The End is Nigh for XP

SlinkySausage writes "Computer makers have been told they'll no longer be able to get Windows XP OEM by the end of this year, despite strong ongoing demand for the OS. Analysts and computer makers are wondering if the move is premature given Vista's ongoing performance and compatibility issues. Dell recently said it would reintroduce XP on a range of machines due to customer demand but Microsoft will only allow this until the end of the year."

Will anyone gain anything from this?

Is it just me or does this move from Microsoft seem rather desperate?
Was Microsofts older versions of Windows phased out this fast too?
I guess the people at Microsoft have a really hard time accepting that many people (and companies!) have gotten comfortable with XP and does not want to get something different. Maybe Microsoft have been taking to long to come with a "new OS" this time?

I think this will definitely be a good thing for those who wish more people would use Linux on the desktop and possible also laptop market. People like Mark Shuttleworth and his fanboys can start cheering already.
I myself am no longer so certain that getting everyone to use Linux is what is best for Linux as a whole right now.
My main reason for thinking this is seeing how little Ubuntu contributes to the rest of the "open-source community".
Maybe I am wrong, in that case I would love to hear why.

I gladly leave the picking up of unsatisfied Windows users to other flavors of Linux, I myself prefer to stick with Gentoo and wish that all the developers at Gentoo would realize that Gentoo just isn't and is not supposed to become an "click and go" OS.

Others who will cheer at this news will probably be those trying to earn some money by selling cracked software, only this time people are not going to come to them to get the newest software but will want the "good old XP". I don't think they care much though, as long as they can make money.
Maybe there will even become a real market for buying and selling those XP-licenses that people have lying around?

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

My main reason for thinking this is seeing how little Ubuntu contributes to the rest of the "open-source community".

I don't know how much Ubuntu developers/official people contribute to the community directly (whatever that means), but because there are thousands of people moving to Linux because Ubuntu exists (Ubuntu is what got me to switch), there is a large increase of patches (most software on Ubuntu isn't Ubuntu exclusive), guides + FAQs + community help (which makes Linux and more user-friendly), bug reports, and a greater exposure to Linux in general. How is that a little contribution to the community?

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

If you want to see the ubuntu community's (best?) contribution just head over to irc.freenode.net #ubuntu; people are always willing to help with the most common, mundane questions you can think of. I don't know why people are so keen to spoon-feed people FAQ responses, but spoon-feed they do, and I think it's vital for beginners (though for more experienced people it does mean the non-trivial questions are drowned out).

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

Seems like you need some new hardware before software anyway - your period key is broken..

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

You're kidding, right? Someone sitting on an IRC channel helping newbies (like me, who has switched completely to Ubuntu at home), that's one of the pillars of the tech support model for open source software. Someone helps me with a problem, then as I gain experience, maybe I can pay it forward, increasing good will toward FOSS.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

Amen to that. Any time I have a critical problem I can't resolve by cruising the web, I visit an irc channel. I ask my question, and usually no one answers the first time. So I answer a few newbie questions. Eventually, someone who knows the answer often comes along. So I get what I need, and I give something back to the community. Not everyone does that, but as long as there are some of us who will answer more questions than we ask, the system can continue to work.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

Well it's better than the elitist guys that tell you to RTFM and turn people off from linux based OSs.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

Not forgetting the things that were developed specifically for / by ubuntu and are now available to the wider linux community (eg upstart).
That's the great thing about linux though, there's room for user friendly distributions like [k|x]ubuntu as well as distributions aimed at people who are allergic to sunlight, like gentoo. (I've used both distributions, liked both very much, and have stuck with one. No, I'm not saying which...)

Dr. Death strikes again.

Bill Gates is software's Dr. Death. It doesn't matter what the customer wants; Bill Gates, the richest man in the world, wants more money, and will drag everyone through his neurosis.

Microsoft's business model is to do what hardware manufacturers want. Hardware manufacturers want operating systems that can't run on old computers, so customers will be forced to buy new computers. Sometimes it has seemed to me that Microsoft is not really primarily a software company, but primarily an abuse company that accomplishes abuse through software.

Windows XP was not really stable until Service Pack 2 was released. Before that, Windows XP was full of grief for administrators. Service Pack 2 contained something like 330 documented fixes, if I remember correctly, and I verified that there were fixes that were not documented. Now Microsoft wants people to go through that again??? With a Service Pack 0 release?

Someone said that Microsoft's motto is "The whole world is our beta test site." The entire reason people wanted to migrate away from Windows 98 is that it has an unstable file system, and artificial limits to system resources. Otherwise, many companies would have wanted to stay with their old systems, because employees often run a very limited set of software packages.

Managers in a company that has a virtual monopoly, like Microsoft, may think that the way to make more money is never to release a good product, so that customers will always want more.

Eventually, I think, more and more companies and universities and governments will decide they don't like expensive, stupid, forced upgrade cycles, and will migrate to a managed distribution of Linux like Ubuntu.

The problem with Linux and BSD has always been that developers don't like to document what they have developed. Sometimes user-friendly GUIs and documentation can be 80% of the work, and that work isn't done very well by people who "just want to program".

Linux distributions need a manager like Mark Shuttleworth [markshuttleworth.com] of Ubuntu. Developers don't like to manage their own work, as Mark said he has discovered. The Linux kernel has a manager, Linus Torvalds, and the rest of Linux needs a manager, also.

I have several times offered to help document open source software, but my offer has always been refused. Apparently there is a strong attachment to doing things the old way. Apparently there is a feeling that someone who writes the documentation will get too much credit, even though I did not expect to have my name on what I wrote.

Changing to any new operating system tends to be expensive because of the re-training required. Good top management could help design methods of easing that transition by coordinating the details that tend to be forgotten when no one is really in charge.

Re:Be kind to Bill Gates

Through the Gates foundation, Bill Gates has donated billions of dollars to worthy charities around the world. It provides 17% of the world's polio eradication budget, as well as other monies for vaccines and HIV research. On the education front, the foundation has donated over a billion dollars to various scholarship programs to help needy students. The Wikipedia has a list of its other activities.

