[JTF243]

JoshMiller - you need to pull your head out of the sand (or wherever it is). If you believe that it only takes $350 every decade for people to keep current with technology, you are delusional.

It MIGHT cost that for the software, but when you have to upgrade your HARDWARE just to be able to run that new garbage (yes, I said GARBAGE) when our older systems (WP Pro w/AMD single core, 1 gig RAM, and Office 2000) are still fully functional, it is a WASTE OF MONEY to upgrade.

If you are a businessman as you imply, how in the world can your business survive if you squander company resources in such a wasteful manner?

[jscott418]

I think providing support to a OS for a decade is plenty. Anybody seen Apple do this? Even open source does not. XP is done, get over it!

[waldojim]

JTF243, on 15 April 2012 - 04:54 PM, said:

JoshMiller - you need to pull your head out of the sand (or wherever it is). If you believe that it only takes $350 every decade for people to keep current with technology, you are delusional.

It MIGHT cost that for the software, but when you have to upgrade your HARDWARE just to be able to run that new garbage (yes, I said GARBAGE) when our older systems (WP Pro w/AMD single core, 1 gig RAM, and Office 2000) are still fully functional, it is a WASTE OF MONEY to upgrade.

If you are a businessman as you imply, how in the world can your business survive if you squander company resources in such a wasteful manner?

Windows 8 runs great on my AMD Athlon -XP for what that is worth.

[Grump]

JoshMiller, on 14 April 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

rosoft (and many other tech companies) I would vehemently object to this strategy.

Good for the free-loaders. Bad for business. I care way more about business than I do that people who can't come up with $350 every decade don't have up-to-date software.

Josh...you seem to have missed the point here. We here don't give a hoot about M$ continuing to provide support but wish to continue using a familiar interface & hardware rather than having to first fork out your "$350/decade" then struggle with new dumbed-down re-named items in increasingly bloated menus.

Some old dogs don't want to be forced to learn new tricks every few years, We just want PCs that function to our requirements, not M$'s bottom line.
We ignored Vista entirely & our newest impulse purchase, a W7 PC here has been collecting dust for the past 6 months as we continue using our XP systems.
From what I read about W8...no thanks! M$ would have to pay me to even consider switching to an OS designed more for tablets than desktops. The only way M$ could retain us as customers would be to include the option for classic interface/menus from previous versions every time they come up with their "Latest & Greatest" Crap.

As things stand its BYe Bye M$, this households future direction is XP then Linux.

[BaliRob1]

I purchased my XP Home Edn in Feb 2007 and, being a newbie then, did not know I would have to pay for another system later which means that I will have lost 6 years enjoyment of what still is an excellent program. If MS will not give me the chance to pay a much smaller service charge annually I for one will go looking elsewhere or even give up possessing a computer. At my age (a secret) I have more pressing needs for the little money I have to live on. Perhaps MS has weighed up this loss of business against hoped for future sales. MS should remember that the largest and greatest of companies can and will fail in this volatile climate some of which will not be here in ten years time. MS should create a 'family' atmosphere for its customers which will encourage the young of today to purchase its products of tomorrow.

[butlerwm]

The reason companies make disposable products is so you have to keep buying them. Just like there's little profit in cloth napkins or diapers, there is little (or no) profit for Microsoft to keep XP or Office 2003 alive on the (many) millions of desktops where they reside. Instead, each of those desktops becomes the potential new home of Microsoft's new OS and Office. Making people needy has always been a better (or at least easier) marketing strategy than making them happy.

Interestingly enough, DOS faced a similar fate before it eventually faded into the shadows. Many hundreds of enterprises and governments lived on a steady diet of DOS and proprietary DOS applications well into the era of even Windows XP. The cost of upgrading those hundreds of thousands of machines and training a like number (or more) of employees was staggering. Eventually, however, DOS disappeared even from the desktops of law firms (one of the last bastions in the DOS world), where coupled with WordPerfect, it lived happily churning out legal documents.

So... no... we'll never see XP or Office 2003 become Open Source. Instead, those users and machines will give way under the weight the latest (if not greatest) incarnation of Windows and Office.

So much for, "the customer is always right."

