Replacing XP Desktop - Windows 7 or 8

KxMx

I think XP was so successful, and taken up by so many, this led them not to be spending more money with Microsoft as each new one came out. Of course at the time and in subsequent years it has been profitable for Microsoft, but now they want people to be upgrading and spending more money, not sticking with something which is costing them money in terms of security fixes rather than earning for them.

Vista bombed, Win7 was nice but a great many people (judging by the numbers who currently have XP) were happy so didn't upgrade, and Win8 really tends to divide people (for some reason I can't fathom folks throw a tantrum because there is no start button or it doesn't load directly to desktop and refuse to have it- even though it takes less than 1 second to switch between Metro UI /Desktop and there is free software to make it look like XP!)

So now Microsoft are being more pro-active in that they are withdrawing XP in the hopes millions will finally spend money and upgrade.

A victim of their own success really, I probably wouldn't upgrade the PC if support wasn't ending, and when my old netbook went kaput XP wasn't an option on the market. Even when I bought that one around 3 years ago you had to hunt for the XP netbooks and not Win7.

That's my take on it anyway.

NiftyDigits

KxMx wrote: »

I think XP was so successful, and taken up by so many, this led them not to be spending more money with Microsoft as each new one came out. Of course at the time and in subsequent years it has been profitable for Microsoft, but now they want people to be upgrading and spending more money, not sticking with something which is costing them money in terms of security fixes rather than earning for them.

Vista bombed, Win7 was nice but a great many people (judging by the numbers who currently have XP) were happy so didn't upgrade, and Win8 really tends to divide people (for some reason I can't fathom folks throw a tantrum because there is no start button or it doesn't load directly to desktop and refuse to have it- even though it takes less than 1 second to switch between Metro UI /Desktop and there is free software to make it look like XP!)

So now Microsoft are being more pro-active in that they are withdrawing XP in the hopes millions will finally spend money and upgrade.

A victim of their own success really, I probably wouldn't upgrade the PC if support wasn't ending, and when my old netbook went kaput XP wasn't an option on the market. Even when I bought that one around 3 years ago you had to hunt for the XP netbooks and not Win7.

That's my take on it anyway.

What happened to the Netbook?

closed

The changes since XP sp2 are largely irrelevant to most people, change for change sake (and many backward), to generate more sales. Networking in xp was far simpler, and fewer lines of code means faster pc and boot times

prowla

KxMx wrote: »

And to be honest the Windows 8 on netbook has great speeds I get a little impatient when I have to use the XP PC!

It's more likely your PC hardware, which keeps improving in performance over the years.

It often needs to as the software running on the PC gets more bloated.

prowla

KxMx wrote: »

... and Win8 really tends to divide people (for some reason I can't fathom folks throw a tantrum because there is no start button or it doesn't load directly to desktop and refuse to have it- even though it takes less than 1 second to switch between Metro UI /Desktop and there is free software to make it look like XP!) ...

There;'s a lot more wrong with Windows 8 than the start button, and actually Micro$oft have reinstated it for Windows 8.1 (though perhaps not as we know it).

Windows 8.x is targeted at smart phones and tablets, and usability via a standard keyboard/mouse interface is broken. It's also ugly.

KxMx

prowla wrote: »

It's more likely your PC hardware, which keeps improving in performance over the years.

It often needs to as the software running on the PC gets more bloated.

Actually I do know a little bit about computers, I think you'll find I am scrupulous with my system and there is not so much as one excessive word document on there, let alone excessive software bloat. Of course it's out dated but the netbook is still superior and I feel Win8 is part of that.

I agree that putting a touch screen OS onto non touch screen devices was a mistake. However my Win8 netbook functions fine thank you, certainly not broken, and I disagree that it's ugly.

I've had it a few months now, and while I have my niggles with it, I am not childishly and unreasonably hostile towards it as many are. I know someone who spent more to get Win7 because they didn't like the fact it didn't load directly to desktop... sheer madness when you consider how quickly and easily it is to switch to desktop.

:cool:

prowla

KxMx wrote: »

Actually I do know a little bit about computers, I think you'll find I am scrupulous with my system and there is not so much as one excessive word document on there, let alone excessive software bloat. Of course it's out dated but the netbook is still superior and I feel Win8 is part of that.

I agree that putting a touch screen OS onto non touch screen devices was a mistake. However my Win8 netbook functions fine thank you, certainly not broken, and I disagree that it's ugly.

I've had it a few months now, and while I have my niggles with it, I am not childishly and unreasonably hostile towards it as many are. I know someone who spent more to get Win7 because they didn't like the fact it didn't load directly to desktop... sheer madness when you consider how quickly and easily it is to switch to desktop.

:cool:

I am perfectly happy to accept that you know a little bit about computers. And of course, a bit of bluster and name calling ("childish" and "sheer madness") is obviously going to help get your point across.

From a user interface perspective it is broken; it has a mish-mash different behaviour metaphors and presentation styles, and the window borders are thick blue rectangular eyesores which are reminiscent of Windows 3. Some of the dialogs (eg. when you insert a disk) are tablet specific ("please tap here"), and you never know whether clicking on an item on the home screen will run an app in a window on the desktop or will run a full-screen single tasking app which looks like the old pre-Windows DOS programs.

If you want to accept that as progress and improvement, then good for you.

For me, there is not a single discernable thing about Windows 8 which is an improvement over Windows 7.

(BTW, on the "knowing a bit about computers" matter, did you know that Windows 8.1 also has the option to go straight to the desktop on boot.)

custardy

prowla wrote: »

I am perfectly happy to accept that you know a little bit about computers. And of course, a bit of bluster and name calling ("childish" and "sheer madness") is obviously going to help get your point across.

From a user interface perspective it is broken; it has a mish-mash different behaviour metaphors and presentation styles, and the window borders are thick blue rectangular eyesores which are reminiscent of Windows 3. Some of the dialogs (eg. when you insert a disk) are tablet specific ("please tap here"), and you never know whether clicking on an item on the home screen will run an app in a window on the desktop or will run a full-screen single tasking app which looks like the old pre-Windows DOS programs.

If you want to accept that as progress and improvement, then good for you.

For me, there is not a single discernable thing about Windows 8 which is an improvement over Windows 7.

(BTW, on the "knowing a bit about computers" matter, did you know that Windows 8.1 also has the option to go straight to the desktop on boot.)

boot times

onzey

(This could develop into something reminiscent of "What have the Romans ever done for us?" from the Life of Brian )

Lum

XP is dead, end of support means no more security patches, new security holes will continue to be discovered, and while lots of people persist in using it people will still invest time and effort into exploiting them for gain. Eventually XP will become as rare as Windows 98 is now, and then it might be safe to use again, but that day is a long way off.

7 is a fantastic OS, much more stable than XP and plenty of nice features. If you currently have it, it's not worth upgrading to 8. There are some benefits to doing so and while it was £25 for the upgrade it was worth it now.

8 is also a fantastic OS, just has a crap UI shoehorned on top of it. If you're prepared to spend a little bit of time installing the fixes for this (StartIsBack or Classic Shell being the main ones) then there is no point spending additional money to get Windows 7, likewise there is no point buying an older, slower, PC just because it has Windows 7.

8.1 is an upcoming free upgrade for Win8 users, however it won't be bringing back the start menu as we know it. It will be bringing back the button, but the button will still take you to Metro. You'll still be needing a third party start menu replacement.

I made a thread here about how to fix Windows 8. Everything in it is free, apart from one $3 optional app that has a 30 day trial. If you still don't get on with Windows 8 after that then go ahead and spend money on 7 at that point.