It's also invested in companies that are polluting and causing health problems. [latimes.com] And they have announced in so many words that they will not be reviewing their investment portfolio for abuses like the ones detailed in the LA Times article linked above, because it would be an onerous process.

This is closely akin to washing oil off some ducks while christening a new oil tanker and sending it off to do its part in polluting the globe. Except it's more personal.

The simple fact, backed up by the fact that the foundation will not be ensuring that their investments are not killing people, is that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is not about helping people. Period, the end. It's about power. Bill gets to continue to be in control of all that money, and he buys himself PR with it. But he's still sitting on more money than he could ever spend! Charity is still appreciated regardless of the situation, but if you're not actually putting yourself to any hardship - not even the small amount of hardship needed to make sure that your money isn't killing people that you claim to be trying to save - then I'm not fucking impressed. And nor should be anyone else.

Did you get paid to prop up Mr. Gates, or are you just easily led?

Re:Who Wants To Move Apartments Every Year?

Your post is the story of my life.

I'm so weary of the constant change.

You can never "master" anything before it is obsolete and time to move on.

After five or six of these iterations, I'm losing interest in mastering anything and withdrawing from computing. I've gone from being a developer to being a project manager (a stable field with a set of rules you can master). I've switched my entire software stack except everquest to open, multi-os software packages that will not be forcibly obsoleted.

I KNOW that some will go obsolete. Heck, if you offer me something 10 times as good, I might upgrade.

But Microsoft seems to be offering 1% to -10% "improvement" to someone like me and they want to force me into a subscription model.

I just want to do artwork, word processing, record/process audio, play shows. XP does all that. Linux does all that. The only software holding me to XP at this time is Everquest and I'm very close to leaving that behind for the same reasons. Every six months there is another expansion which invalidates everything you have done before.
After having six sets of gear invalidated, you start to lose interest in getting on the ride again. And suffering through another three months of flagging to open up parts of the software that you are already paying for.

I agree- I want a nice house that I can polish. not a new house every year that has a new host of problems.
When is life going to stabilize again? I can't see security out more than 2 or 3 years into the future. It makes me weary.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

Ubuntu is nice, but not without issues. I spent 4 hours 'fixing' my computer after trying to install Ubuntu. It only took 10 mins to break my computer with the Ubuntu installer. As it where, I have a Dell XPS with 2 160GB HD's raided (stripping) and 1 250GB with nothing on it. I wanted to simply install Linux on the 250GB and leave windows on my Raid drive. However, allowing the Ubuntu auto installer from the LiveCD go, it screwed up my MBR, in which after installation and reboot you get a GRUB error 21 (unknown error) or "Could not load operating system" if I change the raid/standard hd drive over in my bios.

Installation, RAID, MBR and such problems are still mostly seen by the relatively geeky, since Joe Somebody usually doesn't install an OS, but simply uses it (although this might be changing). There are still some showstoppers in the use of Ubuntu, and that is far worse than installation problems. I moved my sister to Ubunbu Dapper a while ago, and all looked fine. The few times I tested her common peripherals (mostly the digital camera with a USB cable), all was fine. But she's been complaining lately that her digital camera doesn't work half the time. Sometimes she plugs it in, and gets a nice "Import pictures" dialog, some other times, nothing happens. She says it's about 50/50, and she manages to import her pictures with perseverance. However, failure of such a "basic" feature (by her standards) is unacceptable, and that's what triggers complaints to me, as I am responsible for her move to Ubuntu.

Hot plugging of USB devices still seem to be a problem on some Linux distros (I experience some problems with my USB and mp3 player on Fedora 6 too, but I'm not the type to complain, nor do I have anyone to complain to). USB has been the "hot new technology to have" for a while now, and the average user wants it. As long as USB support isn't 99.9999% perfect, it's gonna be a huge problem.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

Was Microsofts older versions of Windows phased out this fast too?

In the past, when a new version of Windows came out, there was no real need to phase out the old Windows - people wanted the newest version when they bought a new PC.

I guess this is a rather new situation for Microsoft (at least in the OS business.)

Now, it wouldn't seem that it should matter much to MS as long as someone pays the license, but I guess in the long run it could cost them money, not just from prolonged support, but people who already have a version of XP at home could start looking for an OS-less PC when they upgrade and just install what they have since drivers would undoubtedly be available for that hardware and not just Vista/nextGreatestOS.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

I guess this is a rather new situation for Microsoft (at least in the OS business.)

The same happened with ME, I think - they'd reached the end of what they could do with the Windows 95 codebase, and they recognized that and moved to XP "Home" for the next consumer release. As an upgrade from Windows 2000, XP wasn't any better than Vista from XP, so it was probably only XP Home that saved them from this last time around.

If they'd delivered the Vista they were busy telling everyone about 5 years ago, they would have had some significant changes to upgrade to, but almost everything of note was dropped and they've gone and released a confusing array of different versions of Vista, all crippled in different ways. Is it any wonder that noone wants it?

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

>In the past, when a new version of Windows came out, there was no real need to phase out the old Windows - people wanted the newest version when they bought a new PC.

That's just revisionist bullshit, IMO. When XP came out, everybody was bitching about how it was a lamed-down 2000, with ugly interface, stupid features, etc., and claimed that they wouldn't use it until at least 2 service packs came out. Now everybody likes (as much as it's possible) XP and complain about Vista in exactly the same manner.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

That is only true if you were going from 2000 to XP. The vast majority of users were going from 98/ME to XP and after the disaster of ME, they welcomed it.

But there was something else going during these switches that wasn't present with Vista, The hardware market had made so many advances that some popular software needed the increase power to run on so people were happy to buy new computers to get the extra performance. Right now, they are just replacing them or getting new ones. This incentive isn't there and from the way it looks, it would be a sideways if not downwards move if someone upgraded to new hardware with Vista pre-installed.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

I'm not normally a grammer nazi, but I assume English is not your first language, so here's a few suggestions

I'm not normally a grammer nazi, but I assume English is not your first language, so here are a few suggestions

:-)

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

I completely agree, but let's put ourselves in a new Linux user's shoes. This person heads out and posts on a few forums looking for help choosing a distribution. Who should they listen to? Everyone has "their distro" and they will most likely sell it to them up and down, even offering to help them get it set up (if needed) but they fail to assess the person asking the question and what their needs are.

