxing on the browser, and full backup to an external hard disc every week

      or so depending on use, just in case.

      Among operating systems, I see Windows as the Jeep analog. It should be (and has

      been) updated to exploit all mod cons as they are developed, but it should still be

      the tough, simple, straightforward tool for the job it has always been. XP should

      live - in a Second Edition (and third, and fourth), perhaps needing to be bought

      again as the new model comes out but true to its concept, history and heritage.

      And don't try to tell me the Cadillac is newer and better - it's not what I want the

      machine for. I still need to cross the Rubicon trail.

  94. david payne
    February 6, 2014 at 2:58 pm

    one of my customers is still using windows 3.1. I like windows xp myself, it is simple and works well. most public library's stil use it. If you are worried about infections then use DEEP FREEZE. Or comdo time machine. Or use a thumb drive with portable software. Or do everything on the cloud. I love what i am using right now, it is a LG 55 inch big screen. No infections. I feel that smart tv's may be the way to go.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:03 am

      Windows 3.1? I'm not even old enough to have ever used that, so its unfathomable for me that someone is still using it as their primary OS.

    • Nick
      February 8, 2014 at 11:09 pm

      Dave, if you are not old enough to have used 3.1, then that may explain part of your view point.

      Maybe it's a generation thing? :}

      Makes me wonder how long some of the readers have been working with computers.

      Me, over 30 years, and yes, I use ALL 'current' windows versions, except Vista. (I am an IT tech and have to know them to survive)

      My main systems are a mix of SUSE, Ubuntu, FreeNAS, XP and Windows 7.

  95. Bruce Barnes
    February 6, 2014 at 2:06 pm

    Not everyone uses Windows XP the same way and for applications like self-checkout lines in grocery stores, it need not be upgraded at substantial costs to the vendor and ultimately us the consumer. I think Microsoft should still provide system patches for it, possibly at a cost now that it's been replaced by newer OS's. Microsoft has a responsibility to its customers.

    I only use Windows for one application that won't run under Wine because I much prefer Ubuntu Linux for everything else.

  96. anotherguynamedbart
    February 6, 2014 at 1:48 pm

    "This is a world that Windows XP was never meant to inhabit".

    What the heck, have you ever used XP? This is crazy, you talk like it's Windows 3.1. I'm using XP right now and there's zero reason I can't do any of those things you described. You sound like a real tool who believes he should upgrade because marketing tells him to.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:02 am

      Yes, I used XP for several years, upgrading from Windows 98. Have you watched that video? Have you tried a more modern operating system? The thing is a relic, and it deserves to be in a museum rather than installed on a computer.

  97. RedTapeDoc
    February 6, 2014 at 1:00 pm

    Its about time however my wife loves it.. Don’t know if we are ready for windows 8 in our office.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:01 am

      Windows 7 is the natural successor to XP, so perhaps you could persuade her to switch up to that.

  98. Alan W
    February 6, 2014 at 12:33 pm

    A direct answer to your question would be Isnt it time we let the users decide what they will use? By this I mean if you bought the operating system (and hopefully you did or got it with your PC) then you should have the right to decide whether or not you want to dump it. I have many programs and games that I bought over the years which are still playable, should I throw them away and by all the latest releases?
    With all the money that Microsoft has made out of XP they should keep the updates coming instead of the "Well we have made a large fortune out of you, lets see if we can make some more" attitudes that big companies seem to adopt these days.
    Oh and if you are wondering, I am using 8.1 as my operating system, because thats what I choose to use.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 5:00 am

      Would you have Microsoft support XP forever then? The company knows that letting people stay on XP for many more years to come is only going to cause problems, updates or no updates.

    • Alan W
      February 8, 2014 at 3:09 pm

      No of course not Dave but as long as it has such a huge following let it live. If Microsoft want us to move on then they should come up with something that is appealing to all sectors dont you think?
      Another way to think of it is if 20 million English people eat baked beans regulary should the supermarkets stop selling them so as to try to get you to eat processed peas instead?

