win XP is vastly faster than windows 7 or 8, plus there is also the issue about 3rd world countries that can't exactly keep up with new PCs all the time, PCs aren't exactly cheap.
if you use PC only for internet and office crap, XP does that pretty well and runs in a toaster.
i myself have win XP installed in another hard drive, aside from windows 7.
they wanna see people abandoning win XP faster? they gotta lower the costs of PC building, especially in developing countries(not gonna happen).
[QUOTE=Jsm;41655946]There's like 2 or 3 companies in the entire world who make the actual interfaces in those things. As far as I know they [B]all[/B] work on Win 7 and beyond. Being unable to fix a problem is a terrible reason not to upgrade.
It's just hilarious.[/QUOTE]
The one I own is apparently one of the better chips, and it's got out of the box support on Linux, OS X and Windows. Considering how easy they are to make I'm kinda amazed people have problems with them.
i don't have XP anymore
because it'll be unsupported soon
In the day and age of FTDI, there's no excuse for XP, even for hardware. If you really have legacy issues, you're going to run something DOS based like 98 or 95 with USB support.
It's people like this that cause businesses to keep using fucking 10+ years old PCs and software that suck major ass.
We JUST upgraded from Win XP to Win7 along with new PCs and I couldn't be happier. Now stuff actually works and programs fully support the OS! Incredible! And the PC doesn't boot for 10 minutes.
And we finally had to get rid of some piece-of-shit printers etc. because their drivers were 16-bit and didn't work on the new 64-bit PCs. That's right, fucking 16-bit. And this seriously was because the man responsible for PC-stuff thought that XP is still superior. Thank god they're about to drop support and we had to switch over.
[QUOTE=SgtTupelo;41656635]It's people like this that cause businesses to keep using fucking 10+ years old PCs and software that suck major ass.
We JUST upgraded from Win XP to Win7 along with new PCs and I couldn't be happier. Now stuff actually works and programs fully support the OS! Incredible! And the PC doesn't boot for 10 minutes. [/QUOTE]
what kind of fucked up win XP install is that which takes 10min to boot?
Despite it being horribly out of date, I still find the look really endearing.
I still wouldn't have an XP machine for anything other than playing games that don't work with Vista/7/8.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;41656689]what kind of fucked up win XP install is that which takes 10min to boot?[/QUOTE]
the decade old one
I stick with XP because there is absolutely no reason for me to 'upgrade'. I don't play Battlefield 3 or Grid 2, and those are the only two things I know of recently that would force me to upgrade. There is literally no reason for me to switch to any other operating system... everything works fine for me right now. Maybe in a few more years when all the newest gaming titles force DirectX 10 or 11 as minimum due to the new generation of consoles gaining tread, but even then I don't know.
-snip- wrong thread
funnily enough, im building a windows 98 machine so i can transfer my gameboy camera pictures over because the cable is only compatible with 95 and 98. Old OS still have their place.
[QUOTE=Sobek-;41656797]I stick with XP because there is absolutely no reason for me to 'upgrade'. I don't play Battlefield 3 or Grid 2, and those are the only two things I know of recently that would force me to upgrade. There is literally no reason for me to switch to any other operating system... everything works fine for me right now. Maybe in a few more years when all the newest gaming titles force DirectX 10 or 11 as minimum due to the new generation of consoles gaining tread, but even then I don't know.[/QUOTE]
you can stay open to vunerabilities when ms pulls the plug on updates, xp is basically swiss cheese now and its a decade old
[QUOTE=willtheoct;41656421]this. vista has UAC(which is amazing, whether or not you hate it) and with the service pack its a great OS. win7 has some slight improvements over vista sp1 that make it worthwhile, and the only good reason not to get it is you cant afford it.
but the article didn't mention any reasons other than "cant afford it", so i'll give a couple of good reasons:
XP: directX 5-6-7 support.
no virtualization. virtualization usually is good, but it causes a heap of problems in older games, including ones published by microsoft..
less bloated control panel.
runs on low-end systems(not to be confused with being faster, which XP is not).
I believe XP also had much easier folder sharing over a network, but i may be wrong about that.[/QUOTE]
what pisses me off about uac though is that i can't stop the notifications appearing whenever i run an application without disabling it completely.
maybe there is a way and i'm just dumb though.
People stick with XP because the good XP alternative (7) was released only after 8 years (Vista was a fail, so I won't mention it), plus it was a great OS for it's time. So people got used to XP for too long and now don't want to abandon it. Basically it's also Microsoft's fault.
Though I'd say Win2k was the greatest, but since it never had any time to settle on most PCs (right after 1 year, since 2k was made, XP came out), a lot of people think XP was right after 98.
[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;41656898]what pisses me off about uac though is that i can't stop the notifications appearing whenever i run an application without disabling it completely.
maybe there is a way and i'm just dumb though.[/QUOTE]
Haven't had this issue on Windows 8
Sticking with XP on my netbook because it probably can't handle 7 but would not bother for any other reason
[QUOTE=notlabbet;41656803]funnily enough, im building a windows 98 machine so i can transfer my gameboy camera pictures over because the cable is only compatible with 95 and 98. Old OS still have their place.[/QUOTE]
Sure, but why not just run it in a VM then? Takes up less space and is easier to maintain (Hell, you can sandbox stuff to their own VM images extremely easily)
I've run into similar COM1 issues as the guy in the article. Just some old test equipment though, so nothing mission critical. USB COM is flaky at best imo.