What is needed is a Linux "Grading" or a distribution focus map. Let Windows users that just want a working distro out of the box with little to no install option open a webpage, and click the easy button. Meanwhile, categorically list the other distributions, their focus (or intended user) and let the person make an informed decision.

Unfortunately, at the same time as this happens, the zealots have to realize that their distro may not be the crowning achievement of Linux that they hoped and build their module to work with several distributions easily. If this transferability between distros cannot be accomplished, said program should be classified as niche and not recommended to the average user.

This of course relies on the fact that all the distributions stop fighting each other and work together in some manner. It's like urban America out in the Linux world in some respects.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

Eventually, as it always happens, there will be bug releases and new drivers for Windows Vista. Upgrading to them is as easily as doing "Windows Update." Linux (and BSD) distros will never be this easily patched due to the very nature of being open source. I only have to go to 1 web site to update my PC's - Windows Update - and it's incredibly simple - just click on Update and voila, it's done and everything works.

Really? Try doing that with non-MS software or you do not use any?

AutoDesk or Maya or OpenOffice or Turbo Tax or any other application you can think of that is not MS. Can you use Windows Update and it is incredibly simple?

Linux distros are MUCH easier to patch because they are open source and because they are distributions not just bare-bone OS. Last I checked, I could update my Debian boxes with just aptitude or apt-get. And any non-Debian software usually has their own archive or provides a deb file. And installing a deb file is usually easier than installing a .msi installation. And with the great new way that Vista works, the .msi files that require admin rights with custom actions may not run like they did in XP or older systems. (no more "and"s!)

Yes, I'm speaking from experience in all of these areas.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

For the Fedora users:
yum -y update

For Windows Users
Run Windows Update
Do you want to reboot now?
Later...
Do you want to reboot now?
Later...
Do you want to reboot now?
Oops I'm away from my desk for five minutes.
Come back. WHere's all my stuff!

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

The trick is the way you answer. The first dialog asks if you want to reboot now or later. Don't answer. It'll then not bug you to reboot and you won't risk an auto reboot.

So in essence...

you should respond to the windows update just the way you respond to your gf.

Re:So in essence...

mod parent +5 funny; as if anyone at /. has a girlfriend..

Re:So in essence...

Some of us are married. What rating does that get us? :)

+5 Drunk

Re:So in essence...

Well, what if she comes at me with Girlfriend Genuine Advantage?

Re:So in essence...

Well, what if she comes at me with Girlfriend Genuine Advantage?

You mean when she searches in your nightstand and under your bed every time she comes over to make sure you haven't violated the EULA?

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

It's actually not new for Vista. XP also just places it on a timer, and when that runs out, shows the reminder again. And if you don't do anything and then go home from work, it auto-reboots. So XP share this behavior. Actually, the only thing Vista does is improve things a little, because it at least let you set the timer to 4 hours, which is far more than XP's 15 minutes or whatever it might be. (not configurable from an UI at least)

To resolve this auto-reboot behavior which is a very strange default, given it can cause dataloss, simply (in XP and Vista alike) set the Windows Update client to only auto-download updates, not install them. The problem with forced reboots after a while only happens if the updates have already been installed.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

I don't reboot into Windows often now. But when I do, I really need to get some work done. I always end up installing all the critical MSFT patches (except IE7 (my work site requires an activeX component that is incompatible with IE7) & that program that wants to see if I'm a thief).

The problem is the pestering for a reboot and the automatic reboot if I don't press a button within 2 minutes (or is it one minute?).

I leave my windows software doing a nice simple task (that usually takes ~15 minutes), walk off to take a break, and come back to my Ubuntu login screen. The first couple times did this I really thought I either had a hardware error or my rendering software had actually forced a reboot somehow.

I can't freakin' believe that an OS can force a mandatory reboot unless I answer a prompt within a set time period. Second of all, I can't believe that they haven't gotten enough complaints to patch it as of yet.

Why? If they really need a reboot to install their software, why can't they just download it when we tell them it's okay, and then just do the install at the next reboot? Do they really think there are windows desktops that don't get rebooted for 6 months or longer?

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

The business desktop version of Vista by default reboots without asking permission at 3am after receiving an update. After all, the computer can't be doing anything useful in the middle of the night, right?

I found out when it rebooted near the end of a week long calculation I was making.

Overall, my impression of Vista has been positive -- on the scale for MS Windows releases. It continues MS's unbroken track record of mediocrity. I've encountered some of the problems people have reported on Vista, although in most cases they aren't really a bad as people say. Other problems that people have feared are just figments of their imagination. You can rip CDs to MP3s and copy the files around. At least for now.

But the lesson they haven't learned is illustrated by the automatic reboot: they haven't learned how to stay out of the user's way. They may have copied some of the MacOS eye candy but they haven't copied is the philosophy of leaving the user in charge. Unix based desktops vary greatly in their usability. Some of them can be cluttered, or cryptic. But they always stay out of the user's way. The irony of Windows was all those years where MS supporters sneered at MacOS as being a childish toy, but Windows is the only desktop environment that patronizes its users.

I'd grade Vista as a solid C, where XP got a C, 2000 got a B, NT 4 a D. MS was aiming for a B, improving XPs security the way 2000 improved NT 4's stability, but early signs are not promising in that regard. It is also a bit buggier still than a released operating system should be, but not intolerably so. But unless you have a specific documented concern, for instance if you have an extensive DRM'd video collection you want to play out of your video card, I don't think there is a reason for Windows users to panic because they have to use XP.

The only people who clearly ought to be irritated by this are IT people, for whom it makes a lot of work and expense. If Vista delivers on promises of greater security (questionable yet), then it will have been worth their while.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

Another way is to click on the reboot modal dialog box in an morse code pattern that says "SOS" (that's 3 longs, 3 shorts, 3 longs), then pull out our keyboard connector and wistle Dixie into the thus freed port and finally turn your chair 3 times counter-clockwise, click your heels and say "i wish i was back in Munich".