  99. Merlin
    February 6, 2014 at 12:33 pm

    I just upgraded all of the home computers to Windoze 7.
    Too bad you can't upgrade from XP to 7 without a blank install. So all needed software has to be reinstalled as well.
    Oh well, That gives the PC a fresh clean start, so it's not all that bad.
    However, I will be using XP in a virtual machine, because some programs only work in XP.
    XP compatibility mode doesn't do the trick.
    So XP in VM under Windoze 7 it is.

  100. Shawn
    February 6, 2014 at 12:13 pm

    Only old people who's kids don't visit still have XP

    Anyway; Linux already has a better, faster, safer version of XP. . . It's called Linux

    • Howard B
      February 9, 2014 at 10:16 pm

      I've used a couple of versions of Ubuntu, Mint, and Puppy Linux, and it's a horrific pain to get things working right - this from someone who's been an IT admin for 15 years. And the sad thing is, to run Flash or games is horrible; WINE doesn't allow half the things to run that should.
      I'd be running Mint if the only game I ever wanted to run is TuxKart or FreeCiv; as a PC gamer, you need *some* version of Windows that will play the games you want under DirectX/Direct3D. Snarky comments aside, if you want to play games on a PC, you need Windows; Linux is *no* substitute.

  101. Jim Gibson
    February 6, 2014 at 12:13 pm

    We have lived with XP for years now and it's become a friend rather than an 'Operating System'. Many company's still use XP and government offices are still attached to it as it is by far the most stable platform Microsoft has produced. Never let it die.

  102. A41202813GMAIL
    February 6, 2014 at 11:54 am

    XP Is Still Fast Enough For My Needs.

    I Stopped Installing Any Newer M$ Updates 4 Years Ago - So After APRIL 2014 It Will Just Be Business As Usual.

    And, Yes, I Use It To Browse The Internet Every Single Day.

    XP FOREVER !

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:58 am

      How is your computer not riddled with malware by this point?

    • A41202813GMAIL
      February 9, 2014 at 12:30 pm

      You Tell Me.

      A - I Use The In Built Firewall Of XP, Without Any Exceptions,

      B - I Use The MCAFEE Viruscan Enterprise 8.8 - Updated Religiously Every 6 ( Six ) Days.

      I Stopped Installing Newer M$ Updates, Because One, Or More, Of Them Turned My Machine Into A Snail, Back In The SUMMER Of 2009.

      Since Then, I Uninstalled All I Could Live Without.

      You Know, You Fool Me Once...

      Thank You For Responding.

  103. Eric J
    February 6, 2014 at 9:52 am

    no.

  104. Vipul J
    February 6, 2014 at 9:48 am

    In India, majority of computers used in government offices still run on specs like 512MB RAM, Pentium processors and 20-40GB hard disks.
    So Windows XP is the only logical OS for these platforms, because Linux would be too complicated and 7 cannot be used on these specs.
    Generally for home usage, I think XP has already died! Every new computer/laptop comes pre loaded with Windows 8, and people who buy DOS based ones, are technically smart enough to load their own OS, and would go for 7 or 8.

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 3:32 pm

      "because Linux would be too complicated"
      Why? Were you born with a complete knowledge of XP? Or did you have to learn it?

    • Vipul J
      February 7, 2014 at 5:09 pm

      I'm not talking about myself. I'm talking about those government employees which are generally from the 80's. And majority of them have worked from Windows 95 to 98 to current XP. So 98 to XP still seems a comfortable change, but 98 to Linux is way off.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:57 am

      That's the problem Linux has always had... if you don't want to learn how to use a new operating system then you're going to stick with Windows even with changes to the versions.

    • dragonmouth
      February 8, 2014 at 4:31 pm

      If you're talking sys admins, tech support and others that need to know the internals, I would agree. End users do not know and do not care what version of Windows is on their PCs. To them the O/S is transparent. All they see is the application(s).

      I was part of a conversion from MVS/Windows-based application environment to an all Linux environment. Even as one who had to support the new application, I saw little of Linux as such. SQL Server was replaced by Informix and I had to learn that. As far as the end users went, all they saw and cared about were the different looking data entry screens, which were due to the different app they were using, not the different O/S.

