Stubborn XP users could be good for 95/98/ME longevity?

[AlteredAaron]

Here's what I was thinking, XP users will be even more stubborn to upgrade than we have been with our 95/98/ME computers. Furthermore, I think the average person is starting to catch on to Microsoft's practice of "planned obsolescence". You know, they gotta keep the money machine rolling, so don't let customers go too long without forcing a new version of windows down their throats, which usually invovles buying a new computer as well.

Microsoft plans to stop support for XP in 2014, only three years from now. When that happens, there's going to be tons of XP users who are going to be left out in the cold, and who won't be able to run the lastest version of Internet Explorer. Something like 50% of all computers hooked to the internet are people using XP. Not only that, but there has probably been more people using XP than any version of Windows ever. For example, Windows 3.1 came along and was kind of like a novelty... who would've thought Bill Gates would take over the computer world? Then came Windows 95, which nearly destroyed Apple and ushered in the Microsoft that we're familiar with today. All of which culminated in XP being the most widely used version of Windows in history.

I'm thinking either Microsoft will have to change their businsess practice and stop forcing people to upgrade every four years, or else they're going to be replaced by something that's less aggressive and greedy. Because if the economy stays the way it is, most people (not to mention businesses) can't afford to upgrade when Microsoft tells them too. Microsoft may have been able to get away with that kind of stuff before 2008, but not anymore. I just don't see how they can keep going the way they're going. Everyday more people either switch to firefox, opera, chrome, linux, or whatever.

I don't know what reasons other people have for continuing to use older versions of Windows, but for me, I'm used to it. I like how I can easily go into DOS and fix stuff, and it doesn't take long to reinstall, plus there's no "activation" other than typing in a few letters, I can turn off most of the automatic updating. It just seems like it's my computer, and I don't have to wonder what program is connected to the internet in the background. I have no interest in computer games either, so all the fancy graphics and tons of RAM is meaningless to me. I mainly just like to surf the web and read blogs and check my email. I like to do simple photo editing and burn music CD's and type documents, but I can accomplish all of that on my Windows ME computer. Buying Windows 7 just seems pointless.

I tried using KernelEx and I got Firefox 3.6 to work on my computer, but I don't know if that version of gecko is any better than the one available in K-Meleon 1.5.4 or Seamonkey 1.1.19?

I also heard that KernelEx worked on Opera 11. Since version 10.54 was the last one to work on my computer that's really good news if it works. Good job to whoever wrote KernelEx.

But getting back to my point. I think the longer that stubborn XP users hang on, the longer Windows 95/98/ME can survive as well. Once 64-bit systems are the norm, then we can really kiss Windows 95/98/ME goodbye.

My own opinion is that Windows will be history in less than 10 years. I think Windows 7 will be the near final version. That's just my hunch. America will be bankrupt, the Chinese won't ever stop pirating software, the Russian government has already switched to Linux. I think the Desktop PC was just a blip on the radar of history. It won't last forever. What do you guys think?

[Guest]

I'll be one of those that will probably stick with XP way past 2014. I can't stand bloat and consider XP bloated. Much prefer Win2K.

I don't even pimp up my XP. I use the Windows95 gray theme, classic start, and a solid black desktop.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

Well gee I dunno.

In 6 years or so when they are selling only hardware that doesn't work with XP AT ALL then maybe you'll change your mood.

Personally I loved XP and liked 9x ALOT but I like progress and don't want to be limited to older hardware. Plus I like to watch my porn and surf unsafely behind MSE and a patched system.

I am not saying you can't still use the older OS's BUT I am admitting that without extreme measures they have grown just OBSOLETE.

My current systems are no longer XP capable (XP 64 yea, But the first 64 windows really bites the big one) With the ability to have quad, 6 and even Quad-CPU setups the older OS's simply fall to the roadside. Sure they can make guesses at what the future will hold but they are only guesses.

