XP now has less then one year to go. . .
The count down has begun, and the end is April 8, 2014 for XP and Office 2003.
The count down has begun, and the end is April 8, 2014 for XP and Office 2003.
The main reason XP had such a long life was because of its corporate penetration. When Microsoft announced that it was dropping support for XP a few years ago, it caused a mighty backlash from the corporate world, so Microsoft gave XP a life extension to allow time for corporations to transition to Windows 7. Consumer concerns didn't enter into this decision.
Actually I was thinking more about the enterprise "consumer" but still MS could have just said
"finito" years ago and enterprise would have had to upgrade to Vista or 7.
So if I try to install XP again on one of my notebooks after 8 Apr 2014, it won't install?
On another note, why does the US use month/day/year instead of day/month/year?
It seems that the US is the only country that uses the month/day/year format, everyone else uses either day/month/year or year/month/day. I can see the logic in the latter two, but none in the former.
In the UK we still have a strange mix of systems.No intended disrespect to our friends from the US but it is not just the date. Found this somewhere on the Web.
The main reason XP had such a long life was because of its corporate penetration. When Microsoft announced that it was dropping support for XP a few years ago, it caused a mighty backlash from the corporate world, so Microsoft gave XP a life extension to allow time for corporations to transition to Windows 7. Consumer concerns didn't enter into this decision.
It is what it is - the US has a lot of weirdness that tracks back to colonization and the revolution. My favorite are my brit colleagues who make light of the way we deal with these sorts of things, completely ignorant of the fact we do these things precisely because we were an English colony, and for a goodly amount of time at that. In fact, it's been argued in the past that some of our more major regional language accents used here in the US have some basis in the language and accents used during the time of colonization and where people emigrated here from - it may even have an impact on the accents of the English language in places in Canadian regions too (David Hackett Fischer wrote a very interesting and large book on the subject). Mixed with the German and Dutch emigres at that time, you get what people might call "American English" and it's accents. It's a theory that's sort of impossible to prove, but it does seem quite reasonable. From what dialecticians have said, the vast majority of accent differences exist on the eastern half of the US, and specifically along the eastern coast and great lakes regions - those regions originally inhabited and colonized by immigrants to the US during our infancy as a colony and later, as a country. Again, it's something that would be incredibly difficult to prove factually (as it happened centuries ago, and records and documentation during those times would be inaccurate at best due to the reasons people emigrated in the first place. However, if true it would be yet another interesting vestige of colonial times, I suppose, in the Americas.As to the date format, it was the standard in England when this continent was being colonized
That's news to me. Learn something everyday.
Corporations in this country (not all, but most) like to privatize their profits but socialize their risk.
...privatize their profits but socialize their risk
Iceland make-a good country for kicking bank-a-man out, and it make-a model for rest of world, but that still doesn't make-a oil to be a fossil fuel. The Earth make-a all by itself!!!