  105. Brad W
    February 6, 2014 at 9:32 am

    It still has a use. It is stable, runs on comparatively little (hardware) resources. Good for students and for coding. Only downside is the older interface and protocols and shortcuts.

    Have used the Windows Fundamental version of XP (which I found thank you internet) and found it stable and useful. Easy to install and as a slightly tweaked version of XP easy to avoid virsuses. In fact never had a virus problem on WinFund.

  106. bart
    February 6, 2014 at 9:16 am

    Not sure whet is the problem with win7 or win8, really.

  107. stick
    February 6, 2014 at 9:12 am

    Linux plus facile pour les particuliers.
    après il y aura plus de windob

  108. Finn
    February 6, 2014 at 9:02 am

    While I agree it's already time for Windows XP to die, I still have a few problems with your logic, Dave. Not EVERYTHING in life has to evolve - you compare OS to music, clothes, haircut, favorite movies and tv shows.

    Some of these things don't have to evolve and be changed. I don't see anything wrong with listening to old music or watching older movies and TV Shows. Otherwise "evolution" (hardly the best word to describe today's rubbish) would make me listen to Dubstep, Nicki Minaj or Justin Bieber and watch Avengers (sorry, hate it, one of the worst movies I saw, just as the other superhero productions). Sometimes it's easy to forget about good stuff and blindly embrace everything that's new. New doesn't have to mean "better".

    This rule might also apply to operating systems, though I have to say I'm pretty happy with Windows 8.1 (and never really liked XP, moved to 7 asap). So yeah, basically I agree with you about Windows XP, however I think your arguments and comparison was a bit out of place ;)

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:56 am

      That's fair comment. I'm certainly not saying music or TV is better these days, but the way it moves on shows how much things change over time. If anything, technology is more affected by time than anything else, as newer IS better.

    • ..
      March 5, 2014 at 12:04 am

      newer is not better most software today comes riddled with bugs and needs a ton of patching a the moment most software companies produce sub standart products and sell unfinished projects , that did not use to happen

      XP needs an overhaul and it needs to stay alive , windows 8 and windows 8 tipe OS's need to be scraped , windows 7 works fine on every single computer just disable the extras and eye candy and run a basic version

  109. On W
    February 6, 2014 at 8:15 am

    Thank you Windows XP! Will miss you forever. Hello Windows 8.1, care for a ride?

  110. Muawiyath
    February 6, 2014 at 6:57 am

    It leaves the user very frustrated but those days were great. It is time to end the story or is it time for Linux to adopt XP and make it something close to Ubuntu ?

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 3:23 pm

      "is it time for Linux to adopt XP"
      Why would Linux want to go backwards in its development?

      "make it something close to Ubuntu ?"
      There is something like that. It is called Zorin.

    • Howard B
      February 9, 2014 at 10:07 pm

      Eccchhh...can't stand Ubuntu's "Mac lookalike" theme with the control buttons on the wrong side, and the "Unity" interface is ugly. Try Linux Mint or MATE instead.

  111. Anonymous
    February 6, 2014 at 5:44 am

    no

  112. ?????? ?
    February 6, 2014 at 5:22 am

    Banks moved to windows xp because of the fact reduce working people, thus resulted in profits now because microsoft put a end to windows xp banks will need to upgrade their machines resulting in lots of revenue waste so investors don't agree for banks to upgrade so windows xp should be retained.
    ATM's used windows xp because of bugs and support to low end 16bit micro controllers just sufficient to dispense cash so they want windows xp to be live.
    In order to build 16bit micro controllers which use low power for some machines not used regularly you need a compiler which works only on windows xp so windows xp should be alive.
    windows xp is beeing used by lots of intelligence agencies just to store data not to decouple complex data because intelligence is by humans not by computer so windows xp should be alive.
    Traffic signals are controlled well by windows low cost pc's(which come with windows xp) so windows xp should be alive.
    Tax people who compute manually need computer to save data not to compute(of course they don't use tally etc... for large auditing as some companies may get caught in just internal auditing) so windows xp should be alive.
    So now the current point at the end
    you need a computer to do low speed work - use windows xp is needed.
    you need a computer to amaze people - you need a high end PC

    • Howard B
      February 9, 2014 at 10:06 pm

      Windows XP won't work on a "16 bit microcontroller" because XP's kernel is x86, 32bit.

