w7pro

September 26, 2010 at 10:27pm

Hi there,  

XP has been a great and stable platform for a lot of users over the last years.  Support for XP SP2 ended July 2010.  Reasons aside, the important benefits to users for keeping up to date on your OS should be called out.   

What does “end of support mean?” Go here for information http://bit.ly/c1AgE7 .  If you're running the 64-bit version of Windows XP with SP2, you have the latest service pack and will continue to be eligible for support and receive updates until April 8, 2014.  Regards, 

John C. – Windows 7 Professional Outreach Team

Tekzel

September 24, 2010 at 3:52am

" First, to hate on their only REAL stable OS since it's inception,"

I beg to differ. Windows 7 was far more stable than Windows XP at a similar level of development. I ran the RC as my primary OS from when it was released to the general release and never once had a single issue. Since it was released I upgraded a notebook, a netbook, my main quad core machine and this dual core bedroom machine all to Windows 7 and have never once had a single issue that was related to the OS on any one of them. So, they have at least 2 super stable OSes. Windows 7 is superior to XP in every way possible.

Edit: Doh, this was supposed to be a reply to americanparatrooper down below.

drag00n

September 20, 2010 at 5:00am

Well well Microsoft has done it again, For users that just surf the net and email Xp works just fine, if they want more security use Linux you have plenty of options with the many distros. I for one rather use Firefox or chrome but for some business sites you require IE, that is the thing about Microsoft, they always try to lock the user in on a product because the competition is better in some areas then they are.

http://www.sagonet.com"Dedicated server hosting at Sago Networks”

Trooper_One

September 17, 2010 at 12:43pm

I hate to say it, but WinXP will be even more resilient than the 3.5" floppy.  Just think, not everyone worldwide can afford brand spanking new computers with graphics accelerators to run Win7.  And for places like internet cafe's, hotel lobbies, libraries, schools and even cash registers, why would you?  WinXP does the job perfectly.  Unless the next year WinXP is 100% dropped and forcing everyone to upgrade their hardware, adoption for IE9 will not be as high as MS would like.

I have 4 machines running: my main gaming desktop with Win7 Home, my laptop with Win7 Pro, a general computer for roommates with WinVista (it's not that bad if you're just running for browser and emails), and *GASP!*  an experiment/general comp running Win7 Pro.

All my comps, including the older ones running Vista (running Opteron 165) and WinXP (running P4 D) are working just fine for their intended purposes (surfing the web, checking email, facebook, burn some disc that's not time sensitive; they can even play DVD movies just fine). 

A note for the Top-of-the-Line Snobs: Although these machines aren't important to me, they are for some people with limited means and resources and enable them to participate in cyber social activities (e.g. facebook, email, web browse).

Not everything has to be lastest/greatest. We're such a wasteful society since there's a compulsion to upgrade, upgrade, upgrade!

Think about that.

jnunamaker

September 17, 2010 at 10:02am

...just virtualize it - problem solved. :)

nHeroGo

September 17, 2010 at 10:01am

...but what I don't understand is why Ford is no longer making spare parts for their model T, and maybe even improve it a bit. I think Ford should spend more resources on older stuff and not try to be so modern and work to develop new stuff - who needs it.

In regards to XP-powered netbooks; they are not known for their graphics acceleration abilities in the first place. It's the wireless phone companies that wants to sell you netbooks with 2-year internet contracts. These poor poor customers fell for it. They didn't buy the netbooks because they were informed that there is a future in XP, but because they were told it was a bargain (free netbook for $60 per month, HA!). And it is not like they are going to upgrade the hardware in these netbooks after they purchased it, I don't think.

MleB

September 17, 2010 at 9:12am

..but up until about a year ago, they were happily having it included on the millions of netbooks that were being produced. Now they are telling those users (plus those with much older, but still functioning computers) that the their new browser won't work? So to get a new browser from Microsoft will cost you a full Win7 install at $250+? I think not.

