Windows XP is to be retired in 2008.

Oracle

Windows XP is to be retired in 2008, so it'll be difficult to get a new PC with Windows XP pre-installed: "Microsoft has confirmed that from 31 January 2008 large PC makers, such as Dell, HP and Toshiba, will no longer be able to buy licences for the software...."

PC makers will only be able to get XP from third party suppliers until 2009: "Robert Epstein, Microsoft's European spokesman on Windows licencing, said .... that PC makers could get hold of licences until 2009 if they bought them from third-party suppliers rather than Microsoft."

Source: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6551429.stm

Where are the third party suppliers getting the licences from? Microsoft I suppose. So Microsoft decided third party suppliers get the product but not PC makers? Talk about having absolute and total control over your product and distribution. Add to that Micosoft's dominance of the desktop PC OS market and it's a classic monopoly situation.

Microsoft are deciding what, when, how and for how much consumers can obtain their product. By effectively forcing consumers to buy only one version of it's product Microsoft creates huge, but artificial, demand for their new operating system Vista. So much for consumer choice.

It's annoying and disappointing that Big Brother Microsoft decides what version of their operating system you can buy, and where, and when you can buy it. Personally I've swithced to Ubuntu Linux, it gives me the freedom, security, privacy and choice I like.

Random

SHame Linux won't do everything that Windows does

Sam Vimes

ciaranfo wrote:

SHame Linux won't do everything that Windows does

it will. you just have to have seven nervous breakdowns whenever you want to install something

is_that_so

Extended Support on XP will be available until 2014.

Fabio

Thinking of switching to Ubuntu for ages....never actually did it though.

Creamy Goodness

Oracle wrote:

It's annoying and disappointing that Big Brother Microsoft decides what version of their operating system you can buy, and where, and when you can buy it. Personally I've swithced to Ubuntu Linux, it gives me the freedom, security, privacy and choice I like.

you've switch to linux, fair play. so what difference does it make to you if microsoft discontinues any of it's products?

this was going to happen at some stage, might as well be now.

the_syco

OP: do you think Windows 3.1 should still be sold on shops? If not, when is a "good" time to stop?

Naikon

the_syco wrote:

OP: do you think Windows 3.1 should still be sold on shops? If not, when is a "good" time to stop?

Maybe it should be released as freeware, but being Microsoft I cant see that
happening:p

Kind of hard to believe Windows(excluding NT and 2000/XP) is just a GUI built over the DOS kernel:/
Screw them anyway, I have been dual booting FreeBSD UNIX 6.2/XP for 2 months now and I think I am slowly being converted.

I reckon I will probably use Linux/Unix family OS,s more often as they are more appealing despite the fact they can be hard to setup configure,etc.
I mean Vista has really strict Licensing agreements, I dont want to shell out for another version of Vista every time I upgrade Hardware components.

Open source systems are heralded as more secure, but I dont know If this is more to do with the fact that hackers target market leaders over the minority of Linux/Unix/other operating systems.

I still use Windows for gaming and Multimedia as BSD is a bit messy with Video playback etc.(this will change in time)
Off topic I guess but the ports system in BSD is class:D

Oracle

To answer a few of the questions posed:
1) Although I'm a Linux user it does make a difference to me if other computer users are denied choice and freedom regarding their software.
2) Yes, I think Windows 3.1, Windows 95, 98, 2000 and XP should be sold in shops, retail and online. All past Microsoft operating systems should still be available to those who want to use them.
3) It's true Linux won't do everything that Windows does:
Linux won't ask me to install spyware software that regularly checks if I'm a legitimate user of my operating system, and contact company servers every time I boot up. Linux won't restrict my ability to play my music, movies and software with DRM, and Linux won't require me to consent to restrictive and absurd license agreements.
4) My experience is far from having nervous breakdowns when I want to install new software. I just click "Add/Remove Programs" and choose the application I want. Then the software is downloaded and installed for me automatically. I can use it immediately, without a computer restart, and I pay nothing to install new software.

I agree it's a different experience to Microsoft Windows. It's altogether a more satisfying and liberating experience.

thefinalstage

Oracle wrote:

To answer a few of the questions posed:
1) Although I'm a Linux user it does make a difference to me if other computer users are denied choice and freedom regarding their software.
2) Yes, I think Windows 3.1, Windows 95, 98, 2000 and XP should be sold in shops, retail and online. All past Microsoft operating systems should still be available to those who want to use them.
3) It's true Linux won't do everything that Windows does:
Linux won't ask me to install spyware software that regularly checks if I'm a legitimate user of my operating system, and contact company servers every time I boot up. Linux won't restrict my ability to play my music, movies and software with DRM, and Linux won't require me to consent to restrictive and absurd license agreements.
4) My experience is far from having nervous breakdowns when I want to install new software. I just click "Add/Remove Programs" and choose the application I want. Then the software is downloaded and installed for me automatically. I can use it immediately, without a computer restart, and I pay nothing to install new software.