    • ?????? ?
      February 10, 2014 at 6:11 am

      sorry wrongly typed by me.
      I meant you can control 16 bit architecture micro controller at ease with windows xp compared to later windows versions.
      Also cross compilation has less issues.

  113. M Mahtab S
    February 6, 2014 at 5:04 am

    Yes, I agree with you and its time to put XP back , I am using Windows 7 , and I am happy with this rather than 8 ,because I have customised this in my way,

  114. Junil M
    February 6, 2014 at 4:27 am

    Windows XP was and is one of the best windows OS with simple interface and great GUI with great user experience. But like everything in this world, it needs to die someday (Microsoft has stopped supporting it, that means it will become a security vulnerability to use it). People should be able to let it go and move on to an updated version or something different like ubuntu, linux mint. Even Windows 8.1 is great and I have been using it and I like it.

    • dragonmouth
      February 7, 2014 at 3:29 pm

      "But like everything in this world, it needs to die someday"
      In its current form, yes. M$ made sure of that. But just think, if all the money M$ spent on developing Vista, W7 and W8 was spent on updating and upgrading XP, how much better it would be. Why must M$ create successive versions of software that barely compatible with each other?

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:52 am

      XP would have needed such a huge visual overhaul on top of all the added features and forced changes that I would say developing Vista/Win7 made more sense.

    • dragonmouth
      February 8, 2014 at 3:53 pm

      If it had to be updated today, I agree with you. But if instead of making a massive effort to create Vista and then W7 and W8, the changes that made those Window versions what they are were apllied gradually to XP, XP would have the Vista/W7/W8 features and capabilities but on a proven, stable and debugged base.

      From a programming viewpoint, developing Vista, W7, W8, when you have XP, is like re-inventing the wheel each time. It is much easier and makes more sense to build on an established base from which most of the bugs have been expunged, then to develop something new and start its debugging process from scratch.

    • Bruce E
      February 20, 2014 at 11:34 am

      In the long run, initiating a new version allows the developers an opportunity to do a more thorough cleanup of the codebase. This makes it easier to make bug fixes and feature enhancements reducing future development costs. Have you noticed how long it has been since MS has issued a feature enhancement for XP? The primary reason is how much additional cost there is to do that versus doing a full refresh.

      Developing a new version is NOT like re-inventing the wheel. Windows 7 did not start from nothing. It began with the cleaned up code from Vista. Their starting point for Vista was still the core of XP like XP was based on the core of 2000. But after the cleanup each time, it provided a means to dig deeper into the core to make the necessary changes to move forward with the newer hardware, improve performance, and tweak internals without adversely affecting the performance of existing installations. Re-engineering something is still simpler, and in many cases safer, than dumping everything you have and starting with a blank slate. It also makes it easier to ensure fewer compatibility issues.

      Even if you set things up as some sort of rolling update as you seem to suggest, the debugging process gets complex with all of the regression testing that is required. As we have seen in the past, patches and updates have broken other parts of the system. By going to a new version you get the advantage of ensuring everything gets thoroughly checked.

      When Microsoft changed the WDM between XP and Vista, everybody was up in arms because their peripherals no longer worked and didn't have drivers that fit the new model. How would that have gone over if it was just done as an update to XP? The big changes between versions are better carried out as an entirely new version rather than a patch/service pack and will take even longer to roll out. This is an increased cost to the developer which will end up being passed on to the consumer in some form.

  115. Alfredo Angeles
    February 6, 2014 at 3:56 am

    I love XP because in any machines works without any any any problem. When I install (forced) win7 I need to undress it completely in order to work without being constantly distracted by so many beautifull shinny and super updated effects all around. Windows xp its like a war hummer not like an unnecesary sporty city porshe. You microsoft guys make something we can use to work. (>.<) I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH XP DIE CC

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:51 am

      The Windows 7 effects can be customized easily enough, and I personally don't find them as distracting as using an OS built for the world that existed 12 years ago!

