[PCWorld]

Post your comments for FAQ: XP deathwatch, T minus 1 week here

[rkinne01]

Thank god it's time to put the old girl down! Vista is better.

[pipercub]

Sorry but i am going to wait for what they are calling Windows 7.
No use in getting Vista and a year or so later find out that they will have a much better product and possibly a complete remake of Windows.

[lodave]

XP works just fine, thank you.
Who needs either Vista or 7? No doubt some mysterious and untraceable malware will soon appear online or secreted within some innocuous and popular 3rd-party software to sabotage the systems owned by the public or businesses who insist on clinging to XP, and of course the only solution will be "discovered" to be an "upgrade" to Vista or 7. After all, they can't sell new OS versions if the existing ones still do the job!
The only question is when the OS "WMDs" will arrive.
Anyone care to bet on it, or better, whether 7 will be rentware?

[Knifeblade]

Windows 7 launches in 2010, was thought 2009 earlier. I don't know if it may be rentware, I would think the new OS would be "dropped" in or offered separate for probably what Vista runs? Don't know.

I hear the point about a method to stop XP, but that may be a bit tenuous. However, since Vista is still in a love/hate relation to users, there maybe some malicious activity. That's certainly in the realm of possible occurences.

What I wonder~~~~~~~~~~ how many XP OS systems decide to hold off until 7 and bypass Vista? Yeah, there's more to it than that, but if my system was Vista-ready, I don't feel that I'd have left XP for Vista. I, just me, expect to wait for 7 and see if it or Vista would be better for me.

[mathion]

When I build a new computer system, it will contain XP. If I need to replace my laptop, I will make sure it has XP drivers available, get one with any Vista flavor, get an OEM copy of XP with a new hard drive with external hard drive case and downgrade to XP. I've worked with Vista enough to know that unless you go very high end and waste a lot more money than you need to by doing so, the experience is less than satisfying. Even a high-end laptop with Vista is slower than my four year old Centrino-based laptop with XP-Pro. If I can't get XP anymore, I'll make the final transition to Linux. Vista is just too resource intensive for my tastes, forcing people to spend more money than necessary for their computer needs just to keep an operating system that takes too much computer to run happy. I'd rather fiddle with XP or Linux than Vista because in the end, it will be faster, less expensive and do everything I need it to do. For those who post things to the effect that you just need to get a high end computer and spend the money and join the technology world, the point is, with XP, you didn't have to. Vista doesn't really offer enough advantages to make the cost differences worth it. If you had XP on that high-end computer as part of the technology world, you'd beat Vista on a machine with the same specs to the punch EVERY time. How does that make Vista better?

[rkinne01]

Funny Vista runs ok on my old PC with only 512 megs of RAM, mind you it isn't breaking speed records; SP1, the various patches, and new drivers have all dried up the performance issues with Vista. You don't need a "high end" system to run Vista, it'll run just fine with one gig of RAM and a multi core system. Once upon a time when XP came out people like yourself whined about having to have a highend systems to run XP and swore they'd stick to Windows 98SE, its all the same! You really want a fast system? Run Windows 95, it'll run on very little RAM with slower CPU's, you'll have the fastest Pc on the block!

"How does that make Vista better?" You mean the features that would increase your battery life, the vastly improved security (essential for laptops), search features, Snipping Tool, the sidebar gadgets (some are VERY useful), and a whole slew of other new apps built into Vista are not useful? I will also point out that support for XP will only last a limited amount of time, so you'll end up picking a new OS anywway so save yourself some cash.

[afcw1969]

My first Windows 98SE just got resurrected yesterday on my first computer from 1999. It was even after a hard drive format error popped up. It said that Windows 98 could not be installed. Ha. Even the fomer tech Joel didn't think I could install it from the next screen after clicking Enter to continue, and Then the command prompt D:/WIN98> that led me to type in SETUP /P J and into 98SE set up it went. Yippeee!

I am very tired of having to activate Windows XP with every fresh install and major hardware changes. So my first PC is now back to its original manufactured state of Windows 98SE. I have two other PCs with XP MCE2005. And that's where they will stay for a very long time, God Willing.

