Will anyone use Windows XP or Windows 2000 even after they reach EOL?

I am wondering if people here who run their laptops on Windows 2000 or Windows XP will continue to do so even after they pass the end of the extended support phase, which for Windows 2000 comes on July 13, 2010 and for Windows XP will be sometime in 2014. I for one would love to hang on to XP as long as I can, after all not only is it familiar, it also yields more hours of battery life on our Toughbooks compared to Vistaster

 

In case you werent aware 7 is out

Also in response to your ?, people still use 98 SE

 

I was thinking about upgrading to 2K or XP but I'm still happy with Windows 95.

 

I used my desktop with Microsoft Windows 98 SE till the middle of 2007 at which point I made the jump to Vista on my newer one. Since that time I've downgraded to XP on all of my laptops and desktops, and although I have a copy of Microsoft Windows 7 I don't foresee installing it.

 

Windows? Whats that? I use MS DOS 6.22. C:\dir /more. Ohh..I miss the old days.
Seriously, I intend on using XP for quite a while yet. It is stable and uses relatively low resources. I have even heard of a Windows XP fundamentals version that works on 128mb ram and ridiculously small HD space. It comes straight from Microsquash, not a hacked version of XP.

 

I still use DOS 6.22 with a graphed on version of DOSSHELL, when it serves my purposes.

 

Windows XP is just the Windows NT core with a nice management interface added that works very well, is 99.99 percent reliable, and has more hardware support than any other version of Windows before it (and after, so far).

Windows itself (especially pre-Xp) was still in effect MS-DOS with a GUI right down at the grass roots level. MS-DOS, for those who remember their computing history, is based on CP/M. CP/M is an operating system that goes right back almost to the start of Unix development and pre-dates the Wintendo x86 processor family by many years.

It's a bit like the way Solaris (which unfortunately has been 'stolen' by Oracle since Oracle bought Sun Microsytems) is SunOS with a GUI (Gnome, etc.) over the top. SunOS is Sun's version of AT&T SYSV unix. Originally SunOS up to 4.1.4 which ran on Motorola 68k processors (last release before SunOS 5.1 which introduced the Solaris 2.x co-branding) was BSD unix and Sun made a total quantum shift to SYSV unix for the SunOS 5.x line (of which SunOS 5.10 [aka Solaris 10] is the current version) when Sun introduced the Sparc processor architecture.

I know lots of people (me included) who run Sun systems that do not have any GUI installed and simply use the core OS at shell level.

Windows tries to hide that, but the original DOS fragments are all still there. I think there will be loads of individuals and businesses that will keep running Xp for as long as there is still nothing better to replace it for the hardware it's supported on. Vista and 7 are massive resource-pigs that almost force a user to upgrade to get any decent performance. XP is a bit 'piggy' too, but nothing like Vista and co.

Craig.

 

Well said, Craig. If it weren't for the fact that I use many Windows-only applications I'd probably switch over completely to a *nix distro.

 

All jokes aside. I see no reason to upgrade my CF-29 MK3. I think XP is the perfect fit for it. Now if I had an MK4 or 5 I would be tempted to upgrade and take advantage of readyboost.
When the XP EOL comes in 2014 I'm not really sure I'll still be using this machine. I figure by then I'll have a CF-30 or 31 (32? ).

As far as Vista, it may be a resource hog but only in the context of older hardware. My desktop has the resources, so why not use them? I avoided this OS until last year due to all the bad I heard about it. I was building a new machine and decided to go with Vista. I was glad I did, I really like it. I understand it may have been released too early and was buggy at first, but I have 0 complaints about it.

I'm currently taking the Win 7 plunge with the desktop. I'm upgrading as I type this. I'm looking forward to trying out this OS. I'm picturing it as a more refined Vista, but we shall see...

 

If my CF-M34 would run 7, I'd do it. I'll have to use XP on it till it dies!

I'm running 7 x64 on my desktop.

 

Well said Craig....


What the heck did he just say???>>>>

 

Frankly the idea that a software company gets to tell me when the "End of Life" occurs for a piece of software that I purchased is an artificiality that I refuse to buy into.

