Windows 8 and 8.1 Forums


Windows XP diehards: Can you survive April 2014 deadline?

  1. #21


    Posts : 149
    Windows 8.1 Pro 64-Bit, Ubuntu 13.04 64-Bit


    Quote Originally Posted by CountMike View Post
    Might as well go to toy-like Linux if you are just going to sit and look at it. Know too many people that don't even know what do they need an I7 or FX 3850 for, but still just have to have it. So they don't even know what they are missing and I have to squeeze every cent just to have something half-decent to work on. Bet anybody that Word will not run any faster on their then on my computer.
    That doesn't justify gimping it down with a 12 year old operating system that you're lucky would even install properly. For these kinds of people, what would be wrong with leaving the stock Windows 7 (or 8) on it?

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #22


    Yeah, mind and processor power are terrible things to waste, in this case it's both.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #23


    Australia
    Posts : 716
    Windows 7 Ult Reatil & Win 8 Pro OEM


    I personally don't use XP anymore, but still repair/reinstall it for a considerable number of persons. I've also noticed it is used by my local doctor, a large hospital, a very large banking organization, etc, etc. No doubt many large and small businesses are still using it.

    The question is, will M$ still activate it after Arpil 2014 for those who want to run it for whatever reason?

    And if yes, have M$ made a rod for their own back with the never ending activation process?
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #24


    South Coast NSW, Australia
    Posts : 615
    Windows 8.1 'Ultimate' RTM 64 bit (Pro/WMC).


    I 'collect' Operating Systems. I have most versions of DOS and Windows, half-a-dozen different Linux distros, several non-Windows/Linux PC OSes (Geos, BeOS, ReactOS etc) plus a handful of non-PC OSes,(Amiga and C64), plus various betas, RCs and RTMs.

    So I'd be keeping XP in any case. I have both Home (SP1) and Pro (original release, no SP), although I have SP2 and 3 as separate executables.

    It runs on my P4 2.8Ghz desktop as a print-server and games machine (Home), and also on this machine in Virtual-Box (Pro).

    No, Lazure, I'm not going to be racing out to install it as the main OS on this i7 machine (Win 8 Pro 64-bit), and it wouldn't anyway. Nor will it on my older (Core 2 Duo) laptop (Win 7 Ultimate SP1 32-bit). But I do have valid and legitimate reasons for keeping it running on an older machine, none of which involve being connected to the internet. So security, or the lack of it, automatically becomes a non-issue. I have all the 'latest' drivers and software/updates necessary, and enough spare-parts/replacement hardware for the P4, to keep XP running on the P4 almost indefinitely.

    It also runs Vista Ultimate 32-bit on a separate internal drive, and is powerful and modern enough to enable me to do exactly the same with Vista when it reaches its EOL.Coincidentally, it's the very same machine I beta-tested Vista on all those years ago, but has been upgraded and enhanced considerably since those days. Vista on 384mb of RAM was never fun, but the current 1gb is adequate. It has a 256mb GeForce 5700 gfx card and an SB Live! sound-card.

    So as I have compelling reasons for continuing to use both of these OSes well beyond their official EOL, and have a machine that's virtually tailor-made to do so, I see no reason to panic and dump either OS.

    But I would like to stress that my intention to keep both XP and Vista running and up-to-date has nothing to do with my being stuck in the past, or being unwilling to move forward/embrace change. If that were the case it/they would still be my main OSes, but that task falls to W7 and W8.

    Screenshot shows the OSes I currently have running in Virtual-Box on this i7. That's less than half the current collection....

    Wenda.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Virtual-Box programs 3.PNG  
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #25


    Posts : 149
    Windows 8.1 Pro 64-Bit, Ubuntu 13.04 64-Bit


    Quote Originally Posted by Wenda View Post
    I 'collect' Operating Systems. I have most versions of Windows, half-a-dozen different Linux distros, several non-Windows/Linux PC OSes (Geos, BeOS, ReactOS etc) plus a handful of non-PC OSes,(Amiga and C64).

    So I'd be keeping XP in any case. I have both Home (SP1) and Pro (original release, no SP), although I have SP2 and 3 as separate executables.

    It runs on my P4 2.8Ghz desktop as a print-server and games machine (Home), and also on this machine in Virtual-Box (Pro).

    No, Lazure, I'm not going to be racing out to install it as the main OS on this i7 machine (Win 8 Pro 64-bit), and it wouldn't anyway. Nor will it on my older (Core 2 Duo) laptop (Win 7 Ultimate SP1 32-bit). But I do have valid and legitimate reasons for keeping it running on an older machine, none of which involve being connected to the internet. So security, or the lack of it, automatically becomes a non-issue. I have all the 'latest' drivers and software/updates necessary, and enough spare-parts/replacement hardware for the P4, to keep XP running on the P4 almost indefinitely.