[rtfire1]

xpm 2005 I think is the halfway from xp to vista. media center in the 05 version has always been great to work with. I my self think its even better with vista.

[skywyze]

Yes, Vista has flaws, every OS does, so that arguement is out the "window." What Vista offers over XP doesn't make it a great buy in my book. The push Microsoft used for this new OS is that it's "prettier" and more user friendly. As an I.T. professional, I don't use the GUI much at all, it's mostly keystrokes for me, I hardly ever touch my mouse unless I'm surfing the web, so the super awesome graphics just slow the system a little. At work (medical facility), we have quite a few third party vendors we work with that won't/can't offer support for Vista, so it's either keep XP or clos eup shop, guess which we chose. I really have nothing against Vista, but the stigma attached to it and the lack of "power user" upgrades makes it a worthless OS, professionally speaking. It's a great system if your computer use is relagated to email and watching streaming video online (which is what most people do), but the reasons just aren't there for me. So, to make a long opinion short, if you want a "show horse" Vista is the way to go, if you want a "work horse" it's XP all the way.

[JokeLady2]

In my opinion, XP is GREAT!!!! I am sorry that they chose to retire it.. Vista might be good if your computer already has it installed from the factory, but, I've heard way too many negative things about it when you add it on after already having XP. I am not sure what I will do....maybe just wait and see. Windows 7 might have tons of bugs, also. I'll just have to cross that bridge when I come to it. Windows XP has been good to me! ;)

[billvelek]

I still run XP on my desktop with NO trouble whatsover. My wife has a laptop with Vista, which I haven't used much but I also seem to need to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to figure out. My last effort was a few days ago when I tried to figure out why all of the "start up" programs are NOT starting. I discovered that Vista apparently has something called "Defender" which insists that the BOINC program that I want to run automatically is some sort of a security risk; maybe that's a great feature, but the &^%)^#$ Defender program won't allow me to over-ride it in any way to permit the BOINC program to auto start when the laptop is turned on. Shouldn't that be MY choice as to what starts up automatically. I finally gave up, after wasting a half hour of my time trying to research the issue, and instead just SWORE ... AGAIN ... that I will never willingly accept VISTA. By the way, the BOINC program is for humanitarian work that I've been doing on my desktop with XP for many years without any security problems; because my wife doesn't remember to manually start it when she turns her laptop on, our project is losing out on a lot of computer crunching, so I hope that someone will please provide me with a solution. My personl website www.velek.com explains it. Thanks in advance.
Bill Velek

[rkinne01]

Defender can be turned off.

Why have it in start up in first place in Vista or XP? It just slows the start up down.

[BAMT]

Microsoft already has their "XP WMD". It is in a message from one of their servers and causes a "Your license has expired" to pop up and you can no longer write files.

[SnTholiday]

I've read many articles regarding Vista Home Basic that state it sucks. That is so far from the truth. I have not used Vista Ultimate, but I did upgrade to Home Premium and after using it a couple weeks went right back to Home Basic. Why? Home Basic is the most like XP Home but is more refined. It is so much easier installing Vista on a RAID array. I don't need all the extra bells and whistles that the other Vista versions have. Sure, my PC can run Aero, but who needs it? Home Basic just that, a basic Vista OS. When Windows 7 comes out will MS give us the choice of just a basic version? I hope so, or make it modular.

[LarryP]

Vista was shoved down the unsuspecting consumer's throat. If you bought a new computer (I got two) you got Vista ... too late you found out you had to spend 1oo's to get your "standard" programs loaded and running again (some of my early software purchases said "Vista" on the outside and were XP on the inside). My solution is to get a copy of XP OEM and toss Vista. So XP is not supported ... so what, neither is Vista unless you gots lots of money for new software and all the phone calls at X$ per minute. When my stuff gets long in the tooth, I'm switching to MAC. Many of my friends and business buddies have done so and they are all happy. MAC's ads have the pulse of the PC consumer perfectly. This is the 90% non-geek consumer experience. The Vista experience of the silent PC consumer who votes only with their money.

[coastie65]

9th of July and I just ordered a copy of XP Home w/ SP3 from newegg. It ain't gone yet. coastie65