I agree it's a different experience to Microsoft Windows. It's altogether a more satisfying and liberating experience.

I could never figure out how to run the software afterwards...

I got the commands right but I always got errors. I used Ubuntu.

Guy:Incognito

So should every company have to sell every model of every product they ever sold indefinately?

Think I'll go buy myself a brand new Nes system from Dixons. I'm sure nintendo have a batch winging its way down there now.

thefinalstage

Stekelly wrote:

So should every company have to sell every model of every product they ever sold indefinately?

Think I'll go buy myself a brand new Nes system from Dixons. I'm sure nintendo have a batch winging its way down there now.

Now THAT would be living;)

Oracle

I'm disappointed at the reaction of some people to my original post, for a consumer forum it seems like some people who replied don't mind if Microsoft remove Windows XP from sale and that they continue to have a monopoly on the desktop PC operating system.
I'm glad there's some people who support my point of view: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6575089.stm

Guy:Incognito

Oracle wrote:

I'm disappointed at the reaction of some people to my original post, for a consumer forum it seems like some people who replied don't mind if Microsoft remove Windows XP from sale and that they continue to have a monopoly on the desktop PC operating system.
I'm glad there's some people who support my point of view: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6575089.stm

I dont see what the problem is, every company has a shelf life for it's products. They get replaced/superceeded and the old one everytually goes out of production. Why do you feel Microsoft should be obliged to sell it forever. Why no threads about not being able to buy Win 3.1/Win 95 etc anymore?

They have released a new product that they want to replace XP with. They are a business and can do what they will with their own products.

marktsang

I dont see what the problem is, every company has a shelf life for it's products. They get replaced/superceeded and the old one everytually goes out of production. Why do you feel Microsoft should be obliged to sell it forever. Why no threads about not being able to buy Win 3.1/Win 95 etc anymore?

They have released a new product that they want to replace XP with. They are a business and can do what they will with their own products.

probably becasue vista is like installing an unwated nanny on your computer - the likely hood is that it will only ever negativly affect legitamite users while ppl with pirate copies will enjoy hassle free use - not that i am advocating piracy at all.

Guy:Incognito

marktsang wrote:

probably becasue vista is like installing an unwated nanny on your computer - the likely hood is that it will only ever negativly affect legitamite users while ppl with pirate copies will enjoy hassle free use - not that i am advocating piracy at all.

That doesnt change the fact that its Microsofts product to do with what they will. If they want it to replace XP thats their choice.

catch--22

Oracle wrote:

PC makers will only be able to get XP from third party suppliers until 2009: "Robert Epstein, Microsoft's European spokesman on Windows licencing, said .... that PC makers could get hold of licences until 2009 if they bought them from third-party suppliers rather than Microsoft."

I think this is in relation to 'boxed' products...ie off-the-shelf windows XP or third parties who will still have stock of machines with XP on it. They're just saying they won't be recalling any of the products until 2009, not that they will be granting licenses to third parties.

In thoery Microsoft could make available (unsupported) soft copies of superceded OS's for for download indefinately.

It's not like it is a physical product (ignoring the shrink wrapped product sold in PC shops) unlike the PC's themselves where most components have only one production run before being superceded, "when there gone there gone", only bargin hunters buy last years hardware.

Most IT departments prefer to keep the same build image for as long as possible, it makes their job much easier (there are still some NT4 set ups out there), they usually only change when the hardware no longer has support for the old OS or the users complain about not being able to use USB etc.

The other question is why would you buy a new PC and put on a superceded OS on it, Linux of course is a different matter.

Sam Vimes

Stekelly wrote:

So should every company have to sell every model of every product they ever sold indefinately?

Think I'll go buy myself a brand new Nes system from Dixons. I'm sure nintendo have a batch winging its way down there now.

to make the nes indefinitely they'd have to keep a few factories and a few hundred workers aside. to keep supplying xp, all they'd need is a few hundred megabytes on a server

Oracle wrote:

I'm disappointed at the reaction of some people to my original post, for a consumer forum it seems like some people who replied don't mind if Microsoft remove Windows XP from sale and that they continue to have a monopoly on the desktop PC operating system.
I'm glad there's some people who support my point of view: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6575089.stm

just because they remove it from sale doesn't mean i'm going to stop using it. i suppose them removing it from sale doesn't make that much of a difference to me

Guy:Incognito

Commander Vimes wrote:

to make the nes indefinitely they'd have to keep a few factories and a few hundred workers aside. to keep supplying xp, all they'd need is a few hundred megabytes on a server

that still doesnt change the fact that it's Microsofts product and if they dont want people to keep buying it they can stop selling it. If they want everyone to use their new Os, thats their choice. The people an choose to use another companies OS.