    It also runs Vista Ultimate 32-bit on a separate internal drive, and is powerful and modern enough to enable me to do exactly the same with Vista when it reaches its EOL.Coincidentally, it's the very same machine I beta-tested Vista on all those years ago, but has been upgraded and enhanced considerably since those days. Vista on 384mb of RAM was never fun, but the current 1gb is adequate. It has a 256mb GeForce 5700 gfx card and an SB Live! soundcard

    So as I have compelling reasons for continuing to use both of these OSes well beyond their official EOL, and have a machine that's virtually tailor-made to do so, I see no reason to panic and dump either OS.

    But I would like to stress that my intention to keep both XP and Vista running and up-to-date has nothing to do with my being stuck in the past, or being unwilling to move forward/embrace change. If that were the case it/they would still be my main OSes, but that task falls to W7 and W8.


    Wenda.
    I made specific mentions that I was speaking about the people holding onto it so much that they taint new hardware with the OS. I also made mention that all is well and fine if you're running it on an older machine. That makes sense and is perfectly viable and acceptable. What you're doing does not bother me in the slightest.

    My whole beef is with the people who take it too far, and sacrifice modern hardware to hold onto XP as their primary OS, the ones who have posts all over the internet actually trying really hard to get it on things it won't even properly install on, because they absolutely must use it over Windows 7 or 8.

    I mean yeah, I get a lot of people hate 8 and don't wanna use it, but why would XP come before 7 in their selection of OS to 'go back to'? Especially considering this machine likely came with 8, and probably has a UEFI bios, and likely will never be able to install XP anyways. However, I've seen a lot of this with windows 7 oem machines too, which I always wondered... "why?"

    "Why?" the answer I would get would either be immediate anger by the person in question, to the point they become infuriated with the simple concept that someone doesn't agree they should be trying to put XP on something too new for it (a windows 7 spec machine or later especially). Anyone who would actually give me any valid reasons without simply frothing at the mouth angrily, had trivial reasons, such as 'oh I'm just used to it' or they don't like some one specific ui change that windows 7 has over xp (and most of that can be adjusted one way or another anyways). It just doesn't make sense to me, sacrificing all that hardware capability for such little things that most people could just adapt to in like 5 minutes and then move on with their computing life.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  6. #26


    Australia
    Posts : 716
    Windows 7 Ult Reatil & Win 8 Pro OEM


    @Wenda Your last post fairly well describes my own attitude. I've still got Win98 2nd Ed running on a legacy machine as a historical keepsake. Ditto XP on the same machine.

    Also Vista Ult 32bit on an i5-2400 CPU, SATA3 SSD HD, 8GB RAM & good graphics card and it burns rubber. Also recently installed it on similar set up for a friend, and they're over the moon. They mainly use it for social networking, banking, paying bills, etc. It's more than adequate, dirt cheap and runs seamless with solutions to all known issues readily available.

    If it ain't broke and does the job why fix it or upgrade it? Of course that advice is for others. My flagship has extreme 6core/12thread CPU, extreme mobo, SATA3 SSD HD, 30GB RAM, 3 extreme SLI linked graphics cards. And not for gaming. Just a super fast machine for serious multi-tasking. Oh, and I'm running W8 Pro OEM installed from retail disk, not upgrade ... with StartIsBack ... and Modern turned off permanently.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  7. #27


    Posts : 149
    Windows 8.1 Pro 64-Bit, Ubuntu 13.04 64-Bit


    Quote Originally Posted by Mustang View Post
    @Wenda Your last post fairly well describes my own attitude. I've still got Win98 2nd Ed running on a legacy machine as a historical keepsake. Ditto XP on the same machine.

    Also Vista Ult 32bit on an i5-2400 CPU, SATA3 SSD HD, 8GB RAM & good graphics card and it burns rubber. Also recently installed it on similar set up for a friend, and they're over the moon. They mainly use it for social networking, banking, paying bills, etc. It's more than adequate, dirt cheap and runs seamless with solutions to all known issues readily available.

    If it ain't broke and does the job why fix it or upgrade it? Of course that's for others. My flagship has 6core/12thread CPU, extreme mobo, 30GB RAM, 3 extreme SLI linked graphics cards. And not for gaming. Just a super fast machine for serious multi-tasking.
    "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" applies really well to an older machine. I wasn't ever attacking that. If anyone reads what I'm talking about, I'm talking about using old operating software on newer computers.

    Now my question is, why are you using a 32-bit version of Vista on a machine with 8GB, you do realize that 5GB of that RAM is not even usable with 32-bit, right? On a machine with 8GB, it would seem a lot more logical to have installed the 64-bit edition (Which in Vista, shares the same license key, so it's not like you have to buy 64-bit version separately).
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  8. #28


    South Coast NSW, Australia
    Posts : 615
    Windows 8.1 'Ultimate' RTM 64 bit (Pro/WMC).


