I, like a lot of you am still supporting a ton of xp machines within friends and family.
Windows xp just hit the deadline for EOL.
IMO with a decent av + am combo (avast free and mbam pro are my favorite) windows xp will still be decently stable.
That does not mean its a good idea to keep running xp.
If anyone here is running xp and still attached to it for whatever reason, its likely your computer is over 7 years old. Its time for an upgrade anyway.
If you have a decently new pc (my dad for example refuses to upgrade to windows vista/7 even though he has a copy of vista sp2 readily and freely available to him) its time to grab the install disks for the newer operating system (if the computer came with them).
(Keep in mind im using this with the impression that most xp users have prebuilts. if you installed xp on your brand new custom built you need to get your head checked)
running windows xp now is like running windows 98 in the era of the second gen core i processors.
there is nothing holding you back from upgrading except for money
TL;DR: WINDOWS XP IS 13 YEARS OLD NOW, EVEN THOUGH IT CAN STILL BE DECENTLY STABLE THERE IS NO REASON TO STAY ON IT
ReactOS looks ugly. Microsoft abandoned that style a long time ago!
tell me your using it for games
By the way he wrote it, No.
dont keep it on your main is what im saying, xp is 13 years old now!
That is fair enough, There are some people though who want to get far with there money, They may have bought it 13 years ago and will still use it until the OS starts to have problems.
I want to do that with Windows 7.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This is a legacy account, meaning it is no longer active
No it is not an OS that is meant for usage for anyone but developers. If you want windows nothing but windows is going to provide you with what you want.
Linux is not a windows alternative in the same way a truck is not an alternative to a sedan. They both are similar and can be used similarly however a person who wants a truck will not be properly satisfied by a sedan.
We still have Winxp machines where I work and we have no plans to replace them within the next 5 years as there is no operating system that can properly replace it. This is no fault of Microsoft we don't have the money to replace the equipment that only has drivers for WinXP. I feel this is a massive problem for a lot of people that will be hanging onto Windows XP.
+1 for linux and win 7. win 7 is what i have on my main. linux is a good os
If you are going to tell people to switch to Linux at least bother to name a distro.
Why do you think this distro is a proper replacement for WinXp and how you expect people still on WinXp to switch when the vast majority are less tech savy persons or business who simply can't.
TL;DR: WINDOWS XP IS 13 YEARS OLD NOW, EVEN THOUGH IT CAN STILL BE DECENTLY STABLE THERE IS NO REASON TO STAY ON IT
I can tell you do not work in IT, at least not for a large spawling entity like a government. One reason - old ass legacy applications. My employer has several. They are supposed to be either upgraded/recoded or entirely replaced, but the progress of those projects is glacial at best.
I can tell you do not work in IT, at least not for a large spawling entity like a government. One reason - old ass legacy applications. My employer has several. They are supposed to be either upgraded/recoded or entirely replaced, but the progress of those projects is glacial at best.
Well i work with friends and families computers. They refuse to upgrade. but i felt like doing a psa on this
nah, I'll just wait for some computer genius's to come along and outsmart all of you.
Like who the FM you seem to worship, the fact you and other rely on people like FM to form opinions on things for you shows exactly why this section went down hill.
I, like a lot of you am still supporting a ton of xp machines within friends and family.
That's not 'supporting', that's those friends and family trying to use you to save money.
IMO with a decent av + am combo (avast free and mbam pro are my favorite) windows xp will still be decently stable.
This is the sort of thing being perpetuated, and it grossly misunderstands the implications of not receiving updates, and exactly how the issues that it causes make the presence of AV software redundant.
XP is based on the same codebase as Vista, 7, and 8. Those still receive updates. When Microsoft releases a patch, those patches get torn apart by malicious individuals to try to figure out what they fix- specifically, and how it would be used. This is only usable on unpatched machines.
However, XP no longer receives patches; later versions do. so that same teardown can easily find and expose critical security vulnerabilities in Windows XP, up to and including remote code execution. An AV won't do much good since it still runs on top of the Operating System, which will be compromised.
running windows xp now is like running windows 98 in the era of the second gen core i processors.