[YellowEagle]

lenapter, on 15 April 2012 - 11:02 AM, said:

I still see some doctor's offices, and even EMERCENCY ROOMS in hospitals, still using XP-What happens to them.?-What happens to patients in life and death situations? GOOD GRIEF!!

Actually most all hospitals in our area use a hybrid system designed for them, it's not XP or Linux, You actually have more privacy in hospitals and the information that hospitals have about you, then you do out in everyday life to. My Dad had to have some testes run on him when he had Cancer, being to weak to even be able to sign the releases my mom was forced to go and get POA on him, to just be able to sign those papers, they had been married for 35 years. They are in their 70's to. In many cases you can't even do anything for a Loved one in a hospital without a Power of Attorney. We are going through that now with someone we have been taking care of for the last 10 years. and he has told them it was ok to let us sign or make decisions for him, we still have to have a POA. On the other hand Anyone can go to the court house and find out anything about you, though you might have to pay some fee's some times to get the information.

[YellowEagle]

waldojim, on 15 April 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

JTF243, on 15 April 2012 - 04:54 PM, said:

JoshMiller - you need to pull your head out of the sand (or wherever it is). If you believe that it only takes $350 every decade for people to keep current with technology, you are delusional.

It MIGHT cost that for the software, but when you have to upgrade your HARDWARE just to be able to run that new garbage (yes, I said GARBAGE) when our older systems (WP Pro w/AMD single core, 1 gig RAM, and Office 2000) are still fully functional, it is a WASTE OF MONEY to upgrade.

If you are a businessman as you imply, how in the world can your business survive if you squander company resources in such a wasteful manner?

Windows 8 runs great on my AMD Athlon -XP for what that is worth.

Mine to!

[YellowEagle]

kjohn034, on 15 April 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

Mattvm8v, on 14 April 2012 - 09:00 PM, said:

There's already an open source alternative to Windows out. It's called ReactOS.

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

Looks really nice but it does say on the site that it's not ready for daily use yet.
I think the author is intending to ride on the huge coattails of Microsoft as most of the hard work is done.
And how selfish of them to not give it away...bad Microsoft.
Also, how many products do you know of that are supported free of charge for ten fricken years let alone more.
ReactOS still requires a great deal of very hard work and who wants to do hard work right? XP for free...yay.
Maybe the author could write articles for free for a while and see how that goes. I'm sure the mortgage company will understand.

And that's been in development for a long time to. Wonder if it'll ever be done.

[YellowEagle]

JoshMiller, on 14 April 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

So the premise of this article is that somehow Microsoft "owes" the consumer something other than what was promised? Ridiculous.

The consumer bought a license to use the software. The continuing updates for a decade afterward are nice, and probably few people would purchase the software without those updates, but the updates are NOT owed to anyone.

Why would Microsoft continue to pay people to work on projects that generate NOTHING for the company? As an investor in Microsoft (and many other tech companies) I would vehemently object to this strategy.

Good for the free-loaders. Bad for business. I care way more about business than I do that people who can't come up with $350 every decade don't have up-to-date software.

$350.00 Bucks you have to be Kidding right. Maybe the Operating System is $350.00 bucks but what about all the other Software you might need that has to work and many times Flawlessly with that software. It can be a lot more expensive just for the home user then just $350.00 dollars. That can be thousands of dollars and if your a Business, that can lead into millions of Dollars just for Software, Not including IT, Training and Hardware and many other things you might need. It can break some business's especially small business's. Now if your just going to surf the Net, yeah then i could see that. though i do know a couple of people that are still using 98se and NT and don't have any problems with the Virus's, they even still use track printers to do their print outs for their Banking. yeah there old school but have no intention with changing. I have tried to get them to upgrade and they won't. They are happy with what they have.

This post has been edited by YellowEagle: 15 April 2012 - 11:01 PM

[waldojim]

Grump, on 15 April 2012 - 07:31 PM, said:

JoshMiller, on 14 April 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

rosoft (and many other tech companies) I would vehemently object to this strategy.

Good for the free-loaders. Bad for business. I care way more about business than I do that people who can't come up with $350 every decade don't have up-to-date software.

