Are microsoft screwing up all old versions of windows?

quietobserver

In the last two weeks my windows has gone out the window, takes about 10 minutes to load up from start and the CPU says its running most of the time at 100%

id honestly be quicker turning the pages of a book again.

have microsoft screwed up or slowed down all the old versions to get people to possibly buy Windows 7??

nullzero

I doubt it.
Windows is just awful anyway.
That's not to say it's not plausible, but I'd just blame your Windows faults on the fact that Windows isn't particularly good to begin with.

marco_polo

quietobserver wrote: »

In the last two weeks my windows has gone out the window, takes about 10 minutes to load up from start and the CPU says its running most of the time at 100%

id honestly be quicker turning the pages of a book again.

have microsoft screwed up or slowed down all the old versions to get people to possibly buy Windows 7??

Sounds like you should have started this in the Computers and Technology forum.

Since my PC is fine I guess this theory has been disproved by counterexample.

meglome

OR you have some sort of virus or trojan.

MeatProduct

A reinstall of the OS is usually the ticket. Just did one on mine and all is well. After you back up all that needs backing up of course.

Nick

mickoneill30

quietobserver wrote: »

In the last two weeks my windows has gone out the window, takes about 10 minutes to load up from start and the CPU says its running most of the time at 100%

If you posted in the Computers forum the first reply to your post would have asked you what is running 100% on your processor. This is not hidden information.
If it was a conspiracy wouldn't Windows report your processor running at 2% instead.

bonkey

I dunno about it happening in the last 2 weeks, or about your processor running at 100%, but I would agree that Windows XP boot times have grown over time, as a result of various changes and additions from hotfixes.

Whether or not this is a conspiracy - a deliberate ploy by Microsoft - I can't say.

Cynics point to the fact that boot time is considered by many reviewers to be a key figure in showing whether or not a new OS release is faster/slower then its predecessor...and that slowing XP boots cast Vista / 7 in a better light.

On the other hand...if you have a patch that could impact boot-times...the choice is to spend money optimising it, or just ship it on the grounds that it will only impact people who've already paid you all they're going to pay for that OS. For a current OS, that can be worthwhile...because a serious impact on boot times can lead to a negative user perception, impacting sales. For a superceded OS...there's no ROI for the cost of optimisation.

In that sense...its arguably "deliberate", in that MS choose to not really care beyond a certain point about the impact of patches to boot times in end-of-life operating systems...and do so on a relatively sound financial basis.

Do they go out of their way to do it? I don't know. I doubt it...but I don't know.

robtri

bonkey wrote: »

I dunno about it happening in the last 2 weeks, or about your processor running at 100%, but I would agree that Windows XP boot times have grown over time, as a result of various changes and additions from hotfixes.

Whether or not this is a conspiracy - a deliberate ploy by Microsoft - I can't say.

Cynics point to the fact that boot time is considered by many reviewers to be a key figure in showing whether or not a new OS release is faster/slower then its predecessor...and that slowing XP boots cast Vista / 7 in a better light.

On the other hand...if you have a patch that could impact boot-times...the choice is to spend money optimising it, or just ship it on the grounds that it will only impact people who've already paid you all they're going to pay for that OS. For a current OS, that can be worthwhile...because a serious impact on boot times can lead to a negative user perception, impacting sales. For a superceded OS...there's no ROI for the cost of optimisation.

In that sense...its arguably "deliberate", in that MS choose to not really care beyond a certain point about the impact of patches to boot times in end-of-life operating systems...and do so on a relatively sound financial basis.

Do they go out of their way to do it? I don't know. I doubt it...but I don't know.

Any hotfixes that MS release that efect performance are mainly released because some twat of a hacker has decided to try to do damage to your machine.. MS then have to release a patch to try to halt the problem, which take up more of your machines resources...

bonkey

robtri wrote: »

Any hotfixes that MS release that efect performance are mainly released because some twat of a hacker has decided to try to do damage to your machine.. MS then have to release a patch to try to halt the problem, which take up more of your machines resources...

The point I was making is that there's an open question about how much work they put into making sure those patches work efficiently, or just work.

Kimbot

Also don't forget that every app you install may have to be started on start-up. If so then your load times increase!!

robtri

bonkey wrote: »

The point I was making is that there's an open question about how much work they put into making sure those patches work efficiently, or just work.

absolutely.. good point... most of the time I would say they just make them work, because they need them out asap to stop the problem before it escalates...