This is not documented anywhere but i heard it from a guy who knows a guy whose father-in-law used to work with someone whose sister worked at Microsoft, so it must be true.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

I have added the relevant dialogue:

For the Fedora users:
yum -y update

For Windows Users
Run Windows Update
Do you want to reboot now?

You: Heck, no I am doing some important work

Later...
Do you want to reboot now?

You: What the hell ... fortunately I just finished in time my presentation ...

Later...

*clicking on save as* *putting cursor on confirmation to overwrite*

Do you want to reboot now?

* clicking on yes on the new popup*

Oops I'm away from my desk for five minutes.
Come back. WHere's all my stuff!

You: NOOOOOO !

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

Let us also not forget the bane of windows program updates: Every app wants to update itself with a separate updater that is started at boot time. So now you have Windows Update, Adobe Update, Java Update, Quicktime update, Corel update and whatnot starting with the desktop slowing your computer and eating up bandwidth while also annoying you... Also restarts are big PITA. I update some non-kernel component like paint and it needs a reboot. Linux distros at least use one app for updates. On the other hand most updates for linux aren't patches but new versions of programs. So downloads are HUGE compared to MS ones. Actually the winner of the update debate will be who can hide the updates being done form Joe User. Windows does a very poor job at that (every program wants to update itself and jumps into the face of the user, and I'm not even mentioning the 'restart needed' nagware) while some distros are better off but not truly automatic.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

Really? I can hook into the Windows Update Services and Windows Update Agent? Where? All I can find on MSDN is ability to check for windows updates and such. All programs that are updated with WUA are MS applications like Office or Visual Studio.

Where is the API to hook into the Windows Update to check for my own updates??

my mother uses Linux

My mother has been using Linux for nearly five years now. There've been a few problems, but as someone who supports Windows users at work, I can confidently say there have been *far* fewer problems than there would have been had she been running Windows. In particular, there have been absolutely no problems with malware and viruses.

And the claim that Windows Update is better than update systems for Linux is so wrong it's not funny. Sure, Windows Update keeps Windows (and maybe Microsoft Office) updated. But what about all the other applications on the system? They come (if you're lucky) with their own update systems, all of which work differently. The Fedora Core system my mother is running includes image-editing software, messaging clients, etc. etc. all of which are kept updated by the same update systme.

Open Source makes it possible for a single distributor to manage updates for all the softare on the system. In contrast, it's impossible for Microsoft (or anyone else) to manage updates for Adobe and Qualcomm and Apple as well as for their own software.

Danny.

Re:my mother uses Linux

I switched my dad to Linux about 5 years ago too.
He was calling me almost every day because his windows 2k PC was locking up CONSTANTLY, it would lock up and he would hit the reset button and get back online (dial up modem). He might get lucky and be able to stay running for 20 minutes, 30 minutes max when for no reason what-so-ever it would lock up again.
Total lockup. He called me constantly, pissed about his PC. I would drive 10 miles to his house 2-3 times a week to try to fix it, as hitting the reset button all the time was damaging the file system and corrupting files. What a nightmare.

One day I had enough and I said "Dad, do you want to put an end to this stupid shit?"
"Yes."
"Let me take your PC to my place for a few days and install Linux on it."
"Ok"

Problem solved. There have been one or two minor issues but nothing I couldn't walk him through on the phone, usually it was user permissions changing on /dev/modem for some weird reason. Easy to fix over the phone.

All he does with it is browse a few forums with Konqueror, does some email (Kmail) and programs some G codes for his CNC shop in his garage. ( http://www.linuxcnc.org/ [linuxcnc.org] )

ZERO viruses, ZERO spyware, ZERO trojans, etc. etc..

Best thing I ever did was putting him on Linux. Made MY life soooo much easier...

Re:my mother uses Linux

I have posted this before, but I also switched my mother (60 years old) to Linux about 2 years ago. The funny thing is we live on 2 different continents with about 7 hours of lag.

Pros: No Spyware, no Virus. Automatic security patches. No reboots for installs. Remote management (ssh, vnc). Everything works!! I am down from about 5 hour/week to about 1 hour/month of maintenance. OpenOffice is just like MSOffice (she still calls it Word, who cares). All of her Hardware works (cheap HP printer)! Multi protocol messenger (kopete) has taken the trouble of explaining the differences between Yahoo, AOL etc away (again without the security problems on MS Land). Spam fighting build into Kmail (using spamassassin).

Cons: some of her girlfriends told her that they could not send her mails because she used Linux (they have no clue what that is, but their 20 year old sons think they do). Power Management is not up to date (suse 10.0).

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

And the vast majority of forced Windows users are corporations. They have Windows Server 2003, Outlook, NetMeeting, etc. all integrated into their back office systems. They are not going to switch out their entire infrastructure to Linux due to some OEM issues.

They will if their IT officers actually took the time to see what the rest of the market offered. You'll find most of these "specific" solutions are not that specific to Microsoft branded software anymore. And if you can show the cost of migrating their systems to the new Microsoft software (all new vista etc) against other alternate solutions and show the definite cost advantage then businesses will defiantly change over.

The fear that you have as an sysadmin is (well founded however) the reason why your infrastructure wont change. Consider, You move over to open source and you fail doing so then yes you'll loose your job and look bad to your bosses. Pick a Microsoft solution to do the job and it fails, you'll keep your job and simply blame Microsoft for your failure.

AND THAT MY FRIEND! is a true tech admins duty these days :)

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

For all of the quirks and problems that Vista has (I bought a Dell laptop with Vista but installed XP instead), it is still much, much simpler than Linux for your average user

With respect I submit that Windows is easier to use than Linux for even advanced Linux users. We don't choose to run and install Linux because its the EASY choice, we choose it cause its free, fast and stable.

I call BS - Linux is easier

Start with a bare HD and a selection of installation media. A copy of Windows Vista, a copy of Ubuntu, a copy of Knoppix, and whatever else you want. Maybe not Gentoo or LFS, but work with me.