Josh...you seem to have missed the point here. We here don't give a hoot about M$ continuing to provide support but wish to continue using a familiar interface & hardware rather than having to first fork out your "$350/decade" then struggle with new dumbed-down re-named items in increasingly bloated menus.

Some old dogs don't want to be forced to learn new tricks every few years, We just want PCs that function to our requirements, not M$'s bottom line.
We ignored Vista entirely & our newest impulse purchase, a W7 PC here has been collecting dust for the past 6 months as we continue using our XP systems.
From what I read about W8...no thanks! M$ would have to pay me to even consider switching to an OS designed more for tablets than desktops. The only way M$ could retain us as customers would be to include the option for classic interface/menus from previous versions every time they come up with their "Latest & Greatest" Crap.

As things stand its BYe Bye M$, this households future direction is XP then Linux.

Seriously, you go through a row of posts, and downvote based on you can't handle a different opinion? Seriously? What are you, five? And All I did was mention that I have an Athlon -XP machine running Windows 8 well. So you can't even handle a personal experience with a FREE product?! WOW.

I would also like to point out, that the only flavor of Windows even close to $350 (for the home user), is ultimate edition, at $219 for a full copy. Second, even though support has been discontinued, that doesn't mean you cannot keep using your old machines. I still have Dos, Windows 98, and Windows 2000 machines in active service. I just know better than to try and make them do things they aren't designed to do.

If you actually try Windows 8, you would find that it is meant to run on anything. It isn't designed for any one platform. The performance, and scheduling enhancements allow Windows 8 to run like a dream on newer machines. The Metro interface actually keeps software in check, and is why Windows 8 runs so well on a freaking SINGLE CORE AMD that is 10 years old! All the latest tech, including 1080P movies on a 10 year old PC - thanks to Windows 8. Try things before dismissing them, you might be surprised.

[Anysia]

JoshMiller, on 14 April 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

So the premise of this article is that somehow Microsoft "owes" the consumer something other than what was promised? Ridiculous.

The consumer bought a license to use the software. The continuing updates for a decade afterward are nice, and probably few people would purchase the software without those updates, but the updates are NOT owed to anyone.

Why would Microsoft continue to pay people to work on projects that generate NOTHING for the company? As an investor in Microsoft (and many other tech companies) I would vehemently object to this strategy.

Good for the free-loaders. Bad for business. I care way more about business than I do that people who can't come up with $350 every decade don't have up-to-date software.

$350 a decade? What are you using as a computer? An abacus? 10yrs ago, a 1gb HD was close to $1000. There are dentist offices that use XP. Why? because that's the OS that runs the machinery. There are photographers that need XP because certain camera equipment and their software isn't supported by Vista or Windows 7. $350 a decade? Care to rethink, or better yet, retract that asinine premise?

[PaymaanJafari]

This is a great proposal, but Microsoft's strategy is to kill everything useful, and sell something else.

If they were wise enough and accepted this proposal, the Open Source community would make great things out of this lame OS in a blink.

[JasonQuestoopu]

It was Peter Parker's uncle Ben who lectured him about responsibility, not his grandfather. This isn't comics trivia; it was in the blockbuster movie, for heaven's sake.

While the notion of WinXP being donated to society is appealing, there are insurmountable legal and philosophical hurdles within Microsoft to that happening. The much more realistic way to keep old hardware usable is software that's *already* open-source: Linux, BSD, Haiku.

[BaliRob1]

I submitted my post before I saw JoshMiller's very unhelpful attitude. I hope any staff he employs are treated more thoughtfully. I am sure that most of us are NOT freeloaders as he implies but would be willing to pay to retain support for XP.

I am also tired of the phrase, "Get over it" - just what does this mean? To me it indicates that the users do not want to listen to other points of view and that they are somehow superior; also, it is almost aggressive in tone.

All that many of us feel is XP 'ain't broke' and 'don't need fixin' certainly with systems that have nothing extra to offer by way of enjoyment or efficiency.

[tomr]

A witty and well-written article, not to mention salient. Mr Gibbs makes a very good case for releasing XP to the world. And as many have noted, though we know that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", we continue to buy and hanker for newer systems. Not much has changed since my first (British) Apricot 2-floppy machine. Same basic word processing etc.