Spyral

The only reason to use windows is to play computer games. Its the only reason I use it. I also just need to figure out if you can put photoshop on it. If you can the next computer I will have will be a linux one

Red Alert

The question about superseeded OS's is interesting. I usually put Windows 2000 on systems as my standard Microsoft OS of choice. It's the least bloated of the NT-based family and it runs almost all software.

It was said ages ago that a time would come when Microsoft would stop allowing copies of XP to be activated. Others said that they'd give away some 'unlock' code - has either of these ever happened?

I object to WGA, DRM and all the other stuff in Vista, not to mention its absurd hardware requirements and total lockdown on 'content' and therefore don't use windows as much as possible. I have switched to Linux on my desktop and use Mac OS X on my laptop, which allows me have the best of both worlds.

jor el

Commander Vimes wrote:

to make the nes indefinitely they'd have to keep a few factories and a few hundred workers aside. to keep supplying xp, all they'd need is a few hundred megabytes on a server

I tend to agree with this point, it's not like MS have to keep building new operating systems, they don't even need to put it on a CD if they make it web download only. However, if they keep selling XP licenses then they will need to keep supporting it with security patches and updates (who would buy an unsupported OS?). This will take time and money and might not be worth the effort when they are devoting everything to the new OS now.

I don't like the fact that they've taken a reasonably good and reliable OS like XP and replaced it with the utterly useless and rubbish Vista though. When XP first came out it was buggy and full of security holes. SP1 took care of a lot of this and SP2 in turn improved it more. However, from using Vista my opinion of it is that it's problems are not something that can be fixed in a patch or update. Only dumping it and going back to XP works. I did try to use it, but even disabling all the fud you can doesn't make it as good an OS as XP.

I also use Mandriva Linux (tried Ubuntu but didn't care much for it) but need a Windows OS for certain games and apps.

I'm not looking forward to when corporate make the decision to upgrade to Vista. It will happen eventually as they won't be able to buy licenses and won't have any support for XP.

SectionF

Stekelly wrote: »

I dont see what the problem is, every company has a shelf life for it's products. They get replaced/superceeded and the old one everytually goes out of production. Why do you feel Microsoft should be obliged to sell it forever. Why no threads about not being able to buy Win 3.1/Win 95 etc anymore?.

I would have thought that the general idea was that the successor product should be an improvement, as has been the case so far.

Nody

Necromancy alert, Necromancy alert, Necromancy alert :pac:

RangeR

SectionF wrote: »

I would have thought that the general idea was that the successor product should be an improvement, as has been the case so far.

Dude, really. This thread is almost 2 years old. You come along to re-open with a small one liner?

Close and lock it, I say. Run for the hills.

However, to add to your comment... Have you EVER tried Windows ME [between Win 98 and XP]? It was total utter rubbish. Buggier than some of the code I throw out on occasion.

Early RTM Vista was dire and almost un-usable in certain situations until SP1 came out.

Fallen Buckshot

Riiiiise from your Graveeeee

seriously tho Vista was suppose to do this and that and Dx10 and uber gfx and in reality its the windows ME of the new era i don't have too much faith that windows 7 will be any better as its basically Vista Rehashed

the groutch

vista is a pile of ****, I'm sticking with my current computer unless I can buy a new one with XP in it (and I don't mean a dell one where vista is the main OS and you have to pay extra for XP)

Nody

the groutch wrote: »

vista is a pile of ****, I'm sticking with my current computer unless I can buy a new one with XP in it (and I don't mean a dell one where vista is the main OS and you have to pay extra for XP)

Good plan except if you want to stick 4+ GB of ram into it (which with the price of RAM today you'd most likely want to).

Regarding Windows 7 from the people I know testing it the comment says it is what XP was to ME in regards to fixing things.

thefinalstage

Fallen Buckshot wrote: »

Riiiiise from your Graveeeee

seriously tho Vista was suppose to do this and that and Dx10 and uber gfx and in reality its the windows ME of the new era i don't have too much faith that windows 7 will be any better as its basically Vista Rehashed

Motha ****a stole my avatar!