Which is easier to get a working system? I can boot to Knoppix in a couple of minutes. With the Knoppix DVD I have not only OpenOffice, but LaTeX editors and other resources. I can boot to DSL or Puppy Linux even faster. Even with a HD install, Ubuntu still installs faster than any Windows version I've installed. Installing Ubuntu, Automatix, and a couple of Latex editors, and I'm largely done.

How many hours of searching the web for the freeware programs I want will it take to get Windows usable for my needs? Yes, Openoffice, Texmaker, Abiword, Google Earth, Adobe Reader, and media codecs/players are all available for Windows, but I have to go to those webpages, download the programs to a folder, and then install. I can install most of them via one apt-get line in Linux, or use Automatix for one-stop shopping. How is Windows easier?

People have very selective perception on this issue. Yes, Linux has stumped me. I had the bright idea of installing TrueCrypt and VMPlayer on Damn Small Linux, and could get neither to work at all. Fine. But they both work on Fedora, Suse, Debian, and Ubuntu, so I'll live with it. Windows often leaves people stuck as well, but no one considers that a show-stopper. I've even read hardware reviews in Maximum PC where they couldn't get a particular something or other to work at all, due to bad drivers or whatever, but no one said "Well, Windows just isn't ready for prime time!" People take the flaws of Windows with a grain of salt and move on, but if they have to type one command into a terminal, then Linux is "impossible for normal people." Spare me. Use it or don't, as you like, but the idea that Windows is easier than Linux is a very arbitrary and misleading statement.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

Upgrading to them is as easily as doing "Windows Update." Linux (and BSD) distros will never be this easily patched due to the very nature of being open source.

Who modded this drivel "Insightful"?

Just about any Linux distro released in the past couple of years has an update tool which will not only patch the OS, but all of the applications as well. All of the additional tools you need to buy to make Windows useful have to be updated separately.

Linux is MUCH simpler than that.

I don't have to go to ANY website to update my current desktop (SLED 10), an icon glows orange in my toolbar, clicking it gives me the option to update.

I work in I.T. as an MS sysadmin.

That explains a lot.

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux

Huh? You really should go download Ubuntu.

I'm a Windows admin too, and started playing with Ubuntu about 6 months ago. It's a damn site easier to patch than windows.

As others have said, Microsoft Update is for MS software, and only selected applications at that. To install software in Ubuntu I just use a repositry and use the "Add Programs" menu. Every single program I've installed is now managed and updated by Ubuntu. My last update patched 40+ programs, in a single operation, without a reboot.

So, under Ubuntu:
  - Installing programs means ticking one box and pressing ok
  - Patching all programs means clicking ok when the update program asks to run
  - Uninstalling programs means unticking one box and pressing ok

And all of this without reboots.

I'm sorry, I'm a huge fan of windows, but Ubuntu amazed me the first time I used it. There is simply no comparison between this and windows in terms of ease of use, and that's only going to improve. Plus the damn thing's more secure anyway. I'm not running firewall or AV software on my linux box, it simply doesn't need it.

Myx

Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?

The End of the Year deadline won't happen. It's not a question of if you like XP or Vista better, its a question of the corporate world upgrading. Say a company has 5000 XP computers. Well, to upgrade those 5000 requires extensive testing plans, pilot groups, developer testing for in house apps, etc. Plus the bureaucracy meeting with Sarbanes-Oxley compliance! Companies have a need to continue buying new computers with XP until they have the time to fully upgrade in house to Vista. No way people can do this End of Year.

Re:Not Linux - my reply to everyone

Further, do you know the nightmare it will take to switch over thousands of employees? Employees aren't just sitting around - they are working a minimum 40 hours a week. There would be productivity loss, lots of retraining, lots of hardware expenses (have to duplicate workstations so users can migrate from their Windows PC to their Linux PC), etc. No VP or Product Manager or shareholders will endure that kind of disruption.


yet vista magically has none of this? are you high or just making things up. Vista is dramatically different and dont even start on the huge difference on Microsoft Office. we demoed it to a couple of managers here and they freaked out.

I love how guys like you try like hell to make platofrm changes seem impossibly difficult yet ignore that every Major MS release is 100% identical to what you are describing.

when Comcast upgraded from 2000 to XP on desktops they had a huge productivity problem, it was lessened by de-xpifying the desktops, that is not an option in vista. Upgrades from office 2000 t o 2003 cause huge downtime with document incompatability, images beign displayed backwards and other problems with 2003 being incompatable with 2000.

so please, tell us how upgrading to vista will be zero impact and cause no downtime. Because you make a linux change sound like the end of the world.

Re:Not Linux - my reply to everyone

What in the world do you do to your Windows PC that you have to reinstall every 2-3 months? I hate comments like this. I reinstall mine once every year or two at max and then only by choice, NOT because I "have to".

So please enlighten me with what it is that causes your Windows PC to be unreliable after 2 months after a fresh install. I'm not a Windows fanboy (slowly switching everything to Apple) but these sort of comments just seem so baseless that they make the rest of your arguments struggle to maintain integrity.

It's a shame

Despite the many hours of frustration it's caused me, it remains the best OS they've made so far.

Asymptototic Death: Arrogance and Stupidity.

That's about all one could ever say in favor of a Microsoft product. They will always asymptotically approach useability.

That's true if you consider "dumb" usable. The trend I've noticed is less control, less flexibility, fewer 3rd party vendors (aka choice) and more annoyance and auto-wrong features. Security and stability have remained poor and have trended down.

They have pulled out the stops in their breakage of XP though. Today I watched someone try to rebuild an XP laptop. He'd done it manytimes before because someone stuck him with admin responsibility for 15 of them. The process had changed on him this time and it failed. The usual tedious process of manually downloading "updates" fell apart and the automatic process took over and could not be stopped. A couple hours later, I stuck my head in to see how it was going and he was reading a M$ support page about "silent failures". Better him than me.

This "upgrade" cycle has the feeling 95 to 98 did but worse. Eerything fell apart at once and the answer was to buy a new one. This time the "new one" is a computer with about 4 times the hardware. BadVista's got the scoop [fsf.org] on this one, Vista - Arrogance & Stupidity [aaxnet.com], "No sane person wants Vista, so Microsoft is making sure they have no choice."