But I do use software that has proven to be buggy in vista, 7, 8, and 64-bit systems. So, for those applications, I have no alternative but to keep an XP machine going. (Virtual machines are just to much work.. I'm lazy like that.)
If enough of them become stable in another OS, then I might consider migrating to a new setup. But to switch over because some kids on the web think old stuff is bad or because fools expose their data to exploitable systems (basically everything connected to the net) or just because MS has a new shiny? No. I've got better things to do than to fiddle with patches, workarounds, and esoteric configurations. (Like making stupid posts here :P )
XP and 95-98 were all a stretch for me. I still get pissed off about managing services and background tasks.
XP is still my favorite OS. I really only upgraded because I got more RAM
XP was nice but it's filled with security holes
Here is a visual representation
[IMG]http://www.friendsofthepeak.org.uk/download/pictures/news_article_images/holey_cheese.jpg[/IMG]
Looks like someone has fallen under the "false consensus" cognitive bias.
[QUOTE=Binladen34;41655883]But Windows 8 can run on almost [I]ANYTHING[/I]. Shit I even put it on a computer that could barely run XP.[/QUOTE]
my sister's computer's cpu does not support windows 8 (the installer doesn't even start)
my old thinkpad t42 does but it uses the generic legacy gpu drivers which i can't replace with the real ones, because they are not WDDM-compatible
Personally for me, XP's served me well for the longest time, but I'll switch over to 7 next time I upgrade, since I could always do with a bit more RAM. I don't wanna know about 8, considering what Microsoft's doing at the moment.
[QUOTE=tirpider;41657383]But I do use software that has proven to be buggy in vista, 7, 8, and 64-bit systems. So, for those applications, I have no alternative but to keep an XP machine going. (Virtual machines are just to much work.. I'm lazy like that.)[/QUOTE]
This is more of an argument for free software than it is for using a deprecated OS
[QUOTE=tirpider;41657383](Virtual machines are just to much work.. I'm lazy like that.)[/QUOTE]
[t]http://puu.sh/3Qccg/3b5214be2d.png[/t]
That totally took so much effort. (actually, about 40 minutes of my time)
If people want to run XP, let them, but if you're just keeping a PC around for compatibility you're wasting time, money, electricity and space. You're better off with a VM.
I generally keep old stuff around for the novelty and for the feel of it. Emulation/vms are great, but it doesn't fully capture the experience of using the old pc/console itself.
If it's not a novelty PC though, why would anyone still be on XP other than money?
The thing is, Wine supports a lot of old Windows software better than Windows does...
[QUOTE=sambooo;41658864]This is more of an argument for free software than it is for using a deprecated OS[/QUOTE]
Except that the equivalent free applications for my purposes do not meet my needs.
I suppose I could start contacting developers and begging for a solution, or hell, even start down the road of writing my own (already do for some things)... or I can continue to be productive with a set-up that [I]is[/I] working without having to fap around getting other people involved in my work.
My rig is unique to me though. Folks using the latest and greatest that technology has to offer so they can touch each other's twitter should stay on top of the trends and upgrade. I suppose it's 'safer' that way (whatever that means.)
----
As for the wasting time and money guy... Mail me money. Then I'll waste it how I see fit.
VMWare has it's uses, but it isn't part of my work flow. If it is part of your's, well goody goody for you.
I really don't understand why folks have such a prejudice against older software. Particularly when it is still working quite well.
You can joke "but it's MS.. it's poo.. haha" and all that does is suggest that you are using it wrong.
I suppose I'll get boxed for being a Luddite.
That's fine, but it won't convince me to break my system to keep up with MS's market plan.
[QUOTE=tirpider;41659065]
As for the wasting time and money guy... Mail me money. Then I'll waste it how I see fit.
VMWare has it's uses, but it isn't part of my work flow. If it is part of your's, well goody goody for you.
I really don't understand why folks have such a prejudice against older software. Particularly when it is still working quite well.
You can joke "but it's MS.. it's poo.. haha" and all that does is suggest that you are using it wrong.
I suppose I'll get boxed for being a Luddite.
That's fine, but it won't convince me to break my system to keep up with MS's market plan.[/QUOTE]
You see, you're missing the point again. We don't have a "prejudice" against older software. I'd happily use Windows XP on my PC, however I choose not to. Windows 8 does what I want and doesn't have half the security holes Windows XP does. (That, and when I connected my dual monitors up, XP desided to BSOD.)
Windows XP works perfectly fine, but newer software calls for newer operating systems. Same goes for Apple, and Linux. I'd rather be running XP in a VM on Windows 8, than Windows 8 on a VM in XP.
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41659125]You see, you're missing the point again. We don't have a "prejudice" against older software. I'd happily use Windows XP on my PC, however I choose not to. Windows 8 does what I want and doesn't have half the security holes Windows XP does. (That, and when I connected my dual monitors up, XP desided to BSOD.)
Windows XP works perfectly fine, but newer software calls for newer operating systems. Same goes for Apple, and Linux. I'd rather be running XP in a VM on Windows 8, than Windows 8 on a VM in XP.[/QUOTE]
But if you don't put the machine with the security flaws anywhere near where those things can be exploited, then there isn't a problem.
BTW, 3 monitors and never blue screened. ... well, not because of hardware at least.
And I believe the whole point of the article was why change systems level stuff when it's working fine?
I will concede that I don't run newer equipment because of money. But even if I upgraded the one I'm on(which I have no reason to,) I still wouldn't touch the other. I'll drive it till the caps pop.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.