Yeah! We will really miss! Windows XP! however Vista not have a class of XP! I think! Pirated Cd's! will work
Well they pretty much killed pirated CD's with Vista although something tells me someone is going to crack that code pretty soon.
very interesting because i beleive XP still has a lot of life in it yet. i think they will still support older xp versions, but they will just stop selling xp as of 2008. all people will be able to purchase is vista. they did the same when upgrading from windows 95 & 98
BTW for anyone who thinks vienna is going to be out in 09,it will not be.I have inside info telling me that according to the production cycle it is expected only in 2010/11 regards ah.
Most sources online are now reporting Microsoft Windows Codename 7 as being shipped roughly 2010+, reliable sources at that.
That would be good. There is no need for a new OS in two years. After all Microsoft is not doing catch up like Mac.
arghhhhhhhhhhhh noooooooo !!!!!!! but xp is better than vista... why is this happening... ???? they must reconsider
Well it's a clever but very nasty corporate decision, I guess that's what you can do when you have majority share of the computer market . I'll carry on using XP until I buy a new PC then I'll move to Vista.
Try the 7 months I've had it, no crashes. I'm on my PC from 8am til 11pm-12am every day, I put it through its paces and Vista has done extremely well. Now I go back to XP on my laptop and I want to cry based on the sluggish-ness of it and the total lack of convenient features.
Well, that is at least a decent period of time. Just for comparison purposes: What are the specs of your laptop compared to your pc running Vista, and what convenient features are you missing?
PC Specs - 3.0GHz Pentium D processor 1GB DDR2 RAM 256mb Geforce 7300 LE Graphics Laptop - 3.0GHz Pentium 4 Processor 1GB RAM 128MB Gfx Pretty good spec laptop really, should take XP without flexing so much as a muscle. I really miss the 'start' search feature, being able to type the name of an application and press enter then it load up or type part of the name of an app etc. I miss my sidebar, and the aero interface/theming in general. Plus as I say Vista seems faster to me, when I first installed it at Beta on my PC I laughed very hard at how slow it was but the final release certainly took care of any problems I had with it. I'd been using Windows 98 up until 2003, then I upgraded to XP and didn't expect Microsoft to release an OS anywhere near as good anytime soon but Vista really is (IMO) a very worthy successor.
That should have no problem dealing with XP. The only thing i'd like to note is that newer processor have made large increases in efficiency over the Pentium 4, though it is still more than adequate. I've got a laptop downstairs running XP on a 2.4GHz Pentium 4 processor and my laptop runs it fine on a 2GHz Pentium M processor. Only thing that I can thing that could be slowing it down is that it may have more things running and installed than your desktop. It is a fact that Vista uses more resources than XP, so there is no way it can be faster. The search feature could, sometimes, be handy but the sidebar and aero interface are just uneeded bloat.
I have had Vista installed on my laptop, and indeed it did slow THAT down. But XP on my PC, nah, it was just annoyingly slow compared to Vista. I have XP available on Dual Boot and I've only ever used it for making DVDs - Vista isn't all that good when it comes to converting AVI/MPEG files to burn onto DVD, because of the resource usage Vista already has it can't fathom out the fact that I want to do something that might take up more resources than Vista is willing to allow. So I switch to XP for making DVDs. Generally speaking though I always have Outlook 2003, Windows Live Messenger, Photoshop CS2, Dreamweaver 8, SmartFTP & iTunes open and running; Vista breezes with those. Just remembered something else as well, Flip3D, pointless but fun! My main gripe with Vista is, when I built my PC I built it with Vista compatibility in mind and I wanted it to be a decent enough spec to run Vista with no problems. And that's fine, it does that. Anything that wasn't built with Vista in mind though gets the rough end because it won't be able to run it that well. My laptop for example, aside from the laughable P4 processor it isn't a bad spec machine but Vista isn't an option. I totally disagree that people should either have to build/buy a new machine in order to be able to run Vista at it's full whack. I also disagree that Microsoft's 'solution' to this is to make people run Vista Home 'Basic', totally pointless in my opinion, instead they should keep up support for XP. At the end of the day they didn't turn their back on Windows 98 this fast... I certainly feel XP is going to be the new Windows 98, no one will want to upgrade unless they are literally forced to do so. Regardless of new PCs and Laptops all being sold with Vista preinstalled I am sure the majority of people will get it taken off and XP installed. Vista in itself is a great OS, it does need a few tweaks so I am very disappointed to say that Vista SP1 is needed quickly for a lot of people. Microsoft made a bad move in making an OS that only top end machines can comfortably run, it's a move they'll be paying for until the next version of Windows is released.