Re:It's a shame

I would say the best OS MS has ever put together has been Windows 2000, especially with Service Pack 4. But out of the box, I feel that 2000 was the fastest (Not really. Windows 98 SE was the fastest, given new hardware) and most secure out of the box. I can't stand Windows Vista, and neither can common users. More and more of my clients are calling me saying "you were right..." and "I should have listened to you" but of course... curiosity killed the cat. Its unfortunate that Microsoft is allowed to get away with such things like this. They are basically forcing Vista down the throats of the entire market with no remorse. I think this latest effort is Microsoft trying to make sure that Linux will not harm their market share. I am personally losing faith in the Linux community in their attempts to take on Vista. Its a true tragedy.

Somebody help us

Foot?

Check.

Gun?

Check.

I think you can figure out the rest.

Seriously... This is a good move on Microsoft's part only if they enjoy annoying their customers.

Wait, why did I bother putting that 'only if' in there?

Re:Foot?

This is a good move on Microsoft's part only if they enjoy annoying their customers.

I think this is a great description of the situation. [ctrlaltdel-online.com].

The thing is, I imagine that only the Windows "power users" really care and/or know the reasons behind wanting to stick with XP (at least until a service pack or two is released for Vista). Most average users just see Vista as the new Windows. Pretty much everything they do--Office, web browsing, email, Solitaire--still works and it's shiny and bouncy and see-through...wow! Most probably won't even notice a slowdown because they get Vista with new hardware and it offsets the new performance requirements.

Microsoft is probably just trying to give people they see as just not liking change a push to move to the new OS. I'm not too concerned because I've got a couple XP Pro licenses hanging around, a few OEMs and one from MSDNAA, so I'll "upgrade" when I'm good and ready.

Prediction

The last copies are going to be a hot commodity next year. I definately plan to set a couple aside before then. Hello Ebay!

Re:Prediction

Don't forget that these are only the OEM copies which are going to be phased out by the end of the year. You can't just go out and buy 4 or 5 OEM copies of windows, and its (as far as I know) illegal to sell them on eBay, as you aren't selling them with hardware.

I think people that want to do the right thing would probably but a retail version anyhow, and everyone else will just pirate it. The biggest demand is going to come from people building their own computers, and by that time I think even that group will have moved onto Vista. They are mostly gamers, and gamers sort of are tied to Vista whether they like it or not...

Re:Prediction

I talked to an MS rep a year or so ago who said the trick with that is you can sell OEM copies if you sell them with a critical hardware component. Since windows technically requires a mouse (per their hw req lists), people just bundle it with a $1 mouse and sell the OEM copy of Windows for much less than the retail copies. It was a just a loophole, and they may have worked it out since then, but it was legal at the time.

What I'm wondering is if the downgrade rights you get with Vista will still apply, and if you'll be able to buy media kits for XP after all this.

They are trying to push linux adoption.

Force once Microsoft is trying to do the right thing.

Downfall

It's funny, that even the compusa and bestbuy salespersons are telling me that I should latch onto any secondhand xp copies I can get my hands on simply because Vista is causing them and their customers nothing but headaches.

Is it just me, or is Microsoft shooting themselves in the foot by pushing this new, and somewhat unpopular product into the marketplace?

Re:Downfall

Is it just me, or is Microsoft shooting themselves in the foot by pushing this new, and somewhat unpopular product into the marketplace?

Do you remember Windows ME? It seems like history is repeating itself again.

Let me use an analogy... You can take a Honda Civic and with very liberal applications of accessories bolt on enough stuff to make it riced out enough so that it (almost) appears to be a Porche. Of course, it still isn't a Porche, just a Honda with a bunch of bolted on toys... Microsoft seems to have a problem understanding this, and this is one reason why I think they keep on making the same OS mistakes.

Re:Another bad move by MS

They could keep selling XP.
But what are they to tell their share holders?
Sorry guys, we sunk 5 billion developing Vista. But nobody wants it.

Better luck next time.

Guess not...

It's a trick

They're going to take XP off the market, then a couple months later after they get tired of everyone bitching about Vista, they'll reintroduce it as Windows Classic. Either that or as XP SE.

This is why my company is starting a move to Linux

My company builds custom video display systems for TV news, weather, and digital signage. I've always been running a Microsoft shop because we could deploy new designs the fastest. We don't need eye candy, just a stable and compatible OS that we can build on.

Our favorite used to be Windows 2000 Pro, because it didn't spend a lot of time getting in our way of booting up and running automated applications.

Then, Microsoft pulled Windows 2000 last year. So we moved to XP Pro..after some pain in getting rid of most of the "were Microsoft, and we are going to think for you" eye candy and automated autoconfig BS, we again had a stable OS to build on, or so we thought.

But having been burned, we started one of our new digital signage projects last year based on Slackware Linux...and we are quite happy with it. Yes it took longer, but we don't have to worry about MS pulling the rug out from under us. We don't have to worry about losing our development investment with Linux.

Apple's Steve jobs pulled a similar stupid stunt when he pulled the plug on the Power PC and all the development around it. We had built products around that too, but after having our products rendered useless by Apple's decision, (not once but twice, remember Nubus?) we'll never ever develop for Apple ever again.

What MS doesn't get about companies like mine is that there is no way we'd ever build a dedicated box or appliance application on Vista. The premise is a joke. If MS had any sense left, they'd keep XP around so that the OEM market had something to work with that wasn't just a collection of glorified myopic and incompatible eye candy.

Hardware / Software Lifecycles

This makes little sense considering when product support for XP ends:

Mainstream product support for XP ends on April 14th, 2009, with extended support (security patches only) until April 8th, 2014.

That's actually better than Windows 2000's support: 13 years of security updates as against 10 years for Win 2000 (whose extended support ends on July 13th, 2010).

http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/ [microsoft.com]

Did Dell see this coming?

Dell, having had a long relationship with Microsoft, knew that Microsoft would try to shove Vista down their throats -- ready or not. Combined with Apple's recent success, I wonder if this prompted their foray into consumer Linux.

