Microsoft has done it. They finally did it.

[flibberdipper]

I tried to update all of my old XP machines, but none of the updates would go. Which can only lead to one thing. They've begun to kill XP already. Come, mourn with me.

[T.Vengeance]

Meh, no offense, but I really dislike XP. Don't get me wrong, it's an awesome OS, but I'd much rather use Windows 7.

[AMICLG]

I never ever liked xp, I always used Ubuntu or Mint until 7 came out which i still use Ubuntu on my laptop.

[nsyedhasan]

[Ryan Leech]

I've always loved XP. I used XP 2002-2013, and never upgraded to Windows 7 because the aero is sooo ugly. That's why I went straight to 8: no aero, and it doesn't use massive amounts of ram.

 

XP>8>7>Vista

[7omRavenclaw]

Well, it's a 2001 OS. I'm still amazed that they continue to release updates.

[flibberdipper]

Well, it's a 2001 OS. I'm still amazed that they continue to release updates.

Not anymore.

[orangecat]

XP was awesome when it was current but its so old that its actually pointless to run. Windows 7 takes better advantage of CPUs and manages RAM better then XP ever did. there is no reason to run XP still.

[xrex64]

I'd much rather use Vista... such a good OS. 

[7omRavenclaw]

If I had to choose between coming back to XP or Ubuntu, I would choose Ubuntu.

[D3MON]

to those xp haters...
get an athlon 64 single gore or pentium 4 HT and try and run windows 7 on it with 1gb of ram, see how far you get.
for the record OP is talking about old pc's so replying " if you have one of those rigs you should upgrade by now" will immediately be followed by lack of any respect henceforth on this forum.

i install win 7 on everything (because aeroglass is beautiful, big bold solid colors belong in primary schools and lego/duplo bricks), if its running with 2-3 gb of ram ill install 32 bit, if we're talking 1-2gb of ram ill install xp, its ease of use is hard to beat and while its security isnt great its still a better overall os than vista, trying to get a driver for xp takes seconds, for ubuntu you can be looking for hours.
95-meh
98-better
xp-legen---dary
vista-sucks the sweat out of a dead mans balls
win7-best today
win8-sucks, any benefits are overshadowed by much larger issues with ease of use and compatability.

[GoodBytes]

Sadly you are totally wrong.

Windows 95 was not "meh'" it was ground breaking, and people just didn't like it because it was a Vista... an OS that was ahead of it's time in terms of mainstream computer requirement to run smoothly, and people don't like change. It was a drastically different from Windows 3.1

XP was a awful OS. Based on Windows 2000, which was based on NT4, which was based on NT3... a 1993 OS, where the whole internet things, and security to that, was almost non existent, as it was all theories, and "who will actually do viruses?". While the OS security has improved, it was just patches. That is why Microsoft, scrap XP the day of it's release and worked on a new core... 6 years later, we have Vista, the foundations of Windows 7, 8, 8.1, and future version of Windows.

XP was also plagued with bugs and issues, and still is. With 0 maintenance system crap after 6 months, even if you defrag with any software you want. It's piss poor memory management could not take advantage of system with more than 1GB of RAM, let alone 512MB. No mater how much RAM you had, it was treating as if you are low in RAM, and dump everything, asap, to your page file. Not to mention that it didn't support and work with multi-core CPU's. A fully single core OS. Was extremely buggy too. And that was what you get for a wall, with so many holes and patches, that the wall is non existent, and all you have is patches everywhere cracked everywhere as well.

Vista was an great OS. You just had to actually read at the system requirements, and actually buy a computer that fit or surpass them. In other words, a proper gaming PC, which becomes quickly a mainstream computer 3 years later by the time Windows 7 came out. You needed the following for a perfectly smooth Windows experience:

-> TRUE Dual Core CPU 64-bit (use Vista 64-bit) 2GHz or faster.

-> 2GB of RAM or more, dual channel DDR1 400MHz or faster (4GB preferred).