Diogenes

No they screwed up Vista just nicely enough...

Ubuntu for the win!

Windows trys to be all things for all men, which means it will never be that efficient, and since now PCs are becoming more versatile, the basic XP package has to have more in it for it to work with all 'standard' hardware.

Captain Furball

You just cannot say that.
Windows is far superior than ununtu.

mickoneill30

Deleted User wrote: »

Ubuntu for the win!

Windows trys to be all things for all men, which means it will never be that efficient, and since now PCs are becoming more versatile, the basic XP package has to have more in it for it to work with all 'standard' hardware.

So is your point that Ubuntu doesn't work with all 'standard' hardware?
I don't really think that's correct.

Recently another OS guy called his kernel bloated
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/22/linus_torvalds_linux_bloated_huge/

bonkey

This is not a "my OS is better then your OS" thread, folks

espinolman

quietobserver wrote: »

In the last two weeks my windows has gone out the window, takes about 10 minutes to load up from start and the CPU says its running most of the time at 100%

id honestly be quicker turning the pages of a book again.

have microsoft screwed up or slowed down all the old versions to get people to possibly buy Windows 7??

That happened to my computer a while ago , so i reinstalled the operating system and that did'nt work , i tried other things and these did'nt work , eventually i put a new hard drive in the computer and that worked !

Captain Furball

bonkey wrote: »

This is not a "my OS is better then your OS" thread, folks

It's something close to my heart.

cable842

just use Linux MInt Its Amazing

Orion

robtri wrote: »

Any hotfixes that MS release that efect performance are mainly released because some twat of a hacker has decided to try to do damage to your machine.. MS then have to release a patch to try to halt the problem, which take up more of your machines resources...

Totally wrong. MS release hotfixes because there are security holes in their products. They do this (eventually) regardless of whether or not anyone has tried to exploit these holes. Linux developers do exactly the same thing (faster) for exactly the same reason.

Deleted User wrote: »

Ubuntu for the win!

To clarify - Linux FTW

Captain Furball wrote: »

You just cannot say that.
Windows is far superior than ununtu.

*cough* *spit* I'd ask you to defend that comment but you're currently banned from the forum so there's no point. Not that there's a defence anyway.

mickoneill30 wrote: »

So is your point that Ubuntu doesn't work with all 'standard' hardware?

People often confuse "supported by" with "supported under". Look at any piece of hardware you pick up - they always list supported OSes. No OS supports any hardware. Manufacturers support the OS. MS don't write drivers for anything - neither do Linux developers. I bought an excellent Brother printer/scanner recently and one of the buying points was that Brother support Linux - not that Linux support Brother.

Anyways - to answer the OP - In my time using Windows I've always found that it's gets slower and slower over time due to a variety of reasons - most of them shoddy programming imo. An annual reinstall is the only thing known to man to resolve this.

bonkey

Let me re-iterate...this is not an OS-Wars thread. Either discuss the OP's conspiracy theory and only that, or don't post.

Cryos

quietobserver wrote: »

In the last two weeks my windows has gone out the window, takes about 10 minutes to load up from start and the CPU says its running most of the time at 100%

id honestly be quicker turning the pages of a book again.

have microsoft screwed up or slowed down all the old versions to get people to possibly buy Windows 7??

Well lets look at this logically.

In the last two weeks my windows has gone out the window, takes about 10 minutes to load up from start and the CPU says its running most of the time at 100%

• Did you install any updates ?
• Did your antivirus software install any updates
• Did iTunes install any updates
• When was the last time you ran an AntiVirus Scan ?
• What is the spec of your system

I would bet my professional career almost that your slowness is more than likely a result of Spyware/Virus or a botched update. The likely hood of Microsoft Conspiring against customers using older versions of its Operating Systems is.... quiet frankly almost impossible.

A number of reasons, the only OS's Microsoft Encourage people to stop using are the following, this is purly because of issues with the OS or cost of keeping them up to date:

Windows 9x OS's
Windows NT OS's upto Version 4.0.

One of the great things about the internet is the fact that if your not happy about something or your pc is running slow theres normally a forum for it, there is not a single trend on the Microsoft Connect forums or indeed here on boards.ie's own PC Forum.

I would suggest heading there to find out why your computer is running slow.

and on the OS front, each OS has its own distintive features that appeal to different people. Its the same for cars, Some people like VW's where as some people like fords.... its no biggy, they do the same thing in the end.