Win XP past Apr 2014... (was: Will XP be supported until 2019?)

[robertcollier4 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay-gqx18UTM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToFgYylqP_U

This video demonstrates the slowness of the new Windows 7 GUI.

Windows Display Drivers Model used in both Vista and 7 doesn't include the neccesary hardware accelerated 2D functions to make the graphics generated by GDI and GDI+ as fast as in Windows XP.

Microsoft chose software render because they found too difficult to combine the new graphical engine with the old one. If you want to learn more about it read this: http://blogs.msdn.com/directx/archive/2009/05/12/2d-drawing-apis-in-windows.aspx

GDI has dozens of functions: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd145203(VS.85).aspx

GDI hardware acceleration in Windows 7 using WDDM 1.1 drivers has only these functions hardware accelerated: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd434692.aspx

WDDM 1.1 drivers makes mandatory this new "partial" GDI hardware acceleration. So any driver which claims to be 1.1 is already accelerating as much as it ever will.

Too bad, the results I got were based on WDDM 1.1 drivers (both from nvidia and Microsoft itself).

http://www.passmark.com/support/performancetest/2d_windows7_performance.htm

2D results in Windows 7 seem poor compared to previous versions of Windows, why is this?

Different Windows applications use different methods of drawing to the screen. Some applications render directly to the window, which is the same method used in the vector tests in PerformanceTest (GDI+ to a hWnd). These application will likely suffer a performance hit in Win7. Other applications render to a buffer in main memory and then use a method known as bitblt to push the final image to the screen buffer (GDI+ to a DIB section then bitblt). This method is known as double buffering. Most large commercial applications (such as Word and Photoshop) use this later method and will not suffer much if any performance degradation in Win7. There is a discussion of this on Microsoft's graphics performance blog.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1036369-did-you-know-all-gdi-apps-render-slower-under-win7/

DWM redirects window draw routines to an offscreen buffer and then re-draw them back to the main screen. That means for any window, DWM is redrawing their contents... twice. Coupled this with slower GDI performance than Windows XP. On the other hand, DWM will ensure the contents of the window fit in before it redraws the whole window, so when you drag the window around, it won't cause graphical glitches because now the window will only be redrawn when it's complete.

On the other hand, not using DWM will free up a lot of CPU resources. But still not enough to make GDI render operations as fast and responsive as Windows XP, as XP has more CPU free to do other tasks. If there is a fix for this, I would love to know, too... but it seems like this is already an integral part of Windows 7. The driver model has had to be rewritten to accomodate the new driver device interface (DDI) of DirectX 10 and beyond, and they had to shaft GDI hardware acceleration to accomplish that. They chose to remove GDI hardware acceleration as they found it hard to combine both driver model features. So there is no likely fix in the future except for a whole new edition of Windows.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windows-gdi,2547-15.html

Edited August 31, 2013 by robertcollier4

[Andromeda43 4]

I'm sorry.....with 16 computers that I try to keep running and updated, it's easy to get them mixed up.

The 12 year old PC, I did build, with Windows ME on it. When I got it back a few years ago now, I upgraded it to XP-Pro-SP3 and it runs it admirably.

I have W8 now set up and running on a 2005 model eMachine, with the AMD cpu and 3 gigs of ram and a 160 gig SATA hard drive.

Sorry for the confusion. W8 installer picked up everything on the little eMachine but the sound. ??? It's basic AC 97 so I don't understand that. Anyway I installed a Soundblaster sound card and W8 picked it right up and now I have sound too. For an emergency Backup PC, it works darn well. Maybe not the fastest PC ever, but it puddles right along.

Right now, I'm on my main PC, which I built in 2005, and which has had some slight upgrades over the years.

It runs XP-Pro-SP3 very nicely as my everyday OS, and Windows Home Premium, Windows 8 Pro and Windows 8.1 Beta, all on separate hard drives. "Never the twain shall meet". One OS never sees the others and they all get along nicely on the same PC.

Windows XP will be alive and well here, till I decide otherwise (like that's going to happen, anytime before the Rapture)

Edited August 31, 2013 by Andromeda43

[ND22 0]

I don't know what mobo you are using but Intel own Z87 chipset based mobo has Windows XP drivers on Intel website for chipset, lan and bluetooth; the audio driver can be downloaded form Realtek also!