Now granted,I haven't used IE in years - and I'll hazard a guess many with even a smattering of computing experience don't either - but for all Mom and Pop-style "I've got a computer, now what do I do with it?" types who run their XP computer that came out of the box (albeit with auto-updates), they are alienating that crowd and, incidentally, making those consumers more susceptible to problems down the road. Problems that might encourage them to give up on their PC entirely for another company or device.

Exarkun1138

September 17, 2010 at 5:31am

I've been running Windows 7 now for almost a year and love it, bit I refuse to run IE in any form. I run Firefox. Chrome is OK, but I just don't like the interface. Opera is pretty good, though.

It IS about time people migrate away from XP. It's slow, old, cumbersome, and just plain ugly. I could write a whole page worth of technical reasons, but I don't have the time. Needless to say, Windows 7 is superior in just about every aspect over XP....now with Vista, why bother when Win7 is so superior to it as well. But when it comes to browsers, MS has a long way to go to get me to switch!

amer1canparatrooper

September 17, 2010 at 3:27am

What's funny to watch is Microsoft shooting themselves in the foot not once, but twice.  First, to hate on their only REAL stable OS since it's inception, but to also create a vulnerability to allow other vendors such as Opera, Chrome, Firefox, etc. to steal away market share.  I know that this is a primal shift to evoke upgrades to Win 7, however, this move will weaken their branding overall and create more disdain towards purchasing further Microsoft products.

Greg4422

September 16, 2010 at 8:13pm

I'm a IE user, my current version is IE8, I refused to use that spyware google chrome, and firefox is just boring to me.  So today for approximately 30 minutes I gave IE 9 Beta a test drive and I HATE IT!!!   It really made me appreciate IE8, and I'll be using IE8 until they pry it from my cold dead hands....oh nvm 

JohnP

September 16, 2010 at 8:11pm

 Most folks don't realize that the speed of Firefox is considerably SLOWED DOWN by ADBLOCK. I was marveling at the speed of IE9 until I found a way to import blocked ads:

http://cid-83edeb637d37824c.office.live.com/browse.aspx/Public%20stuff/Adblock%20filters%20for%20IE8

just unzip and import to InPrivate Filtering. Turn on InPrivate filtering and POOF,  pages come up a low more slowly. Why? Because the whole page has to be reformatted.

Is this slowdown worht it? You bet! Do web page providers like AdBlock? No way!

So, since they both work about the same now, why bother? FF is a mature product with tons of good add ons. Next...

Nimrod

September 16, 2010 at 4:46pm

I have DX10 and windows 7 and it sure as hell WONT be running on my computer.

Zachary K.

September 16, 2010 at 4:38pm

comeon XP users, vista is gone! you can join us, here in the future! we have candy....

MrGeek

September 16, 2010 at 4:27pm

I have Netgear WNDR3700... kick ass...

 

But IE9 is sllloooowwwww when accessing router settings. It takes a good 10 to 20 seconds before log in window appears, and when I click anything in the router settings windows, it takes another 10 to 20 seconds to get any kind of response.

 

Don't get me wrong, it access the router, it is just very slow. Chrome works as fast as IE8, click, and there it is. So I'll stick with Chrome to mess around with ma Netgear baby

whathuhitwasntme

September 16, 2010 at 3:47pm

Yet another reason to run firefox

it will still be better

it will still be faster

it will still be easier

IE will still be SECOND best

Eoraptor

September 16, 2010 at 3:35pm

Yeah, because something like the 55% of people using Windows Xp don't at all need the newest in browsing technology...

Well, PC World pointed out that to get IE 9 running in XP, you first have to get Direct X 10 running on it. So there's your starting point.

Keith E. Whisman

September 16, 2010 at 3:18pm

That's a fun idea, how about getting IE9 on a Linux distro such as Ubuntu and not just running in Wine or some other emulator or virtual machine.