I remember a seminar Billy Boy was giving a LONG time ago where he was saying 64megs of ram was possible in the future. Thats MEGS not GIGS!!! Now there are Limitations in current win7 editions of 192gigs! HOLY NUTS!

In the future we could see 1,2 or higher TB of RAM!!!! Where will you be then?

Call me a MS whore and a slave to the progress but hey I am not ashamed of it.

Edited January 21, 2011 by Kelsenellenelvian

[Guest]

In the future we could see 1,2 or higher TB of RAM!!!! Where will you be then?

If an operating system or program needs 1.2 TB of ram, I don't want it.

I get along just fine with 1 gig of ram. I actually didn't notice a difference from when I upgraded from 512 megs. I never, ever max out my ram. The most intensive program I use is VirtualBox. I allocate it 512MB.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

Get into graphics or game development. You'll use up loads then.

[dencorso]

Microsoft plans to stop support for XP in 2014, only three years from now. When that happens, there's going to be tons of XP users who are going to be left out in the cold, and who won't be able to run the lastest version of Internet Explorer.

Welcome to MSFN, AlteredAaron!

All I know is, by 2014, I'll be running both 98SE and XP, just as I do now (unless the sky falls on my head first, of course!).

And then, there's ReactOS to the rescue, which should be mature enough to help keep XP going strong, by then.

[vinifera]

and who won't be able to run the lastest version of Internet Explorer

lol who even wants to use that piece of crap anyway...

as for XP support, yes the official one stops in 2014, which doesn't mean people will gonna drop using this OS the very same day MS stops patching it...

but the way MS goes with winblows... I think i'll switch on Linux later as anything post Server2003 is just crap an excuse to buy expencive rig's just to be capable of running their fancy OS

in which user has absolutely NO control over it

[BenoitRen]

My current systems are no longer XP capable (XP 64 yea' date=' But the first 64 windows really bites the big one) With the ability to have quad, 6 and even Quad-CPU setups the older OS's simply fall to the roadside. Sure they can make guesses at what the future will hold but they are only guesses.[/quote']

Not capable in what way? XP does support multiple processor cores.

Get into graphics or game development. You'll use up loads then.

Not all of that is state of the art, bleeding edge that it requires loads of RAM. My 160 MB of RAM is more than enough for game development, thank you.

Edited January 21, 2011 by BenoitRen

[Kelsenellenelvian]

4+ gigs of ram.

[submix8c]

...as for XP support, yes the official one stops in 2014...post Server2003 is just...

Fortunately for some folks, Server 2003 SP2 isn't going away in 2014 (including R2 SP2).

Heck I'll hang onto my rig to the bitter end, unless I become Fabulously Wealthy and then I might upgrade...

Side note - Kel is kinda right, though. Even some Gamers like the biggest-baddest hardware and OS available (read wealthy or bored). A few tend to get/buy those games that require heavy-duty s**t, especially those online gamers (I know one, was a "tester") that just have the "need for speed". Although... don't you have to have an ISP that provides super-high speeds? (Which is faster, the ISP or the HW/SW? Inquiring minds want to know)

Side note 2 - Gawd! Please don't let this be another "flame-fest"! I hate that krap!

[Andrew T.]

In 6 years or so when they are selling only hardware that doesn't work with XP AT ALL then maybe you'll change your mood.

If a critical mass of users refuses to upgrade from Windows XP, there would be no competitive reason for hardware that doesn't work with XP at all to exist.

The "inevitable" aspects of technological obsolescence often boil down to self-fulfilling prophecies.

[Kelsenellenelvian]

In 6 years or so when they are selling only hardware that doesn't work with XP AT ALL then maybe you'll change your mood.

If a critical mass of users refuses to upgrade from Windows XP, there would be no competitive reason for hardware that doesn't work with XP at all to exist.

The "inevitable" aspects of technological obsolescence often boil down to self-fulfilling prophecies.

I don't think millions of people are just going to deny progress and hold the rest of the world back like that.

[dencorso]

OK.

The OP question is already answered, so there's no point in elaborating further.