[galeso]

JTF243, on 15 April 2012 - 04:54 PM, said:

If you believe that it only takes $350 every decade for people to keep current with technology, you are delusional.

It MIGHT cost that for the software...

$350 for operating software, but how much for Autocad upgrades, accounting software upgrades, ... and the training that goes with it?
Most people I know regretted upgrading to Vista. Windows 7 does seem infinitely better than Vista.

[susanrat]

It's a great idea and one the Microsoft might just follow in a way. Not completely but in a smaller way.

[MleB]

No chance of Open Source XP. The very last thing they would want is some OS-backsliding as folks chose to hold onto the OS (even more than now) or give up in disgust over a current one and go back to something that they feel happier with.

Certain amount of chutzpah on Microsoft's part for trying to kill off the OS when yet comparatively recently, they were happily loading it on millions of netbooks, lest they lose market share to Linux.

[NickRusso]

To start with, there is no economic benefit to M$ to release XP/2003 to open source. We know they are not the most beneficent of companies.

Next, this would only REDUCE their profits because so many people who are justly enamored of XP/2003.

That said, MS is virtually a monopoly, especially when it comes to Office software. The open-source alternatives are just not adequate for an advanced user (ever try resizing and cropping a picture in OpenOffice?).

Being Master Certified in the MS Office suite, I used to brag to my students (on behalf of M$) that you could have put me into suspended animation after having used Word for Windows (remember when we called it that?) 1.1 and Excel 3.0, and I would still be able to wake up and learn 97, 2000, 2002 (really the beta for 2003), or 2003. I don’t want to waste my time learning a new interface when I’ve mastered the old one.

Now we're looking at phasing out support for 2007? What a joke! No one who had any serious familiarity with Office would have bought it, if they knew what they were doing. I have enough friends and students to know that if they did, they are sorry, and some have reverted to the 2003 version.

All the things that are supposed to be so much easier in 2007/2010 are so difficult to find, they may as well not be there. I don't enjoy having to search through customize and All Commands to see if it still exists, what the technical (not menu) name is for it, and then put it on a toolbar that I need a microscope to see. Meantime, I’ve got a "ribbon" with so many useless commands on it that takes up as much space as three toolbars, that I can't customize unless I have a doctorate in XML. At least on has the choice of getting rid of it and using keyboard shortcuts, when they are available, to get the common things done. Perhaps they'll eliminate those, too, in the next version.

As far as the OS goes, M$ seems to think that arbitrarily moving around helpful features as well as removing them while adding eye candy is progress.

Go ahead and put in the eye candy, but IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT. I still can't use the *improved* control panel layout, and even in the classic view they've changed the names of some of the most-used applets. Thank goodness, I've memorized things like appwiz.cpl and main.cpl (and there's still a Run... line). They’ve really improved MSPaint, but there’s that stupid ribbon again! The obvious “pinned” taskbar icons are such an obvious rip-off of the Mac’s interface (which is implemented much better), it’s hilarious. Where’d Quicklaunch go? I have to make my own folder for it.

I am happily using XP on a fairly modern laptop, and 7 on several other machines. I still have bones to pick with 7 (why doesn't a newly-opened app appear at the top--I just opened Winword from the Run… line and where'd it go? - Oh it's an orange button on the taskbar, and why don't Save dialogs and such not get the focus anymore?). But it's stable and can run XP-era apps (unlike Vista, another paid beta--yes I have that on one box).

Why not stick with the program (as it were) and IMPROVE THE SOFTWARE, not rearrange the interface. Anyone who delves mildly into the guts of the things knows (Documents and Settings is now Users? Good move for the brevity, but why take My Pictures in my User Folder and out of My Documents? It could be argued that it should have been there in the first place, but it's an unnecessary incompatibility.

In spite of all its quirks, I like 7, and thank heaven for CTRL+Shift+N! The Mac has had Command-N for decades!

I would probably not have these newer OSes if I could have still bought machines with XP. However, there is some value in keeping up-to-date. I have even bought 7 for barebones boxes I have built!

I certainly hope that OpenOffice and Symphony will start to emulate some of the finer points of MS Office, because I will never BUY another new MS suite, unless they priorities in line with the consumer.

Just my humble (?) opinion…