Did you get the memo? xp is dead.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe we have different needs than you and a grandiose statement as such just makes you look like an idiot.
#1). I work for a software company, and i have to test stuff that customers might run into. So, I need XP a whole lot more than Windows 8 compatibility mode
#2). When testing software, like a backup app, or misc network utility, I often do so in a VM. An XP VM takes a whole heck of a lot less resources (RAM, CPU, HDD space) to spin up and play around with than (vista, 7 or 8). With just 2-3GB of space and 256MB of RAM, I can run XP and get done what I need to test. I keep an XP image that I can reuse and it's like 2GB, which can be copied from my source a whole lot faster than a 12GB Windows 8 image.
Many people (and it looks like CR is included in that) have no idea how deeply entrenched the XP technology is. It's everywhere. Microsoft may say it's "dead" from a strictly
marketing and support (as far as THEY are concerned) standpoint but out "in the wild" there are many, MANY people who still use it to run their daily lives, businesses, what have you. When I walk around our corporate office I still see many machines that are running XP. I go to the doctor's office and their entire LAN is built around XP workstations. My bank (Bank of America, not just some little fly by night operation) still uses mostly XP in the branch offices. Not everybody is on the "upgrade train" with this stuff like many of us here are. They're too busy taking care of business to be worried about whether they have the latest version of an O/S. The sentiment among computer users IN GENERAL is simply this: If it ain't broke, why fix it? You have to answer the question "why" more often in corporate environments because they are not likely to upgrade to the latest item just "because it's cool".
People like me can afford to upgrade and play with the technology but there are many out there who are using their [XP, Vista, Win7] installations that, if asked, can't come up with the sufficient "why" to retool. I can afford to buy a new hammer if I want to, too. There's some really great looking ones down at Lowes and they're always coming out with new models that look really COOL but then I ask myself why ... does my existing hammer now all-of-a-sudden no longer function because there's a new one for sale?
I'm not saying there's anything WRONG with making new models of hammers, but to take the attitude that someone is a luddite because they refuse to upgrade to our latest, greatest hammer so they can be with the crowd? Nuts. You upgrade when you either break your existing tool or you determine the new tool will do what you want it to much better than what you have and you can afford same. THAT's when you upgrade.
One more analogy and I'll quit my rant. Take another example: Honda. I own a 2006 Honda Civic. Bought it from Courtesy Honda back in 2009 as a slightly-used car. It's got 125,000 miles (or so) on it right now. One thing I DON'T ever hear from Courtesy (or Honda USA) is that the "2006 Civic is DEAD". I can still get service for the thing, it still runs like a champ and I'll probably get half-a-million miles out of it. They have given me no service deadline (I.E. after such-and-such a date we will refuse to 'support' your 2006 Honda). No ... they service it practically forever. Rare to see in the software industry, though as I think about it I realize that the company I work for services our product no matter how long someone has owned it.
Making statements like "XP is DEAD" comes from people who are uninformed about what goes on in the real world. The deeper the penetration that this technology makes, the longer it's going to take to force people from one platform to the next. Some will, some won't, so what? A tool is a tool. Why shouldn't someone be able to use it as long as they want to?
-Max
