Users are sticking to Windows XP

[DaBees-Knees]

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1725964/users-sticking-windows-xp

DEVELOPER OF MERELY GOOD ENOUGH SOFTWARE Microsoft is having some trouble luring its customers off Windows XP. Even after dumping support for Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2), the Vole is still finding it hard to get people to move off Windows XP and onto Windows 7.

According to figures released by Netmarketshare, usage of Windows Vista and Windows 7 combined fails to eclipse that of Windows XP. That's a disappointing statistic, given that Windows 7 has been available, in one way or another, for well over a year and Windows Vista has been knocking around for nearly four years.

Microsoft was hoping that ending support for Windows XP SP2 would light a fire under Windows 7 uptake, but at this point it seems that the Vole's plan isn't working. With a combined market share of 29 per cent, Windows Vista and Windows 7 aren't even in the same league as Windows XP, which has over 61 percent of the total installed base.

While the figures are a source of embarrassment for Microsoft, it's still pretty impressive to see one of its hairball operating systems that is almost a decade old having such a large share of the market.
 
Though these figures go to show that Microsoft is having a hard time shifting users off its lumbering operating system, Jobs' Mob is facing a far worse picture. Mac OS X use has stagnated at the 5 per cent mark for the past year.

Perhaps these figures are not that surprising. After all, we are talking about two companies, one of which is best known for flogging a phone that can't make calls and another that's known for stifling competition. They both must be wondering what else they might do to increase sales.

We'd suggest that perhaps good products and fair dealing might help

I think try harder and charge less comes to mind. 

[']['affy]

perhaps its because ppl dont want to upgrade there computer just because m$ bought out a newish operating system

[Pri]

Sounds about right to me Taffy. If it works might as-well stick with it. It's still getting Security Updates and that's all that maters.

[White Stripes]

legacy support for ceartain devices is still desireable too.... such as the gameport (expensive joystick no longer works) and gameport midi (only usb midi devices supported.... this one takes even more expensive equipment out of the loop)

and of course industrial controllers that use ISA devices tho NT4 is still in use today for this if the company hasnt switched to linux or another operating system...

the comparably insane hardware requirements are a downer for many too..

[GhostShip]

You all know I stick with XP because it does all I need.

I feel the situation that if I changed a working system for one that basically demands I trash my current machine before it even fires up is just ludicrous,  like the rest of you I dont have tons of spare money to splash out on new versions of software that will run on the new system either, I think they need to address the fact that XP is not heavy on system requirements and a lot of folks are happy using their hardware investment for a little longer than MS thinks they should be, if they released a cut down O/s that ran on somewhat lighter hardware requirements I would be very surprised if folks did not migrate to it eagerly, its not their ideal corporate model but lets be honest here if there is a market they should embrace it and service the customers in that market or are they simply following in the footsteps of the recording industry who say you can only have one format of legal physical media, the 30 year old cd.

[Pri]

A great example of what GhostShip is talking about is ReactOS which is a NT compatible (driver and binary) open source operating system. It's like 30MB in size! - runs faster than Windows 98 but on modern hardware and yet is almost completely compatible with Windows XP. I mean I tried it and fired up some normal software like Firefox, WinMX, even some Direct 3D games. All of which target Windows XP / Vista and 7 and they all ran, and they didn't just run they ran incredibly fast with the most responsive interfaces you'll ever witness.

The more that Microsoft releases new things the more I am dismayed by the pure bloat. Their Dynamic-Link Libraries are out of control for a starters.

But they aren't the only one look at OS X. It used to ship on systems with 256MB of RAM and a single core G3 300Mhz processors and it ran great and still looks quite similar to it does now. To the user there isn't much that has changed in the user interface or the capability to run software between Mac OS X Panther (which would run on 256MB of RAM) to Snow Leopard the current version which gobbles up RAM and CPU Cycles.

I think some of it is that developers have gotten lazy they get these fast processors and they think 'ah well no need to make this efficient, I'll just use more CPU cycles no one will notice'. And I must admit I've done that myself. In my own software there has been cases where I thought instead of making x y z code faster I'll just thread it and chunk the operation out so it executes faster over multiple cores. That sort of attitude doesn't work well in Open Source software because there is always someone able to look at what you've done and there is a sort of outside observer aspect that definitely makes you feel guilty when adding poor quality code to a highly visible project. Not so much in Commercial projects where it's all closed and the only people you have to answer to for your poor excuse for code is your boss that wants results not refinement.

And of course there is most definitely the hardware aspect. Microsoft has been found colluding with Intel in the past to change hardware requirements and to raise bottom specs to help Intel sell more graphics Chips. They know exactly what they are doing and it's rotten for consumers.

[White Stripes]

ROS's target is a win2003 compat core (x86, amd64 & arm... among others... i think dec alpha is in there too...) with an xp interface with extras (like many linuxes multiple desktops)..... honestly i cant wait for the beta...

..current version is not quite so user friendly... testers beware...

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

raise bottom specs to help Intel sell more graphics Chips

you sure its not both graphics and cpu.... the GMA isnt exactly the most powerfull thing on the planet... leaning heavily on system ram (it doesnt have its own video ram) and the CPU....

....does intel make ram? (sounds like a silly question i know... but ive not seen an intel branded ram chip that was made after the 1980s...)

[Pri]

They've done other stuff collusion wise but the GPU thing sticks out in my mind to get OEM's to purchase more exspensive Intel GMA chipsets to get Aero working with Vista even though the older chips were capable but defective by design to not function with aero.

[White Stripes]

defective by design in hardware or software?

http://www.filecluster.com/reviews/012009/fast-aero-add-vista-transparency-to-your-windows-xp/

even 2d-only chipsets can pull the effect off   (granted 2d only its sluggish so disable blurring if using 2d only chip)

[Pri]

Software drivers were the restrictive element I believe. People got it working with hacked drivers to prove it was deception.

[White Stripes]

business as usual...


--edit--

http://www.crystalxp.net/galerie/en.id.5139-truetransparency-lefreut-explorer-tools.htm

(nother aero emulator if the other doesnt work)