Interestingly, Windows 98SE's support was dropped in 2004 to much the same horn. Of course 98SE's Windows Update capabilities were crappy and barely worked at all, but it was still in common use in businesses. The deadline was extended for some businesses that purchased extended support contracts.
there is nothing holding you back from upgrading except for money
This is the best reason for anything, honestly.
Consider businesses. Businesses don't care if something is flashy or has the latest gadgets. All that matters is whether it can work for their business. That is why there are still grocery stores that use DOS-based, or Terminal-based POS systems. The Company I work for makes a similar product for a long-defunct Operating System, and has done so for the last 30 years; it was only within the last few years that a real effort has been put into the Windows port (which resulted in my being hired, thankfully) and that was because problems in the OS were causing problems with our software which in turn was causing problems for the customer that affected their ability to do business.
Before that, it doesn't matter to them. Updating to our Windows product is going to represent a cost- both in terms of the cost for the software itself but moreso in terms of the cost of retraining employees. There are people working at some of our customer companies that know more about our product than the current developer team. Asking them to move away from it is like asking them to abandon an old friend with rampant and chronic alcoholism. They insist on just working through the rough patches.
Now that said, the kind of software that only runs on Windows XP must be really crappy. I mean ours doesn't work on Windows as-is because it's designed for a completely different Operating System- but an XP application not working on Vista or later requires a special kind of developer. The kind of developer who requires constant supervision and whose mere presence causes buffers to overflow and names their variables "Steve" and "Thomas". The kind who favours just screwing around until something works as opposed to actually reading the documentation.
It is an unfortunate problem that they are not the victims, because they have already moved on. It is their customers, who are left with their discarded cheetos bags and the lingering smell of their BO in the server room that are the victims.
Now, in an ideal world, companies wouldn't contract their internal software to idiots, but idiots tend to underbid the competent by quite a lot. "hmm, this firm used a McDonalds napkin for their proposal and drew naked female elf warrior named "GreenMelon" in the margins- but if we go with them they only charge 4000 smuckers. That's great because Jam is pretty easy to come by." Even after they later realize the word being written was "Smackers" and referred to money, it's still better than the companies that actually know what they are doing.
If you are going to tell people to switch to Linux at least bother to name a distro.
Why do you think this distro is a proper replacement for WinXp and how you expect people still on WinXp to switch when the vast majority are less tech savy persons or business who simply can't.
This is my favourite. Especially since the only reasons to stick with XP are:
1. You have an old System
2. You need to run software that only works on Windows XP.
3. You are a stubborn doofus who insists on cutting against the grain in order to appear to not conform, because you are an individual and you don't want those dang tight-shirts getting all up in your headspace.
1 is not solved by Linux. a Modern Linux distribution has heavier system requirements than XP. Unless you go for one of the distributions designed specifically to be lightweight, but then you are using a system that has very limited options. It's one thing to find applications when you are using Ubuntu or Suse, it's quite another when you are running some random distro.
2. is not solved by Linux. Think about it- if a piece of software is so dependent on the particulars of how Windows XP Operates that it cannot run on Vista or later even with compatibility mode enabled, WINE doesn't have a chance.
3. "like dude, Microsoft is dropping support for XP, they are totally forcing us to upgrade, we aren't going to stand for it, I'm switching to Ubuntu, because for some reason needing to perform a clean install of the new version every 6 months is preferable to upgrading a 13-year old OS. "
"Yeah! Let's stick it where it hurts and then say they asked for it By the way they dress!"
"Yea... wait what?"
What I find additionally ironic, is that some of the people switching to a Linux distribution are doing so because they don't like the changes to Windows with Windows 8. Now, that seems a bit strange. "I don't like how they changed Windows in Windows 8, so I'm going to throw away all my gathered experience with the system and start completely over with a fresh new paradigm on a fresh new OS and a new desktop environment, what could possibly go wrong, and why is my computer asking to BASH me?"