 

Personally, I question Microsquash's definition of "support". I think it's more damage control for their products.

 

I still use Win3.1 on an old Compaq 386/25 laptop.

It's designed to run on low-power netbooks. GL getting a copy if you're not a HUGE OEM, though.

 

I wouldn't recommend using XP on Internet connected machines after MS stops releasing security patches.

 

True. THAT is the issue with using no longer supported MS software. As security holes are found they will no longer be plugged.

 

I don't see an issue as long as you run good AV and a good firewall... Maybe MAC filtering... If someone wants in BAD enough... They will always find a way....


I just hope someone goes after Apple MACs as I am tired of hearing my buddy say that he is foolproof... When I know that he is not!

 

On the other hand, as soon as the focus switches away from XP, the exploit writers tend to focus on to the newest Operating System.

 

That will be time to ultimately switch to using linux on legacy hardware. I run SunOS (Solaris without the GUI part) on my bunch of older Sun systems. Newest one is a Sunblade 1000. I have Sun machines back in Sydney which go right back to the 68020 ones (which ran SunOS 4.1.x but have really good NetBSD support).

I think that providing there is enough interest, and with TB's there definitely is, a few of the Linux variants will support the legacy TB hardware for plenty of years to come. Why chuck out hardware that works perfectly when it can be re-used for a worthwhile purpose with a new OS...

Craig.

 

The flaw in your logic is in thinking that you BOUGHT anything from Micro$oft. You don't EVER buy anything from them. you RENT it.

True enough... and every new release is REALLY just a bug-fix for the last version. Some day, they'll actually have something that WORKS.

I disagree here; I've always turned off Automatic Updates on any M$ box I've ever used; they cause more problems than they fix. If you use ANY OTHER browser than IE, and ANY OTHER eMail client than Outlook... you'll have a machine that is 3x as hardened to attack as ANY M$ box with the latest security patches running "As M$ intended".

Pay attention to the trade websites and fix what they tell you is broken, use an active Security Suite (if your machine has the horsepower to run it) and JUST DON'T GO TO STUPID PLACES ON THE INTERNET. :GEEK:

I still have machines running Win2K quite happily at home and on clients' networks; they serve their purpose, and why fix what isn't broke?

See my post above to plug the 3 most heinous security holes in ANY M$ OS. :wink:

mnem
Un-holey.

 

I'm with mnem on this one. All of my machines run Kaspersky IS. There is a little bit of a slow down, but nothing that bothers me. Nothing gets by KIS without my permission, including windows "updates". I do not get viruses, malware, spyware, or popups. He pointed me to "Tech Republic" which reviews all of the updates in the monthly M$ update dump so you can make an informed decision on which to download. Kaspersky, of course does its updating several times a day whenever you need one.
CAP

 

Perhaps, however the flaw in your logic, legally, is that M$ Lawyer's legal theory has resulted in zero change in law, case or otherwise. If you have some actual citations, I would love to look at them!

Until it does, it is just a legal fantasy designed to facilitate sales and maximize profits.

PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
​

Microsoft, I am still running Win 3.11 and DOS 6.22; come and get some if you think that you can!

 

Actually, they HAVE changed the law of the land; they have spent billions of dollars and armies of lawyers to do JUST THAT.

The break-seal EULA has been challenged many times in the US and Europe; the challengers always lose.

Why? because there is NOTHING ILLEGAL about a software LEASE; which is EXACTLY what the EULA describes in legalese, only without ever using the words "rental" or "lease".

Back in the first rounds of these lawsuits, they tried to force them to call it that - a lease or a rental - but we couldn't have THAT - the customer KNOWING that they didn't OWN every bit of that $5,000 box (it was fine that they didn't OWN it, as long as they didn't KNOW it) they were already wondering if they really needed.

So the software companies lined right up behind Bill Gates and fought tooth and nail until they were able to buy off the courts. Once the precedent was set, the rest was history. Had the courts known how cheaply they sold the American public down the river, I'm certain they would have held out for billions, rather than mere millions.

mnem
And now for a little change of scenery...

