What is it about XP that people just can’t live without

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

  1. Posts : 11
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
       #31

    Well I switched recently to win7 after 8 years of XP. Was a pretty bad decision since I cant afford win7 and the eyecandy wasnt worth it. I'm musician and the drivers for a lot of my hardware doesnt work as good as under Xp.
    Some stuff doesnt work at all (actually only the scsi stuff and an old midi interface)
    As soon as I can be arsed to install all the crap again on my laptop I go back to XP since seven will run out sooner or later.
    A big fat minus for seven is the brush bug on photoshop cs4 (my girlfriend tried seven out as well "oh, and she was clever enough to run it on a replace HD to check how good it works on a laptop" - had the same bug so its not just my maschine and the CS4 pack is a bought one from my GF's graphic agency - all win7 drivers available were tried out.

    The Performance between seven and XP is almost the same but considered that I had different profiles on XP - 1 of them for live gigs which ran only serato scratch without explorer and all that crap which made my system uncrashable, makes me prefer XP again. Dont know if that is possible on seven since I'm an OS-0.

    I guess the years will pass and if seven is really that good loads of people will switch to seven or eight or whatever will deliver the best compatibility with the actuall and past software & harware. Some people will use XP as long as they can......maybe.....forever

    I dont see the benefits right now so I will stick as long with XP as possible untill harware/ software issues will force me to switch or seven will be available for free (illegal) The only good thing about is that it operates with 64 bit on my laptop and that it detects all of my ram installed. That was the reason for "checking" it out (Videoproduction consumes loads of ram )
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 2
    Win XP Pro
       #32

    I’m still using XP because I have yet to hear one substantial reason why I should upgrade. What are the compelling features that should make me want to upgrade? All I hear is that the UI is really cool. Gee, at 65, cool passed me by about 30 years ago. And if it is so cool, why do so many tech sites recommend turning Aero off to improve performance? There were also some claims about improved security. But why are all of the Tech sites filled with articles on how to shut off UAC?
    I’ve been in the IT business for 45 years. So long, in fact, that it was called DP when I started (that stands for Data Processing for you yung’uns). The first computer I saw was an IBM 1401. I’ve had a personal computer in my house since Commodore 64 days. Today I have 4 PC’s in my house. Comparing my primary PC to that 1401 is mind boggling.
    One thing I am certain about is that nobody buys a computer for the OS. Applications drive all purchasing decisions whether for the home or for business. So my point is that until application software is written that takes advantage of some new capabilities in the OS, there is no compelling reason to upgrade.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 803
    Windows 7 Professional x64
       #33

    Iisee said:
    I’m still using XP because I have yet to hear one substantial reason why I should upgrade. What are the compelling features that should make me want to upgrade? All I hear is that the UI is really cool. Gee, at 65, cool passed me by about 30 years ago. And if it is so cool, why do so many tech sites recommend turning Aero off to improve performance? There were also some claims about improved security. But why are all of the Tech sites filled with articles on how to shut off UAC?
    I’ve been in the IT business for 45 years. So long, in fact, that it was called DP when I started (that stands for Data Processing for you yung’uns). The first computer I saw was an IBM 1401. I’ve had a personal computer in my house since Commodore 64 days. Today I have 4 PC’s in my house. Comparing my primary PC to that 1401 is mind boggling.
    One thing I am certain about is that nobody buys a computer for the OS. Applications drive all purchasing decisions whether for the home or for business. So my point is that until application software is written that takes advantage of some new capabilities in the OS, there is no compelling reason to upgrade.
    Welcome to Sevenforums!
    Nobody is forced to upgrade.
    If you are happy with what you have, why bother. :)

    Only thing is if you buy a new PC after 22 October it will have Windows 7 on it.
      My Computer


  4. Posts : 349
    Win7 Ultimate X64
    Thread Starter
       #34

    Welcome to Sevenforums Iisee.
    Good to here from you and your point of view.
      My Computer


  5. Posts : 72
    Windows 7 Ultimate x64
       #35

    Personally I never liked xp, for a few reasons, I switched back to 2000 almost immediately after buying xp, and gave it to my mom+dad for their future installs.

    I liked vista, I don't know what bothered so many people about it, im sure there were genuine problems people had with vista, but I never experienced any I couldn't solve with either a bit of experience, or research or both.

    XP was never an os i liked using, I wold have even preferred 98 if I had too.
      My Computer


  6. Posts : 5,807
    Windows 7 Home Premium x64 - Mac OS X 10.6.4 x64
       #36

    driecken said:
    Personally I never liked xp, for a few reasons, I switched back to 2000 almost immediately after buying xp, and gave it to my mom+dad for their future installs.