    Lazure, my apologies if I came across as singling you out for my comment. this was not my intention, and I'm sorry if it was taken as such. And I do agree with you re the apparent obsession some have with hanging onto it as their main OS at all costs on modern machines.

    As I said, I did try it on my Core 2 Duo laptop, and it didn't want to know about it without a lot of preliminary mucking around. I didn't bother. Because of that experience, I've never even bothered trying to see if it'd install on this machine. It doesn't have an UEFI Bios (thank Heaven, as I don't like the idea at all, nor its execution), but I assume I'd have the same issues as the Core 2, if not more.

    So yes, some have valid reasons to keep XP, but I don't think that 'cos Win 8 sucks' or 'Tried Vista, it sucked, I'm not even bothering with 7' are not among them.

    I've actually told family and friends that if they buy a new W7 or W8 machine and want to go back to XP, to pay a techie as I will not help them. I don't want to be the 'fall-guy' when the inevitable issues arise. But I will continue to maintain their old machines currently running XP.

    Cheers!

    Wenda.


    EDIT: Although I sadly no longer have the screenshots to prove it, I did at one stage set this thing up to run a stand-alone MS-DOS 6/Windows 3.1 setup, just for fun. It wasn't actually that difficult, but, as Lazure says, it wasted 99.8% of the machine's potential (see system specs). You don't see a lot of Sandy-Bridge i7s running Win 3.1!!! As a fun exercise it was great, but I'd not use an OS earlier than Vista SP2 as my main OS.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  9. #29


    Australia
    Posts : 716
    Windows 7 Ult Reatil & Win 8 Pro OEM


    @Lazure I haven't even read your earlier post. I just happened to read Wenda's as it was the last post on the thread. When I bought Vista Ult OEM 32 bit there was no 64 bit disk included, which is different to my retail version of Win7 Ult which included both 64 and 32 bit disks. I chose 32 bit back then because of possible driver issues. In Oz you do have to buy the 64bit version separately if OEM.

    Contrary to what you claim, my son is a qualified PC techo and has exactly the same 32bit version of Vita Ult OEM on exactly the same machine, but with 6GB RAM and there is a considerable difference in speed of operation ... meaning my machine is faster. Regardless of what theoreticals may apply, it ain't necessarily so!Update: Incidentally the machine with Vista on it originally had Win7 Ult 64 bit on it. I only put Vista on it when I upgraded Win7 to a top end machine, and never even thought about changing the RAM. With Win8 I built an entirely new rig.

    M$ told me I couldn't install XP first on the same machine as Win98. WRONG! It can be done and quite easily. When I spoke to the M$ techo to explain how, he didn't want to know, and told me I was "dangerous"! Keep an open mind and try a few of the so called "can'ts". It doesn't hurt to think outside the box occasionally and try stuff out.
    Last edited by Mustang; 08 Jun 2013 at 21:47.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  10. #30


    Posts : 149
    Windows 8.1 Pro 64-Bit, Ubuntu 13.04 64-Bit


    Quote Originally Posted by Mustang View Post
    @Lazure When I bought Vista Ult OEM 32 bit there was no 64 bit disk included, which is different to my retail version of Win7 Ult which included both 64 and 32 bit disks. I chose 32 bit back then because of possible driver issues. So in Oz you do have to buy the 64bit version separately.

    Contrary to what you claim, my son is a qualified PC techo and has exactly the same version of Vita Ult OEM on exactly the same machine, but with 6GB RAM and there is a noticeable considerable difference in speed of operation ... meaning my machine is faster. Regardless of what theoreticals may apply, it ain't necessarily so!
    You can't just download the 64-bit ISO matching your edition and plug in your license key during install? That's typically what we can do over here in the US anyways, you're not paying for the disc you're paying for the license key in the end. Download the appropriate ISO and make your own disc . Maximum available memory may not affect speed directly, but if you use up the ~3GB that you can use, it can become sluggish through more intensive multitasking. I guess that hasn't been a problem with you, though.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Windows XP diehards: Can you survive April 2014 deadline?
Related Threads
Read more at: Windows RT 8.1, Windows 8.1, and Windows Server 2012 R2 Update April, 2014 See also: Install the latest Windows 8.1 Update - Microsoft Windows Help
Windows RT 8.1, Windows 8.1, and Windows Server 2012 R2 Update: April 2014 Note Windows Update may offer update 2919355 again even when the computer already has update 2919355 installed. This is expected, and is in order to resolve a Windows Update client issue. Windows Update only installs...
More...
Source A Guy
Eight Forums Android App Eight Forums IOS App Follow us on Facebook