 

Citations please, where the "End of Life" of a product is enforceable by the software company?

 

Ahhhh! :wink:

You got me there Bill... I thought you were flipping serious.

Of course, we both know that's just a codeword for "We're not making enough money on this out-of-date product, so we're gonna stop expending resources to fix it for you even though it's still broken. Thanks for your money, yer on your own. Spend some more money with us, you cheap S.O.B."

mnem<~~~Super-annuated Old Basilisk~~~<<<<

 

Hold on there Hamlet! No one said the software companies could tell you to stop using their end of life product, just that they would no longer "support" the old software. I think the OP was asking if it would be safe to continue to use Windows Operating Systems after M$ stops supporting them and issuing updates. The Dragon and I (and actually you) all seem to be of the opinion that the answer is definitely yes! No one has sold me on W7 yet. But then it took a while for me to shift to XP as I have a certain fondness for W2K in its finally wrapped up incarnation.
CAP

 

Hamlet, I like that!

It's all good, I respect everyone here. I am just making a point. I just grow tired of the legal bullying that is employed by some major companies to maximize their profits.

One year at Dayton Motorola had a team of legal beagles at the hamfest walking around threatening people with suit that were selling used Motorola gear, they and I were told that the equipment was used, contained their software and therefore somehow no longer Motorola and that we must surrender it or remove the Motorola logos from the equipment!

Can you imagine if Ford or Chevy, which also contains proprietary software, was to pull this stunt! I told them to bring it on and refused, then told them to get the hell away from my table.

There was mutilated gear on the market for a few years following that show.

My point being is that just because some companies legal team comes up with a fancy theory that says software intrinsic to the operation of a device is not only their intellectual property, but that they maintain real property rights to it as well, does not make it so. I will wager, and I did, that they would have a hard time selling that load of horse manure to a jury of my peers.

I rest my case...

 

For a good 32-bit operating system that the virus writers have had little or no success breaking into look at IBM OS/2 Warp (the ORIGINAL "windows" of 1995 :wink .

Unfortunately there was little third-party support for OS/2 and it was relegated to running such mundane things as bank ATMs, store POS cash registers, the telecommunications infrastructure, etc.

Since I have a brand new copy of Warp I just may to try it on my Mk2 CF-29 to see if I can get it up and running with Touch Screen, Touchpad, etc.

If not, well there's always the Recovery Disks.

 

It's not a theory.

Software licenses are legal contracts.

 

It's not, but they use other means (like adding new features, which is how the term 'bloatware' comes about) which make it logistically difficult for commercial users to continue using older hardware, so these users upgrade the hardware and in turn upgrade the software, thereby extinguishing the use of older operating systems because they 'need the new hardware to get full use of the new software features' in the OS.

Sun did this too, but at least with Solaris it's always been easy to just ignore the X-windows stuff and go with the base OS if that's all someone needs, then it's a simple shell-based command line system with all the hardware power available to run proper grunty applications instead of servicing the needs of graphics co-processors, etc.

Real computing power is about i/o capability, not processing grunt, though the grunt does help where it's not bogged down doing other stuff.

WHen did you see a 'new' version of an operating system offering 'less' because that makes it more efficient on existing hardware? Me thinks Sun is learning this the hard way now that it's owned by Oracle and almost all of Sun's top-level skilled tech and management are leaving... Microsoft is probably better placed to cope with that type of event but it would be an unusual day indeed when Microsoft is taken over by another player.

Craig.

 

I am no lawyer, however, my job has demanded that I receive quite a bit of legal training. I assure you that many things are contracts and that not all contracts are enforceable.

The "end of life" is what I have been talking about here, and that in my opinion, is not enforceable, or even implied in any EULA I have ever read.

Please provide me your copy of a EULA that says that you are not allowed to use a M$ Product after a certain point.

It is all just a theory until proven in a court of law, which is exactly why no one loses a case by default, simply because it was a "violation" of some contract.