Edited September 4, 2013 by ND22

[Dogway 4]

I don't know what mobo you are using but Intel own Z87 chipset based mobo has Windows XP drivers on Intel website for chipset, lan and bluetooth; the audio driver can be downloaded form Realtek also!

It's not "officially" supported. I finally managed to find drivers (haven't tested though) for my asus mobo but it required some research. The same shady research that prevents mobo manufacturers to openly link the drivers in their mobo support pages (they would be glad to content 1/3 of the user base, after all this is not their war). You can follow my efforts in this thread.

If you can add something or find an official Intel RST driver that would be cool.

[halo3productions 0]

What's the current status of extending XP past 2014? I'm not talking about petitioning M$ because we all know that's a waste of time. I'm talking about the users' status on extending XP, like the Windows before.

I noticed in the early posts that Windows POS may have compatible updates. Now to me that would seem reasonable, but why would MS allow that? I mean sure they aren't advertising it, but clearly people would notice. However, I guess we won't know until after the deadline (say something magically changes about the updates).

And I've just been wondering why I'm not on Windows XP x64... now to find a copy.

Edited September 16, 2013 by halo3productions

[AnX 27]

POSReady 2009 will only receive tech support - no security updates, as Windows 2000 embedded also lost its security updates on July 2010, even though support is stated to be until 2015.

[halo3productions 0]

Did a benchmark. Came up with interesting results.

Windows XP Professional SP2 x64 (completely updated)

Windows 8 Pro x64 (completely updated)

[CharlotteTheHarlot 2]

Did a benchmark. Came up with interesting results.

Windows XP Professional SP2 x64 (completely updated)

Windows 8 Pro x64 (completely updated)

Yep, not surprising except to MetroTards.

There are way more things occurring per second in the OS as you move from XP > Vista/7 > 8. Just running ProcMon will demonstrate that. And that is true no matter how many services and tasks and autoruns that you remove. The core OS is doing more talking.

This is not to say that some of the updates are not any good, obviously some are. But there is simply less core OS housekeeping happening in the older operating systems and consequently there is more CPU available to be used by running programs.

[jaclaz 1,410]

I would say "interesting but not surprising" .

In my dinosaurish view, something that is not there (if not really-really needed) and/or it is smaller, will result in faster operations .....

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/145209-the-smallest-possible-size-of-bootsdi/?p=933421

jaclaz

[dencorso 1,309]

I would say "interesting but not surprising" .

+1

[ND22 0]

Windows server 2003 is supported until July 2015. Wouldn’t be possible to install those updates on XP with minimal modifications?

Edited December 19, 2013 by ND22

[Guest]

Very possible, ND22. Moreso with x64 than x86, since XPx64 uses the 2003x64 SP1 codebase.

[vinifera 118]

Windows server 2003 is supported until July 2015. Wouldn’t be possible to install those updates on XP with minimal modifications?

actually you could do following, but isn't quite legal yet also not illegal either

find yourself Longhorn (Vista) reset build, the client version 5.2.3790.1232

this is XP since it is client version of Server 2003 SP1 RC

its EULA makes it illegal, but its out of ANY support makes it legal

-

by logic it should accept any Server 2003 SP and hotfixes since its kernel is 5.2 (remember this one is 32bit) and is still XP

so stiff Servers '03 SP2 init and all hotfixes (or try slipstream) and there you go

Edited December 19, 2013 by vinifera

[Flasche 17]

Any one of you who are willing to try and use POSReady 2009 should after install download a virus removal program( I used Malwarebytes) or Manually remove these registries

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\Notify\SSOExec]
"Asynchronous"=dword:00000001
"Impersonate"=dword:00000001
"Logoff"="SSOReset"
"Unlock"="SSOExec"
"Lock"="SSOReset"
"DLLName"="%windir%\\temp\\sso\\ssoexec.dll"

Their was a virus on the install and microsoft forgot to remove some of the registries.

source http://forums.mydigitallife.info/threads/40191-Windows-Embedded-POSReady-2009/page10

Edited January 29, 2014 by Flasche

[dersonpg 0]

Four days ago I installed POSReady 2009 in a notebook Sony VGN TZ 350 and was very good!

The system is fast, stable and so far have not had any problems, crash or blue screen of death.

Honestly, I tried Windows 7 and Windows 8 but POSReady and far exceeded my expectations.

Too bad XP is set to end on 8 April this year but who are willing to stay with him five years worth experience POSReady 2009 (extended lifecycle until 2019).