    I liked vista, I don't know what bothered so many people about it, im sure there were genuine problems people had with vista, but I never experienced any I couldn't solve with either a bit of experience, or research or both.

    XP was never an os i liked using, I wold have even preferred 98 if I had too.
    I agree...I used XP for three days and then tossed the disc back for 2000...I loved Vista and would be using it with no issue if 7 wasn't here
      My Computer


  7. Posts : 15
    Windows 7
       #37

    my 2c


    I think XP's longevity owes to a stabilisation in computer hardware, particularly with the pentium 4 processor. Therefore it wasn't necessary to upgrade the OS when new hardware came out.

    Also XP was easy to use, and as it lived longer and longer, drivers became more and more stable. As we all know, drivers had to be rewritten for Vista so instability crept back again generating a lot of bad press. With Windows 7 most manufactures would have got their act together writing a drivers for Vista, which I don't think will need to be changed hardly at all for Win 7. So things will work in Win 7 straight away as the drivers are already mature = no bad press. I think that if people want to use their 8 year old hardware they should stick to their 8 year old OS. Updating one component in the system generally means updating them all.

    The other thing is that the Microsoft OS design, while completely getting reworked under the hood from XP to Vista, and taken a bit further with win 7, looks and operates under fairly the same paradigm as XP, so again no compelling reason to upgrade on the surface for non-tech savvy people.

    Now if only windows 7 came with WinFS...
      My Computer


  8. ten
    Posts : 266
    XP / Windows 7 Pro RTM
       #38

    I just don't see a good enough reason to "upgrade". I just see negatives like slowing down my system and adding more bloat. I'm a minimalist and think XP is bloated too but it's not that bad

    One of these days I'll have to but XP will be supported by MS until 2014 so I don't think it will be anytime soon.

    Anyways, who cares? It's just software folks. This appears to be par for the course around here but there's no need to get romantic about it. Pretty soon you'll be outdoing Linux and Mac fanboys.
      My Computer


  9. Posts : 554
    Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1
       #39

    driecken said:
    Personally I never liked xp, for a few reasons, I switched back to 2000 almost immediately after buying xp, and gave it to my mom+dad for their future installs.

    I liked vista, I don't know what bothered so many people about it, im sure there were genuine problems people had with vista, but I never experienced any I couldn't solve with either a bit of experience, or research or both.

    XP was never an os i liked using, I wold have even preferred 98 if I had too.
    You and me both. When I bought a new machine in 2003, the first thing I did was wipe XP off it and install Windows 2000. To this day I don't get what was so great about XP. Is it because the average user went from 98/ME to XP? Sure, maybe THAT was a worthwhile upgrade, but 2000 to XP wasn't at all IMO. I was disappointed when Microsoft decided to scrap SP5 for 2000 in favor of an update rollup.
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 397
    6x W2K8 R2 (x64), 6x W7 7600 (x64), 2x Gentoo (x64), 1x Ubuntu 9.04 (x64), 1x pfSense (FreeBSD)
       #40

    str4w said:
    Well I switched recently to win7 after 8 years of XP. Was a pretty bad decision since I cant afford win7 and the eyecandy wasnt worth it. I'm musician and the drivers for a lot of my hardware doesnt work as good as under Xp.
    Some stuff doesnt work at all (actually only the scsi stuff and an old midi interface)
    I don't see how anyone can criticize an operating system that has not even been released yet for driver incompatiblities. I'm not trying to single anyone but what did you expect from a beta and release candidate? There is a reason RTM is released several months prior to a public release.

    In addition, have you ever looked at trends in driver incompatibilities? You'll notice the same companies typically tend to have "broken" drivers at each OS release. It is not rare that driver developers use undocumented functions and\or "bugs" to get their products to work. When fixes are put in place, usually for security reasons their products break.

    Does anyone not remember the release of XP? Most corporations would not touch it until SP1. Most of the people I know who swear by XP are the same people who swore by W2K until XP SP2 was released.

    Iisee said:
    There were also some claims about improved security. But why are all of the Tech sites filled with articles on how to shut off UAC?
    Because of lazy developers. That is the only reason to turn off UAC. At least 50% (probably a lot more) of software is developed using bad practices and by developers who do not care to learn or are used to seeing examples of bad practices.

    Edit: To elaborate, how many application continue to store their configuration file, logs and even user data in their installation folder or subfolder. It wasn't until Vista that many applications were updated to use APPDATA, ALLUSERSPROFILE, ProgramData, TEMP eventhough most have been available and the proper storage location since W2K. And it isn't just smaller software products, IBM and Lotus still have Enterprise products that store configuration and logs in their install folder. The software and more specifically the lazy programmers fault yet the operating system is to blame and the developers recommend turning UAC off instead of fixing their products.
      My Computer


 
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00.
Find Us