Using Vista or XP for the next seven years?
Many people are perfectly content to keep their three, five year old or older systems humming along with XP and while it may be possible to keep those systems running until the year 2014, is it worth it?
By 2014, assuming the system is three years old today would make it ten years old then and to be honest, I wouldn’t be caught dead using a ten year old computer system unless there was some kind of technological disaster.
But there are those that will and do. For those of you with Windows 98 or ME, you mean nothing to me, you don’t exist, go buy something new.
ComputerWorld ran an article a few weeks ago about keeping your installation of XP running for as long as possible, until Microsoft ends support for it. In fact, support for Windows 98 just ended last year, I would not have been so generous, I’d have cut support a year after XP came out.
In the article there are lots of shareware and freeware applications and programs you need to buy in order to add some of the Vista features to XP. Just taking the applications named on page three of the article amounts to $109 in additional programs you would need. That amount of money just happens to be within $2 of an OEM copy of Vista Premium.
That doesn’t help you much if you don’t have a computer that can’t run it. But it serves my point that if you buy all those programs just to make XP “Vista-like” then you’ve basically bought a copy of Vista.
Then there are all the performance tweaks needed on XP, but Vista needs some of the very same ones, albeit, not as often and Vista doesn’t require as much maintenance as XP does though that really depends on your technical prowess.
Stretching an operating system to last 13 or 14 years is beyond ludicrous. I don’t think it should be done and I wouldn’t stand behind anyone attempting to do so.
Yes, there are very old assembly robots that still run DOS and old industrial machines that run DOS applications to operate, I don’t have a problem with that, that is acceptable. What is not acceptable is a business or home user that is still running Windows 98 or ME.
Running XP is still acceptable for now and in my book will be so until 2008 when Microsoft will stop shipping it completely, then, it’s probably time to upgrade to Vista. The company says a SP3 is in the works for XP and if it is released in 2008 then the termination of support is 2014. But if it is released around 2013 or later then XP’s life will be extended some. Here’s hoping Microsoft can actually make a release on time.
My point is, you should be running Vista for the next seven years but not even that, Windows 7 should be out by 2010 so run Vista for the next three, damn the backwards compatibility and upgrade to Windows 7 when it comes out. Because everyone needs a computer with DDR3 memory, don’t they? Of course, even that will be slow by the time Windows 7 comes out.
If you must run XP for the next seven years, please follow the advice in the article, just don’t tell me that you will be running an ancient operating system.
Related Posts:
August 1st, 2007
Or you could run Linux (ducks).
August 1st, 2007
Yes, or you could run Linux… it’s just I could never get it to work for me.
August 1st, 2007
Words almost fail me, Jonathon. For someone who usually comes acreoss as reasonalble erudite, you can also be amazingly arrogant at times.
Has it never occurred to you that some people are not flush enough with cash to keep on the endless upgrade cycle the moment something newer hits the market? Or that they may have more pressing prioritites than their technology toys?
If one’s computing needs are very modest, and extend only to word processing and a couple of simple games, with no need whatsoever for internet connectivity, then why can’t the same old box keep going on until it breaks?
My mother and several of her friends immediately fall into this category. They don’t want the internet, they can’t afford a new machine, they just want a box that does the very basics. For one or two of them, even Windows 3.1 still does the business.
After all, software doesn’t wear out. Provided that it does what you want, when you want, why change?
There is an old saying that one needs to remember – if it ain’t broke, don”t fix it!
August 1st, 2007
And there’s another thing – me getting angry leads to typos!
August 1st, 2007
Well, my computing needs are not modest, Windows 3.1 got the boot as soon as Windows 95 came out and then Windows 98 which was a mistake for the first version, I’ll grant that, I skipped Windows ME entirely and waited for what would become Windows XP and ran that until Vista came out at which time I replaced all my Windows XP boxes with new computers… and devices with Vista compatible drivers.
Linux just doesn’t do it for me. I won’t even touch the whole “Running Windows 3.1″…
August 2nd, 2007
What a stupid column written by a stuck up idiotic geek who probably lives for updates and upgrades. Let me ask you: Do you “upgrade” your car by buying a new car every year? How old is your car? If you’re a normal person, you probably don’t “upgrade” your car every gawd darn year. That’s the way that normal people are with their computers and their operating systems. You talk the way you do because you are not normal and because you are a stuck up geek who has to always have the latest software. You are SO SO SAD!!!
August 3rd, 2007
Cars cost upwards of $15,000 but you don’t need a loan to buy or upgrade a computer…
It’s not about the latest software, it’s about the latest hardware that runs the latest software. You can’t really have one without the other.
Also, it’s because I run PhotoShop, some video editing tools, DVD authoring and games that I *NEED* fast hardware. What, doesn’t everyone run filters in PhotoShop on a daily basis?