-> PCI-E graphic card.

-> Pixel Shader 2.0 supported graphic card.

-> 256MB dedicated, fast, GPU VRAM.

-> SATA HDD, with a NCQ compatible HDD, where you have it turned on in the BIOS (so many people forget about this, and that's a massive performance loss not having it enabled)

-> Latest technologies at the motherboard level

-> Latest peripherals, Vista 64-bit ready, as well as your hardware.

-> Latest drivers

If you bought anything below, or low end OEM computers, then that is not my problem, nor Microsoft. You have been had, and that is all.

Windows 8, you clearly have never used it, and jumping in the hate bandwagon. If you actually use it, as your main OS, like many here, end up looking Windows 8, and even some people love it and don't want to go back to the Start Menu. It has a steeper learning curve, but once you pass it, it's awesome. I know no one that actually used Windows 8/8.1, seriously, as a main OS, for a month or so, and end up not liking it, from computer enthusiast to your 'average consumer'.

[SSL]

snip

 

Well said. Way too many people jump on the Windows 8 hate bandwagon without having ever used the OS.

[flibberdipper]

<snippity snip>

I don't know about that. I disabled the page file in XP on my machine, and it uses the RAM pretty damn well. It sits at about 300MB out of 2GB no problem. Then you fire up IE.... 600MB.

[Giggitygoebbels]

Sadly you are totally wrong.Windows 95 was not "meh'" it was ground breaking, and people just didn't like it because it was a Vista... an OS that was ahead of it's time in terms of mainstream computer requirement to run smoothly, and people don't like change. It was a drastically different from Windows 3.1XP was a awful OS. Based on Windows 2000, which was based on NT4, which was based on NT3... a 1993 OS, where the whole internet things, and security to that, was almost non existent, as it was all theories, and "who will actually do viruses?". While the OS security has improved, it was just patches. That is why Microsoft, scrap XP the day of it's release and worked on a new core... 6 years later, we have Vista, the foundations of Windows 7, 8, 8.1, and future version of Windows.XP was also plagued with bugs and issues, and still is. With 0 maintenance system crap after 6 months, even if you defrag with any software you want. It's piss poor memory management could not take advantage of system with more than 1GB of RAM, let alone 512MB. No mater how much RAM you had, it was treating as if you are low in RAM, and dump everything, asap, to your page file. Not to mention that it didn't support and work with multi-core CPU's. A fully single core OS. Was extremely buggy too. And that was what you get for a wall, with so many holes and patches, that the wall is non existent, and all you have is patches everywhere cracked everywhere as well.Vista was an great OS. You just had to actually read at the system requirements, and actually buy a computer that fit or surpass them. In other words, a proper gaming PC, which becomes quickly a mainstream computer 3 years later by the time Windows 7 came out. You needed the following for a perfectly smooth Windows experience:-> TRUE Dual Core CPU 64-bit (use Vista 64-bit) 2GHz or faster.-> 2GB of RAM or more, dual channel DDR1 400MHz or faster (4GB preferred).-> PCI-E graphic card.-> Pixel Shader 2.0 supported graphic card.-> 256MB dedicated, fast, GPU VRAM.-> SATA HDD, with a NCQ compatible HDD, where you have it turned on in the BIOS (so many people forget about this, and that's a massive performance loss not having it enabled)-> Latest technologies at the motherboard level-> Latest peripherals, Vista 64-bit ready, as well as your hardware.-> Latest driversIf you bought anything below, or low end OEM computers, then that is not my problem, nor Microsoft. You have been had, and that is all.Windows 8, you clearly have never used it, and jumping in the hate bandwagon. If you actually use it, as your main OS, like many here, end up looking Windows 8, and even some people love it and don't want to go back to the Start Menu. It has a steeper learning curve, but once you pass it, it's awesome. I know no one that actually used Windows 8/8.1, seriously, as a main OS, for a month or so, and end up not liking it, from computer enthusiast to your 'average consumer'.