  116. Amio
    February 6, 2014 at 3:26 am

    So long as Microsoft continues to allow older patches to be downloaded via Windows Update or a download link somewhere, I see no issue. I don't think Microsoft saying "no more patches" necessarily 'kills" Windows XP, because it will still work.

    I have nostalgic reasons for wanting to wanting to see Windows XP continue, but none translate into the technology we have today. Continuing to use Windows XP is useful just for the old hardware people own. I remember when Vista/7 released, and my old computers couldn't handle the requirements for those two OS's. I no longer have those computers, but I could see someone wanting to install XP on an old PC due to the system requirements.

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:50 am

      It's the beginning of the end though once support is pulled. You're taking a gamble using an operating system which will now be vulnerable as its manufacturer has moved on.

    • Paul B
      February 10, 2014 at 3:21 pm

      People with old computers can use Ubuntu or some another linux distributive

  117. Stella Kowalski
    February 6, 2014 at 3:03 am

    XP is a keeper.
    I hate Windows 7
    I will be running XP as long as I can
    and to top it off, I run XP in 98 mode because I like a clean and simple working desktop.
    Long Live Windows XP

    • Tim
      February 6, 2014 at 12:39 pm

      What causes your negative thinking about Win 7?

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:48 am

      You hate Windows 7? I don't think I've ever heard anyone express that before. What do you hate about it?

    • David
      February 10, 2014 at 2:31 pm

      What to hate about Win7? How about the fact that the control panel is retarded... Everything takes more clicks. If you want to personalize the look of the mouse - it'll take you a minute to find it... (Time saver hint: It's not under "mouse" and not under "personalization"). It's a maze of Category > sub-Cat > sub-sub cat > nope, back out and try again...Arg! Can't you just give me the classic view so I can pick the one I want!? OH there's "list by small icons", good, that looks better... wait - where's the "add-remove programs"? It used to be easy to find at the top, now it takes forever to find "Programs and features" buried somewhere in the middle... and they're even sorted alphabetically from left to right, not top-down like every other alphabetical list in Windows!! WTF!!
      I want my Windows XP back... but add Jumplists... They are the only redeeming feature of Win7. Actually besides control panel layout and an overdone GUI, Win7 isn't all that bad and is a far better replacement for WinXP than Win8... Don't get me started there...

    • Rohit
      February 15, 2014 at 6:55 am

      You need Linux,Windows is not for you.Go for Ubuntu if all you want is simplicity

  118. Davin Peterson
    February 6, 2014 at 2:48 am

    Windows XP was a good OS. But, it's dated, slower and less secure. Therefore, like IE6, it needs to die.