August 3rd, 2007
yes but im still gonna run xp till i feel vista is stable enough because when xp came out i didnt upgrade until sp2 came out so i think i might do the same and upgrade to vista when sp1 or even sp2 comes out because there are so many “glitches” with vista at the moment
i like the sound of this windows 7 thing but i need more convicing to make me upgrade 2 tht
August 8th, 2007
This guy OBVIOUSLY works for Microsoft… I didn’t get rid of Windows 98 until about a year and a half ago. Why? Wanted to make sure Windows XP was stable, AND I had a chance to put a friend of mine’s through a test run. Windows XP is THE most stable operating system I have EVER had. THIS current installation has lasted the ENTIRE time I’ve had XP, once again, a year and a half. Vista has too many bugs… TOO MANY! No one in their right mind would buy an operating system upon first release!!! Wait a year or so. Heck, now that Microsoft has announced Service Pack 3 for XP, I will probably keep XP for quite some time longer! Games are STILL being made for XP, only TWO games have been released that are Vista ONLY right now. And guys? A company has made programs that let you run THESE SAME TWO GAMES on Windows XP. I used to complain that i couldn’t run older DOS games and utilities on Windows XP. That is, until the amazing DOSBOX program came around. Now, not one single DOS program I’ve tried fails to work. IN XP…
Tell me again why I should go and shell out $200 or $300 for Vista?? PLEASE???
August 9th, 2007
Because Vista doesn’t cost $200 or $300, the OEM version can be had for $120 online, I wouldn’t pay $200 or $300 for it, I’m with you there.
$120 is just a little more than XP cost.
DOS, who still needs to run DOS programs, let the past be in the past. (save for industrial applications).
I think you held on to Windows 98 for a little too long… you had to wait… five years… to make sure XP was stable… five years?? I can’t wrap my head around that.
No, I don’t work for Microsoft, I simply believe in having fast hardware to run the latest stuff.
August 9th, 2007
In the 90’s we had a saying… if you wanted a game to look good, buy a Windows game, if you want a game to PLAY good, buy a DOS game… That philosophy has not changed.
People are obsessed with graphics, and whatever is the ‘new thing on the block’. I seem to remember Duke Nukem 3d not having textures, but the art was so masterfully done, that it didn’t matter, oh, and it was an amazing game. That is just 1 example.
I am in line with the other posters here, you can’t buy a new OS until a later revision. I never owned Windows 3.xx, and stuck with DR-DOS right through Windows 95, which was a clunky operating system. When I got the various versions of 98, I stuck with it, until ATI made me change for getting my Doom3 capable 8500DV… Sure, 98SE wasn’t the most stable OS, and I had to do a complete hard drive wipe every 3 months, but it was quick easy and worth it. Everything I installed, from DOS software, to the latest games well into 2002, worked beautifully. I still never wanted to upgrade to XP, as it was relatively clunky, for no good reason, and its compatibility for old software was laughable. In fact, I am a big fan of the way MAC OSX does things… move on, don’t make backwards compatibility, it KILLS computers when done improperly.
I used Windows 2000 on a work computer that I slowly upgraded, and when I could upgrade it no more without it, I finally bit the bullet, and bought a copy of XP. Luckily, this was after SP2 came out, and it was a good move, for compatibilities’ sake.
But when I was satisfied that XP was truly able to run decently on even 200 mhz print servers, I switched every computer in the house, minus my Linux router… because I had finally give up most of my DOS games anyways (beat them all). All of my computers are humming along quite nicely on XP SP2, and I laugh at all my buddies who took the plunge on an unready version of XP embedded on their laptops. They hate it. They can’t do anything with it, or to it. I already had to wipe one of their hard drives because it was so unstable, that he couldn’t even restart his computer without getting a Blue Screen of Death. I got a LOT of BSOD’s with 98, but it never meant anything. But if I ever got one with 2000, XP or Vista… that was BAD BAD news… Just the precursor to a truly fatal error. Luckily an HP system restore did the trick for my friend, so far.
Echoing the sentiment of the previous posters, I don’t have the kind of money to keep upgrading relentlessly, and I don’t see why I have to. I don’t play super-new games because most of them are pretty bad… they never even came out with most of the biggest games I was waiting for, like Babylon 5 Into the Fire and Tie Fighter 2, not to mention they JUST came out with a worthy sequel to Command & Conquer, and my copy of Office XP works just fine on any computer I have installed it on. The upgrades in the new OS are cosmetic. The OS, for most people, is THE most EXPENSIVE part of the computer. Especially since Vista bonds to the motherboard, and in the OEM version, you don’t get support from Microsoft (instead in the EULA you get it from whomever built the computer)
I is nice to hear there is a DOSBOX. Does it work with USB Joysticks for Rebel Assult 2?
In summary:
Keep old OSs at least until the new OS has fixed their bugs.
OSs should not be backwards compatible outside of emulation.
People don’t have the money or the time/patients to keep upgrading and learning new systems for no tangable benefit to themselves…
We just want it to work.
Playing good is better than looking good. I don’t get why they rarely do both (i.e. Unreal Tournament 1)
August 9th, 2007
And, Microsoft support is important because… no thanks, I can do my own trouble shooting…
I rarely bother with calling any support, hardware, or software, I think I have once in the past ten years and I ended up buying a new part any way and passing up on the warranty service because it would have taken too long.
August 30th, 2007
Jonathan Schlaffer, don’t be such a SNOB. I’m running XP on a 1999 Pentium III computer. SO WHAT about VISTA. My parents are still using Windows 98 and Windows 2000 on their computers. You are not going to see people moving to VISTA like you are. Good God, People are still driving cars made in the 1990s. And People are still watching TV sets made in the 1990s and 1980s or earlier. Do you really expect people to be different when it comes to computers. Boy, you are such a SNOB.
September 2nd, 2007
There is really little point in answering someone who lacks an objective point of view. Like so many journalists who write for computer magazines Jonathan is so immersed in his world there’s no way he is going to understand anyone else’s