>linked threads on steam
>cannot believe how far to garbage the posts in this forum have gotten
>inb4 this post is repped to the moon and back by blind fanbois
>inb4 storm about me making a post
Like who the FM you seem to worship, the fact you and other rely on people like FM to form opinions on things for you shows exactly why this section went down hill.
Do you think we are wrong if so why?
But forming our own opinions is haaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdddddd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"like dude, Microsoft is dropping support for XP, they are totally forcing us to upgrade, we aren't going to stand for it, I'm switching to Ubuntu, because for some reason needing to perform a clean install of the new version every 6 months is preferable to upgrading a 13-year old OS. "
"Yeah! Let's stick it where it hurts and then say they asked for it By the way they dress!"
"Yea... wait what?"
"Think about it bro, We're gonna stick it to the 'man' and make M$ bleed. Didn't you hear? Games getting linux support, steamOS and windows XP dying is going to be a deathblow to M$! FREE AS IN FREEDOM!"
Using XP is still OK.
But if you ask me Microsoft should have removed the activation rather then keeping the activation servers up.
What if we need XP for compatibility and something happens?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This is a legacy account, meaning it is no longer active
well i say No.
PSU: Corsair CX600M
STEAM
#NoHate
This is a legacy account, meaning it is no longer active
ReactOS looks ugly. Microsoft abandoned that style a long time ago!
By the way he wrote it, No.
That is fair enough, There are some people though who want to get far with there money, They may have bought it 13 years ago and will still use it until the OS starts to have problems.
I want to do that with Windows 7.
This is a legacy account, meaning it is no longer active
No it is not an OS that is meant for usage for anyone but developers. If you want windows nothing but windows is going to provide you with what you want.
Linux is not a windows alternative in the same way a truck is not an alternative to a sedan. They both are similar and can be used similarly however a person who wants a truck will not be properly satisfied by a sedan.
We still have Winxp machines where I work and we have no plans to replace them within the next 5 years as there is no operating system that can properly replace it. This is no fault of Microsoft we don't have the money to replace the equipment that only has drivers for WinXP. I feel this is a massive problem for a lot of people that will be hanging onto Windows XP.
And I feel like this fits here.
If you are going to tell people to switch to Linux at least bother to name a distro.
Why do you think this distro is a proper replacement for WinXp and how you expect people still on WinXp to switch when the vast majority are less tech savy persons or business who simply can't.
I can tell you do not work in IT, at least not for a large spawling entity like a government. One reason - old ass legacy applications. My employer has several. They are supposed to be either upgraded/recoded or entirely replaced, but the progress of those projects is glacial at best.
nah, I'll just wait for some computer genius's to come along and outsmart all of you.
My YouTube Channel --->https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCM70mQPHXT9RC8skS5pK6Vg
Well i work with friends and families computers. They refuse to upgrade. but i felt like doing a psa on this
Like who the FM you seem to worship, the fact you and other rely on people like FM to form opinions on things for you shows exactly why this section went down hill.
Do you think we are wrong if so why?
That's not 'supporting', that's those friends and family trying to use you to save money.
This is the sort of thing being perpetuated, and it grossly misunderstands the implications of not receiving updates, and exactly how the issues that it causes make the presence of AV software redundant.
XP is based on the same codebase as Vista, 7, and 8. Those still receive updates. When Microsoft releases a patch, those patches get torn apart by malicious individuals to try to figure out what they fix- specifically, and how it would be used. This is only usable on unpatched machines.
However, XP no longer receives patches; later versions do. so that same teardown can easily find and expose critical security vulnerabilities in Windows XP, up to and including remote code execution. An AV won't do much good since it still runs on top of the Operating System, which will be compromised.
Interestingly, Windows 98SE's support was dropped in 2004 to much the same horn. Of course 98SE's Windows Update capabilities were crappy and barely worked at all, but it was still in common use in businesses. The deadline was extended for some businesses that purchased extended support contracts.
This is the best reason for anything, honestly.