Vista is only good at sp2 where bugs are fixed.Before that it was pretty buggy with frequent bsods.

I have a surface rt and the only button used in modern ui is desktop.Does not really like modern ui although does not hate it either.

[Slinkey]

I loved XP, but Windows 7 is better than XP in every way. For people who don't like "Aero look", you can always disable it and go back to the old look. (Not sure if XP, but 2000 and earlier). Most likely there is an XP theme.

[flibberdipper]

I loved XP, but Windows 7 is better than XP in every way. For people who don't like "Aero look", you can always disable it and go back to the old look. (Not sure if XP, but 2000 and earlier). Most likely there is an XP theme.

Nope. Aero, Basic (Think Windows 7 Starter), and then the good ol' Classic.

[GoodBytes]

Vista is only good at sp2 where bugs are fixed.Before that it was pretty buggy with frequent bsods.

BSOD are related to hardware or driver issues.

So you are blaming Microsoft for something that isn't an issue. The old days that it was Microsoft, have long passed, hence why there is no "resume"

action anymore, when a BSOD occurs.

[GoodBytes]

I don't know about that. I disabled the page file in XP on my machine, and it uses the RAM pretty damn well. It sits at about 300MB out of 2GB no problem. Then you fire up IE.... 600MB.

You should NEVER disable pagefile. Whoever says you can, knows nothing about computers.

I explain here, why that is the case: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/28088-when-you-install-windows-on-a-new-pc-what-do-you-do-first/?p=359647

[applebook]

They put XP out of its misery. 

 

That crap OS should have been culled half a decade ago. Vista SP1, when running on proper hardware, was far superior, and 7 just completely obliterates both of them. 

[Guest]

to those xp haters...

get an athlon 64 single gore or pentium 4 HT and try and run windows 7 on it with 1gb of ram, see how far you get.

for the record OP is talking about old pc's so replying " if you have one of those rigs you should upgrade by now" will immediately be followed by lack of any respect henceforth on this forum.

i install win 7 on everything (because aeroglass is beautiful, big bold solid colors belong in primary schools and lego/duplo bricks), if its running with 2-3 gb of ram ill install 32 bit, if we're talking 1-2gb of ram ill install xp, its ease of use is hard to beat and while its security isnt great its still a better overall os than vista, trying to get a driver for xp takes seconds, for ubuntu you can be looking for hours.

95-meh

98-better

xp-legen---dary

vista-sucks the sweat out of a dead mans balls

win7-best today

win8-sucks, any benefits are overshadowed by much larger issues with ease of use and compatability.

Joule say 8 is better than 7, I've had no issues

[mooommo]

My first gaming rig was an xp with a pentium and a radeon HD3000 with a haupauge capture card. sure it doesn't play many games now, but i loved it when i bought it.

[flibberdipper]

You should NEVER disable pagefile. Whoever says you can, knows nothing about computers.

I explain here, why that is the case: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/28088-when-you-install-windows-on-a-new-pc-what-do-you-do-first/?p=359647

I was bored, and I felt like it. I just wanted to see what happened. It's back though.

[IdeaStormer]

Vista is only good at sp2 where bugs are fixed.Before that it was pretty buggy with frequent bsods.

I have a surface rt and the only button used in modern ui is desktop.Does not really like modern ui although does not hate it either.

 

Vista is only good if you need help remembering your password, as you need to type it so many times you end up remembering it.

[IdeaStormer]

You should NEVER disable pagefile. Whoever says you can, knows nothing about computers.

I explain here, why that is the case: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/28088-when-you-install-windows-on-a-new-pc-what-do-you-do-first/?p=359647

 

That's why some people have large amounts of RAM so that wasted space after you quit a program is moot, a few meg or even a gig left there is no big deal, heck leave the program running as most people do anyway. I could see it being a problem if you load and unload a huge program with data but then again who the heck would being doing that for unless they're just trolling the OS.