    • Lorand Juhasz
      February 20, 2014 at 8:36 pm

      I dont quite agree. Win7 does have improvements, but nothing related to being faster, for example. It is really a pity that XP has become "dated", but i think, for everyday users who are a bit more serious, the functionality is still much better than that of Win7 even today. E. g.: also among other software there are some that Ill always use for the purpose they were made for, unless, like XP they become "dated" with their age (companies name them "obsolete" and make it impossible to use them), and ive had compatibility issues many times with Win7, where XP was fine. Not to speak of the compromisation of usability for eye-candy and neat features, which are not even optional on a Windows installation.
      I can remember 5 pieces of software right now which Ill use as long as I can, even some games, that are no more supported on newer platforms.
      It probably is better for the economy to make people buy things they dont need, but if companies would take people more seriously (though I admit that its also up to us to work for that... never gonna happen) they would make new products which exceed their predecessors in usability, rather than complexity. On my computer XP is incomparably more snappy than 7, consumes around 300 MB RAM (system commit only 'bout 140 megs) vs the 6-800 of Win7 on idle, the little features, like searchbar in start menu and showing the folder path in a vector-like construct and letting me chose to which place I would like to return to are nice, but hell... couldn't they implement this in a newer XP as well? Why does my installation take up more than 15 gigs of disk space, why cant I at least choose not to install features that are totally useless to me? About security: I am not concerned about updates, because for one theyd be the last thing I would download on any OS, and after XP Im rather likely to go to Linux, in fact Im testing and practicing with Linux OS-es in a multiboot system on my main machine.
      The thing with Linux is, that altough you again have to learn something ABOUT the tool instead of being able to get to your PURPOSE with it, I think it will be much more worthwile than getting used to every new Windows version, because the whole ruleset and philosophy that move that world is more practically oriented, than those of companies that are refusing to actually develop something useful and want you to think that whatever new they give you is best, in order for them not having to invest as much in research and sell everything in a new shell nevertheless.
      My opinion:
      XP vs Win7:
      Functionality of the OS itself (speed, clutteredness, etc.): XP, it is much faster, and has less useless stuff on it by default, like Win Exp. Index, eye-candy, and stuff.
      In relation to other software that we are using(support!): Win7 for most people, most notably businesspeople, professionals, also maybe for hardcore gamers, but not for everybody, and surely not for me, thanx (Cant use the old simplistically cool-looking Turbo C, Turbo Pascal, QBasic witout DosBox, cant play Age of Empires 2 and Starcraft without fixes, is slower when browsing).
      And come on! They both have support for at least some versions of Office, which is a decent software, but there is also LibreOffice and OpenOffice.

      Plus I know a lot of people who couldn't even afford buying hardware with a more than 1 core CPU and 512 MB RAM, but they dont know Linux eighter, because Windows has been "standard" for so long.
      For me, if Microsoft would make a new XP(a simplistic and USEFUL OS), with perhaps more options to choose from at installation, a little configurability wouldnt hurt. I consider an OS that dosent compell me to buy more expensive hardware much more modern, so if they had made a new Win98 that would have been the best for me, better than Win7. Ill use XP as long as i dont get totally viral, and then its time for Linux and for some tasks Win7.

    • Lorand Juhasz
      February 20, 2014 at 8:42 pm

      Sorry, have just seen how long it has gotten... Anyway, thats what I think, after moderation maybe Ill come back to put it into fewer words, because I think its an interesting topic.

    • Amit Kulkarni
      February 23, 2014 at 5:23 pm

      @Lorand - Read your whole comment(!), glad to see someone with exactly my thoughts. XP was much "clean"er than Windows 7, or Windows 8 for that matter. Forcing people to buy new hardware keeps software industries running, but doesn't give users the only thing they care about: usability and compatibility.

      I started using Ubuntu three years ago to become comfortable with Linux and use it as my primary OS. Tried others like Kubuntu, Mint, Fedora, OpenSUSE, and finally settled with Arch Linux 6 months ago and ditched Windows. (Surprisingly, most old programs that you mentioned run better in Arch using wine, that they would on Windows 8)

      I switched back to Windows 7, now residing in the only NTFS partition on my hard drive, for the times when something doesn't work in Arch.

      Anyway, good luck! :)

  119. RetiredArmy1
    February 6, 2014 at 2:44 am

    Get rid of the Windows 8 series and Revise XP

    • Robadob
      February 7, 2014 at 12:41 am

      Yeh!

    • Dave P
      February 8, 2014 at 4:48 am

      Revise it how? Windows 7 was pretty much XP on crack. Windows 8 is something different, sure, but XP has already been replaced with a natural successor.

    • shad-99
      February 10, 2014 at 1:25 pm

      Agree with that xD.. long live Xp..

    • Windows 8 Hater
      February 24, 2014 at 1:00 am

      I agree. I love xp and it was a great mark for microsoft i say they should keep it forever.

    • John M
      February 25, 2014 at 1:07 am

      XP was and still is the best operating system windows has ever put out. They should revive it. 95 and 98 were both prone to blue screen death. Vista was a bad joke. 7 is a fall back to 98 with crashes and freeze ups. 8 is a shot at being an oversized touch screen tablet. For a pc XP rules.

  120. John C
    February 6, 2014 at 2:12 am

    Just let it die already. It's long over due.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *