Jump to content

How can we keep XP alive?

oldwindows

By oldwindows
in Windows XP

 Share

Recommended Posts


dencorso

dencorso

Posted
Posted
Support ends exactly 1 year from today.
buy a Windows Embedded XP system which gets updates till 2016.

The POSReady 2009 I think'll get updates till 2019, or am I mistaken? Obviously, MS may still release surprise security fixes for really dire scenarios, up to then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jody Thornton

Jody Thornton

Posted
Posted (edited)

It may be possible to port updates from Win2003 to XP, which will remain in extended support until 2015/07/14. In the case of XPx64, the files are already interchangeable due to the shared architecture.

I placed a thread on the Windows XP x64 forum probing the latter question. I think that updates for the x64 version of Windows Server 2003 would need to repackaged in order to be used for Windows XP x64. But it would be great to use the OS until July 2015.

On my second machine, I was using regular 32-bit Windows XP as a simple file server, but I since changed over to Windows Server 2003 so that I could have an additional year of extended phase support. Hopefully, there is a way I could do the same with Windows XP x64. Failing that, I plan to move to Windows Vista x64 Ultimate Edition (my DVD has SP2 integrated) to take me to 2017.

Edited by JodyThornton
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)

I remember your thread. :)

If Microsoft uses the same scheme then that they use now, repacking will not be necessary. Just extract the package with the /x switch, swap in a hacked update.exe that ignores the relevant INF directive, then run that executable. The method works.

Edited by 5eraph
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dencorso

dencorso

Posted
Posted
On my second machine, I was using regular 32-bit Windows XP as a simple file server, but I since changed over to Windows Server 2003 so that I could have an additional year of extended phase support. Hopefully, there is a way I could do the same with Windows XP x64. Failing that, I plan to move to Windows Vista x64 Ultimate Edition (my DVD has SP2 integrated) to take me to 2017.

With all due respect: MS let go of 9x/ME way back (July 11, 2006) and we're still using it (I mean, the 9x/ME community I'm part of, as you all know). I'll do likewise with XP. I really fail to see what's the big deal. Why being *in-support* is so important to you all? While there remains compatible hardware, I see no obstacle whatsoever to continue using XP in the next 10-20 years. After that, it'll probably become really problematic... Then again, by that time, so much water'll have passed under the bridge that we can hardly know what we'll be interested in doing, IT-wise. This is just my 2 ¢, of course.

windows-8-market-share-small.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monroe

Monroe

Posted
Posted

A standing ovation to dencorso ... still clapping !!! I hope you are correct in predicting the future ... I have given some thoughts to getting a newer computer with Windows 7 sometime "down the road" but I really don't want to. It's exactly one year ago that I was making the switch from Windows 98SE to Windows XP Pro. What a great year it's been ... everything working so well, sad to say that in one way ... no more challenges, have all the software programs that I'll probably ever need, I still do a little research trying to understand a few things about XP a little better but it's not really necessary. These days I turn my notebooks on and they work and run better than I could ever hope for.

I go along with densorco with the 10 to 20 year thing ... I hope for a another 10 to 12 years, or maybe more ... but when the 20 year mark hits, it probably won't matter much to me, sad to say ... I'll probably be watching "birds and butterflies" and won't have any idea what a computer was or how it worked ... "sad to say" !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jody Thornton

Jody Thornton

Posted
Posted

Hi dencorso:

I was setting up an old machine for my superintendent's brother. He was wanting a machine just use for six months while he saved up to get a new one. He had a Pentium III 400 MHz CPU. I upped it from 256 MB to 512 MB of RAM, and installed a clean copy of Windows ME on it. I used the unofficial SP for Windows ME and the Revolutions Pack v9 to modernize the interface somewhat. For browsing, I installed Seamonkey v1.1.19 (which as far as I know, was the last release to work with Win9x from 2010).

And still, there were SO MANY sites that just do not render properly. It may be a small thing, but when I load Google, the two search buttons should be side by side; not one on top of each other and stretched out. Facebook doesn't work properly. Many sites leave the top part of the page blank, leaving you to scroll down to see the actual page. I could go on, but you get the idea.