Damn

Well this is something I was regretting.
I have been a long time user of Windows (since the 3.1 days) and have tried every OS they released (except for ME) since then.
I must say I liked Win 98SE a lot. And then I discovered Win2k. But to me Xp was the amalgamation of both.
It runs smoothly and doing what I do on the PC (web browsing, Winamp listening, Battlefield 2 (and other games) and VLC movie watching) it works perfectly. Nearly 100% of the time without an issue.
I have tried Ubuntu (and I did actually like it a lot) and also FreeBSD back in the day (was impossible for a high school teenager with other things on my mind to try to comprehend it).
I am currently a help desk technician. I help people (regular Joes) with their problems. Problems with printing or email archiving etc.
I must say XP is very easy to navigate and do things from simple commands to powerful policy lock downs.

Now I did experiment with Vista (No I didn't buy it and I wasn't one of the beta testers) and the first thing I encountered was my dislike for it.
Microsoft has changed the way that their OS looks (well minor/major improvements are good but....) to the point of making the functionality of it severely hindered.
So I installed Vista Ultimate on my machine. The very first thing I noticed was that navigating my folders was quite a lot more difficult than in XP (or any other MS OS. Why I ask?? I mean its not like navigating folders is something that people don't regularly want to do!!). Now with the default interface I found it almost impossible (it literally took me an hours worth of forum reading etc.) to work out how to turn on hidden files and how to get the familiar File, Edit, View menu up the top of explorer (WTF? Removing that as a Window's default isn't an improvement!!).

Eventually the company I work for (a government health provider) will go over to Vista. This will make help desk support and general troubleshooting a problem. Instead of being able to say (over the phone) "Click Start and then My Computer. Click on File and then Open and then browse to D drive and select the template folder there" I will now have to say something like "Now click the colourful icon in the bottom left corner. Go to Computer then click the icon of a little man running. Now click the brown box that looks like a little house. Now type in "D" and then hit enter. Now select the little flashing house icon again and then type in "Templates". Now eventually you should see a listing of flashing grey and black text on a transparent background. Click the third option which should read "Show in Explorer""!!
Why did they change the appearance of a perfectly viable and working, efficient interface (XP I am refering to here) and replace it with colourful meaningless icons and pictures.

My opinion if Vista is that I will never use it again. I will not be buying it. If I am forced to use it (which is what the article seems to allude to. That MS will eventually (and quickly I might add) drop their support for XP and push everyone to Vista) I will give up using MS products and move to Linux to get the things done I want to get done (I have used Firefox for a long time and i know of the XMMS(??) player for music. I like what WINE and Cedega are doing with games).

XP is the last MS operating system I think I will use. By dropping support for it so quickly (granted this is just Dell not supporting it anymore but I do hope that Microsoft keeps up their support for many years to come as they did with 98 and 2000) they are forcing me, a loyal paying customer of all of their OS range (not inclusing ME. God... WhY?!@) and a supporter of their environment through my work for many years as a help desk technician, to be forced to use an alternative OS. I'm not a big fan of Macs just as I am not a big fan of Linux yet. For one reason, theres not really many native, fun gaming environments (like the BF franchise or SWAT/Rainbow Six tactical shooters) available. Also the things I do like and am grateful for within a Windows OS (m

My predictions for Wndows over the next year...

In 12 months time, the only XP you can get will be pirated copies.
That means if you want to stick to Windows on your new PC, you will ned to invest in Vista.... at a steep increase in hardware, software cost and maintenance cost (driver issues, bug fixes etc)

The Home segment will need connectivity to lots of 2-yr old peripherals... and they will be pissed that neither Vista supports their peripherals, NOR the hardware vendor is keen to write certified drivers for Vista.... this will push hardware makers to go the way of open source drivers, and supporting Linux. Microsoft will be too much of a moving target since old drivers and hacks will no longer work with Vista. Result: Hardware and peripheral makers switch to Linux, and take home users with them.

The 'build-your-own' segment of PC makers will suffer heavily, since Vista seems specifically designed to discourage this market, and promote large OEMs like Dell and HP. The stability of Vista on custom-built PCs seems much degraded than big-brand PCs of inferior specs.

Result: Build-your-own PC makers move to Linux, and start adding value to their offerings instead of just loading OEM Vista.

When it comes to corporate PCs, there are basically two categories:
1. Those who have Corporate licenses for a fixed no. of desktops will stick to XP or 2000 or even NT 4.0.... (my nephew in Bangalore is migrating server farms of Shell from NT4 to Win2K... he's having fun managing those mailboxes and migration to Active Directory!). Result: Vista on the corporate desktop will have to wait a loooong time for big corporates with site licenses.

2. Corporates without site licenses will be faced with a choice: Either buy new PCs with Vista, forking out large sums for jumbo hardware and bloated software...
OR
Migrate the desktop to Linux.

Corporate sysadmins have been notoriously lazy for a decade and more... (I know, I was one until recently). Sysadmin usually meant applying patches and Service Packs, blindly installing the latest OSes from MS, firewalls and IDS etc. Until now, sysadmin seldom got involved in IT planning, Standardising on formats, protocols, identity management, entitlement, provisioning etc.

With Vista, the price for this laziness is being increased steeply - the Vista desktop PC is going to be twice as epensive as the XP equivlent, and mgmnt is going to frown at incompetent sysadmins who never planned for migrating away from Windows and Office lock-ins. Even if the desktop gets Vista by default from the OEM, the servers and apps are still going to be on old versions of Windows or Linux servers for a long time to come. Maintaining support requests from new Vista users is going to be a huge new headache for lethargic sysadmins. Result: New hardware gets Vista; old hardware remains on existing Windows versions.

The few sysadmins who can see what's coming are alredy planning to do away with Desktop apps and standardise on Web apps that work with non-IE browsers on non-Windows OSes AS WELL AS existing Windows boxes with IE. This is what we're doing at our firm - except for some CAD software and call-centre software, all other desktops are shifting to web-based apps in this year. What if the CAD appln does not run on Vista? What if IBM doesn't release a Vista-compatible client by this year? We don't have control over those... but the next year should be interesting. Vista appears to be an attempt to arm-twist the entire spectrum of the IT ecosystem into the Microsoft-way. And that is why it is doomed to fail spectacularly.

