ps24eva Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 i don't think people realize how old XP is. It was released without support even for usb 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zxian Posted October 12, 2005 Share Posted October 12, 2005 XP-SP1 brought USB 2.0 support, and the driver support for SP2 is even better...With SP2 and all the post SP2-hotfixes, you are up to date.Vista has new features, but then again, as with other OSes, it will end up cutting out the very bottom end computers from the market.And 4 years is not "soo old". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Think about the people still using Windows 98. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prathapml Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Well, i agree that 4 years is actually VERY long!But since it still is the top-of-line, i dont see anything missing. Even Bluetooth was finally introduced, with SP2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhelic Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 (edited) While I'm quick to blow the legacy horn (I'm quite known for it actually) I have to disagree.#1. XP lacked USB 2.0 support because the spec wasn't finalized in time to make it in XP.#2. It's been universally agreed (by MS and the users) that XP SP2 was half a step to a whole new OS under the hood.#3 Yes 4 years is a long time in software, and we won't get a new OS until we hit the 5yr mark. Imagine if we were stuck with Win95 Revision B and didn't see another OS until Win2000 was out. Of course that's assuming anything you make will be inferior 3-5yrs later and while that can often be true, the whole NT5 kernel (created for Win 2000) has proven itself to be a rock solid foundation that all future MS technologies can run on.Despite, there's nothing old about XP /w SP2 and considering that SP3 (being released at the end of 2006) will add all the major features of Vista (except the new vector GUI) only goes to show that XP is truly a rock solid foundation and there's nothing old about it.Now without XP SP2, I could definetly agree that XP would be "old", especially when you want to think about security. Edited October 13, 2005 by Rhelic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdogg Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 (edited) best reasons not to use vista1 - need new monitor (we'll see)2 - opengl is completly broken (too slow to say its not and this is m$'s plan to get rid of them)3 - uses too much memory4 - what are really the benifits over xp (none for me, more its more like a downgrade)but i do agree with your words, best reason to use vista is cause its upto date.but so will sp3 be, so. Edited October 13, 2005 by gdogg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ringfinger Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 I agree, I'm sticking with XP for a while. The having to buy a new monitor/lcd thing is just crap. I'm not lettin' the man bring me down!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesmosis Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 yeah XP rocks! one the best Windowses has MS released, I'm dying for SP3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InTheWayBoy Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Can't believe we're already talking about how Vista is gonna be so much better...Just like XP, and any M$ OS for that matter, the first release is gonna suck...more trouble than it's worth. By the time things are ironed out (SP1?), XP will be the new 2000. Everyone will be happy with XP and not see a reason to go to Vista. True, new tech is always fun, but much like USB, Bluetooth, and Firewire there won't be many reasons to be the first to jump ship to it.And the best reason to stay with XP...is it's not named Vista. WTF were they thinking!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aegis Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Why use Vista? With every previous Windows release, Microsoft released like a plethora of patches after the first year. There's many bugs that even the beta-testers didn't catch. With XP, users all around the world have had 4 years to find those bugs and get them patched. Besides, most of the Vista features are being backported . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlo555 Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Vista looks like the biggest resource hog I've ever seen. I shall be sticking with win2k and 98se for quite a long time to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takeshi Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 There're always those (and plenty of) people who want the latest in everything.Before I used XP I was using Windows 3.1, believe you or not. I wrote my doctoral thesis and research paper using 3.1 and Word 6, with 8MB RAM on the computer.Will I get Vista? Maybe, but not next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlash428 Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 I've beta-tested Vista, and it's pretty cool--but from what I have found (in the release I have anyway) it's just not different enough to make a difference.Why will I stick with XP?Because why spend $ on a new product license when XP (with SP2), is a completely up to date, reliable OS? Personally, I can't think of one.I agree with what others said too--there's bound to be bugs and glitches that will take AT LEAST a year to catch; meaning that Vista, once released to the gen pop, won't really be the best (or up to date) OS available. I'll bet money on that.I'm not one to hold on to the past, but I also never upgrade simply for the sake of upgrading. I'll probably wait for Vista SP1 before I'm really ready to run with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeboeck Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 Vista is up-to-date and XP is old! Microsoft's PR department couldn't have said it better. If Vista's new technologies don't work in XP, those technologies won't be adopted for a couple of years. If you were unable to host .NET websites on Windows 2000, then .NET would be a lot less popular. If you can't play Blu-Ray on XP, people won't buy them. If you can't use the new Office on XP, people will stick with the old one. If the new DRM only works on Vista then, well, we hate DRM anyway...For some time, XP will be very much up to date, except for the version number. I will probably be upgrading just to have the latest, but many people and especially corporations stick with XP until there is a budget to buy something new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdogg Posted October 14, 2005 Share Posted October 14, 2005 well said, many will stick with xpwith lots of alternate gui's coming for xp, and new ones looking goodrumors of a google os, java gui , and the google java partnership for this, its pretty nice to know, maybe i wont be using the next microsoft os, even if they give it to me for $79 oem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now