Sure, the OS is lickety-split fast, and the browser loads quickly. But the rendering issues of supported browsers are too much of an issue for most people (and even though I'm usually quite tolerant, I'm fast becoming one of those who just want the site to work). And what of banking online? The site has to be secure, and I would only trust a modern browser to do that.

Which means Win9x is simply out. Sadly that will soon mean Windows 2000 as well. As for my being fixated on ensuring I'm on a supported system, once Windows XP goes the way of the operating system graveyard, the browser vendors will stop releasing for XP as well. So I'll need to use Vista or higher; just to have access to a current browser on Microsoft Windows.

Is that not correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dencorso

dencorso

Posted
Posted

Not quite. You can navigate very passably still, even without KernelEx, using Opera 10.10...

But I wasn't trying to make the case for 9x/ME... I only mentioned those OSes to say they went out of support in July 11, 2006... and remain usable today.

There'll be navigators supporting XP SP3 for a long time ahead: its usage share is still about half the windows users...

The best years of XP are still to come. Relax, stop worrying, and enjoy them instead. :hello:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Monroe

Monroe

Posted
Posted (edited)

Jody from Canada ... we sort of exchanged some information in another forum dealing with the K-Meleon Twin browser. You did mention using SeaMonkey and I tried the portable SM version and it worked just fine but I still like the KM browsers with XP as I did with Windows 98SE. You mention concerns about banking in today's world. I am having no problem (so far) in doing my banking with K-Meleon ... also can still get into my brokerage account with KM. I am using JamesD's KM 1.6 beta 2.5 version and I added some UserAgents from KM Twin and some that I found on the internet ... I had no trouble using the KM default but I have the UA set to Firefox 15. Maybe the banking sites are more picky or stringent in Canada and just don't work well with "older browsers" but when I do have a real problem with a site then I fire up IE 8 and can usually get things to work OK with that. I have 3 KM browser versions on my XP notebooks: KM v1.5.4 ... KM v1.6 beta 2.5 by JamesD ... KM Twin. Maybe some additional modern UserAgents might be of help. I've been experimenting with various UAs and the whole thing is fascinating.

Just to add ... I usually have JavaScript off but for banking and other sensitive accounts ... it usually has to be turned on. Just my 2 cents on the matter.

Edited by duffy98
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jody Thornton

Jody Thornton

Posted
Posted

Not quite. You can navigate very passably still, even without KernelEx, using Opera 10.10...

I can respect that, but how long will Opera v10.10 be able to render these pages properly? Plus, I want to render pages properly, not just passably. I suppose XP will be able to support Seamonkey builds for awhile. I can only hope. But at least I have a migration path with either Vista or Windows 7, if that's not the case.

As for the person I previously corresponded with regarding Seamonkey vs K-Meleon, I ran K-Meleon v1.6 and 1.7 alphas with one of the several add-ons and user-agent strings. And without proper HTML 5 support, Google Images doesn't work quite right. So even K-Meleon isn't a modern option really. It's too bad too, because I really liked K-Meleon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
submix8c

submix8c

Posted
Posted

The following was kind of OT, but the point remains that older hardware functions (more or less) fine with an older OS (with our support, of course) as already stated. Your point of Rendering, however, is well-taken.

Pentium III 400 MHz CPU. I upped it from 256 MB to 512 MB of RAM, and installed a clean copy of Windows ME...
The CPU is a tad "slow" but the RAM would be sufficient for utilizing XP. P-III @400 implies Katmai, max of 600mhz (SECC Slot-I) so since hard to find not worth upgrading further. I'm not really sure how well it would perform with "modern browsers" (e.g. IE8), bearing in mind the Original Minimum Hardware Requirements (roughly matches the IE8 requirements).

XP will no doubt be "kept alive" well beyond it's expiration date. Google

windows xp market share 2013

indicates roughly 39% still use it now, trailing Windows7 and leading Vista and Windows8.

We'll be fine. Bear in mind that Windows9x was a die-hard. AFAICR MS literally had to shut off the MS Update to "make them go away" (not!). Even IE6 was still update-able during and beyond that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...