Unlike previous versions, Vista will mean changing EVERY aspect of current IT functioning. Which is why it is a definite victory for Linux and Free Software, because at last, it will be more easier on the Desktop than adaoting to Vista.

Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...

This is pretty ridiculous. Most computers bought within the last year will run Vista and essentially all new computers can (the cheapest PC from Dell would work fine with Vista). As for drivers, I doubt there will be any problems in 12 months (from what I've heard from people using Vista now, most of them are already resolved).

Where I live, most computers are bought not from big brand OEMs but assmebled and custom-built to specs. The average config today is 256 / 512MB RAM, no special graphics card - the on-board chipset is used, and it takes 8MB VRAM from the main RAM via a BIOS setting. This with XP is good enough for home use. This way, the custom-built PC is 25% cheaper than a branded one with similar specs, and about 40% cheaper with top-of-the line specs.

Last week, I met with one such h/w vendor and he confessed that with Vista he is forced to go in for branded boxes, because it's very very complex and complicated to build truly Vista compatible systems. He says nobody has reliable information on graphics cards, sound cards, chipsets, webcam support, USB camera support, wireless card support, FireWire (IEEE 1394?) support etc. This has cut down 'built-to-order' PC sales by 40% over the last few months. This is driving him to get his support team familiar with Ubuntu.

Where the hell are you getting this from? You're claiming that Vista runs worse on off the shelf parts as compared to Dell?

I'm sorry, I can't read any more of this. Have fun in that little fantasy land of yours.

As quoted above, I'm getting this from the h/w vendor with whom I've been dealing for over 10 years now. Vista seems to discriminate between systems from big-time OEMs and custom-built ones. The main culprit is the amount of misinformation on device drivers etc. Hardware that's worked fine with XP WITHOUT DRIVER issues crashes regularly with Vista.

On further enquiry, it appears big OEMs actually source motherboards from Asus, Gigabyte, Mercury etc. ... but the performance of Vista is still degraded on these same boards when 'assembled'. One would conclude that Vista reads the BIOS (which is the only difference between braded and custom-built kits) and behaves better if it detects a familiar OEM BIOS.

Push to Vista

Of course MS is pulling XP. Anyone surprised? They need Vista to be a success, even a moderate one. They can't allow Vista to fail like ME did.
While they still dominate the market, it's not an unchallenged dominance anymore. A failure the size of Vista would mean considerable market share gains for Linux, OSX and maybe even other/new competitors over the next 3-5 years while they struggle to get a new windos out. By the time they're ready to release it, the market could've moved elsewhere.

So they're going to force Vista on us, figuring that like all windos versions prior, once we have no other choice, we'll accept it and consider all its shortcomings and problems as a "that's just how computers are" thing.

the end of annoyance is nigh

When MS stops supporting it, I'll stop getting all these insistent messages to download the latest security fixes which aren't, and can finally have a stable platform I can start to understand. This is a good thing.

XP will not go away. It will continue to exist on the machines of everyone who keeps it and CD ROMS that people don't throw away. Hell, 95 and 98 haven't gone away. I still have them on a couple old machines because some things I use insist on them. By now I can fix anything that might go wrong with them. Same will go for XP.

What about Microsoft's licensing policy?

What everybody seems to have forgotten is Microsoft's licensing policy. Sure, they won't be stamping any new XP discs after a while, but all those fancy new Vista licenses slapped onto new PC's can also be used as a license for any other older OS. At the company I work at, all the new machines we order have XP license stickers on them, however most machines get Windows 2000 installed. So, all you have to do is dupe a bunch of the XP cd's, since having copies of the cd doesn't really constitute piracy, so long as you have a legitimate sticker on the PC, you're good.

They're already making it hard to buy...

I work for a non-profit, and we discovered last week that Microsoft's Charity OpenLicense program is no longer available for Windows XP or Office 2003. If we want those, we have to pay full price instead of the discounted Charity OL price (which is about 1/4 of the full price). In this particular case, we were attempting to buy a license to use with Parallels on one of our MacBooks, so that our web nerds could test their work on Windows.

What really pisses me off about them dropping the COL program on XP is that the non-profits are generally the ones that can least afford the hardware upgrades to make their existing clients play nice on Vista. On the other hand, it's still cheaper to buy XP even at full price.

This is becoming an issue for my biz

I work in the hearing healthcare business, specifically audiometrics and otoneurology. Our manufacturers lifecycle on software versions is rather extended. A couple were still DOS based in 2001. Currently, everything is spec'd for XP Pro SP2 and I don't expect this to change for at least another year or so. Most computerized medical diagnostic systems are approved by the FDA/UL/CE on a particular make and model and the manufacturer supplies the system with OEM XP. On others, the clients usually supply their own system. This is where we are having problems. Unless the clients special order systems with XP, it will not run the software. Go to Dell or the HP sites and customize a system. XP Pro is not a choice now. Our only resort may be to purchase systems with Vista, reformat, and install XP. This is going to add needless additional costs for the client.

Deja Vu...

I'm sure I submitted this story a week ago :)

Anyway - my experience was at the local mega-computer store, where Microsoft had come in around 2 weeks ago and 'recovered' all the XP media/disks etc... The store is now 100% XP free, overnight.

Another case, a friend bought a Dell with XP on it - on delivery, it had a free Vista upgrade (and no XP).

Anyway - it's already happenning.

Because they can?

I don't use Windows so I don't know the background very well, but is XP the first operating system that they could shut down worldwide (except for pirated copies) just by refusing to authorize its installation? Perhaps they didn't shut down the earlier versions as fast because getting illicit copies was so much easier?

Also, don't forget that Vista has all that wonderful DRM which Microsoft is banking on; they want everyone to be using that as soon as possible.

Wait a minute...

Why should Microsoft care if companies are producing windows XP machines? They are still get money for the sale of Windows XP.

I understand giving up support for Windows XP to force users to move to Vista, but selling XP seems to just continue bringing money in. In fact, in another year, someone who buys an XP machine today might buy a Vista upgrade. I can't see how this is bad for Microsoft. It to be a win, win... win situation.