Consider businesses. Businesses don't care if something is flashy or has the latest gadgets. All that matters is whether it can work for their business. That is why there are still grocery stores that use DOS-based, or Terminal-based POS systems. The Company I work for makes a similar product for a long-defunct Operating System, and has done so for the last 30 years; it was only within the last few years that a real effort has been put into the Windows port (which resulted in my being hired, thankfully) and that was because problems in the OS were causing problems with our software which in turn was causing problems for the customer that affected their ability to do business.
Before that, it doesn't matter to them. Updating to our Windows product is going to represent a cost- both in terms of the cost for the software itself but moreso in terms of the cost of retraining employees. There are people working at some of our customer companies that know more about our product than the current developer team. Asking them to move away from it is like asking them to abandon an old friend with rampant and chronic alcoholism. They insist on just working through the rough patches.
Now that said, the kind of software that only runs on Windows XP must be really crappy. I mean ours doesn't work on Windows as-is because it's designed for a completely different Operating System- but an XP application not working on Vista or later requires a special kind of developer. The kind of developer who requires constant supervision and whose mere presence causes buffers to overflow and names their variables "Steve" and "Thomas". The kind who favours just screwing around until something works as opposed to actually reading the documentation.
It is an unfortunate problem that they are not the victims, because they have already moved on. It is their customers, who are left with their discarded cheetos bags and the lingering smell of their BO in the server room that are the victims.
Now, in an ideal world, companies wouldn't contract their internal software to idiots, but idiots tend to underbid the competent by quite a lot. "hmm, this firm used a McDonalds napkin for their proposal and drew naked female elf warrior named "GreenMelon" in the margins- but if we go with them they only charge 4000 smuckers. That's great because Jam is pretty easy to come by." Even after they later realize the word being written was "Smackers" and referred to money, it's still better than the companies that actually know what they are doing.
This is my favourite. Especially since the only reasons to stick with XP are:
1. You have an old System
2. You need to run software that only works on Windows XP.
3. You are a stubborn doofus who insists on cutting against the grain in order to appear to not conform, because you are an individual and you don't want those dang tight-shirts getting all up in your headspace.
1 is not solved by Linux. a Modern Linux distribution has heavier system requirements than XP. Unless you go for one of the distributions designed specifically to be lightweight, but then you are using a system that has very limited options. It's one thing to find applications when you are using Ubuntu or Suse, it's quite another when you are running some random distro.
2. is not solved by Linux. Think about it- if a piece of software is so dependent on the particulars of how Windows XP Operates that it cannot run on Vista or later even with compatibility mode enabled, WINE doesn't have a chance.
3. "like dude, Microsoft is dropping support for XP, they are totally forcing us to upgrade, we aren't going to stand for it, I'm switching to Ubuntu, because for some reason needing to perform a clean install of the new version every 6 months is preferable to upgrading a 13-year old OS. "
"Yeah! Let's stick it where it hurts and then say they asked for it By the way they dress!"
"Yea... wait what?"
What I find additionally ironic, is that some of the people switching to a Linux distribution are doing so because they don't like the changes to Windows with Windows 8. Now, that seems a bit strange. "I don't like how they changed Windows in Windows 8, so I'm going to throw away all my gathered experience with the system and start completely over with a fresh new paradigm on a fresh new OS and a new desktop environment, what could possibly go wrong, and why is my computer asking to BASH me?"
Why are you so worried does not really bother any of us.
>cannot believe how far to garbage the posts in this forum have gotten
>inb4 this post is repped to the moon and back by blind fanbois
>inb4 storm about me making a post
But forming our own opinions is haaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdddddd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Think about it bro, We're gonna stick it to the 'man' and make M$ bleed. Didn't you hear? Games getting linux support, steamOS and windows XP dying is going to be a deathblow to M$! FREE AS IN FREEDOM!"
"Oh yeah totally, bro. Now lets kiss."
*Moaning intensifies*
But if you ask me Microsoft should have removed the activation rather then keeping the activation servers up.
What if we need XP for compatibility and something happens?
This is a legacy account, meaning it is no longer active