Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

Question

Change to XP

Jun 21, 2012 11:00AM PDT

My current computer is a 3 year old Lenovo B450 running on XP. I want to buy a new Lenovo but the dealer tells me that it can not run XP, only windows7, I had windows7 on another computer & I hate it so I want XP on my new computer. Is this possible? Have we lost the right of choice?
I have the CD for Windows XP, someone tells me I only need the driver for XP and all will be OK. Is this true?
Please be kind to me as I am Brain dead when it comes to computers.
Thank you for any help you can give.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Clarification Request
"the driver for XP"?
Jun 21, 2012 12:14PM PDT

Last XP SP2 install I did required a dozen drivers, installed in a very specific order PLUS two helper apps.

And this install failed gloriously when we tried it with "XP".

Bob (never again) XP install.

- Collapse -
Answer
Some can. But many have no XP drivers.
Jun 21, 2012 11:20AM PDT

And finding XP support is as you discovered, nearly impossible.

If you want to do this, you'll check for drivers and see if your XP can be installed. For EXAMPLE, XP (the one without no SP on the CD) is too rough on users to install with hard drives over 127GB.

You would know that as a seasoned XP user.
Bob

- Collapse -
Answer
It needs to be said
Jun 21, 2012 11:55AM PDT

It needs to be said, and this isn't targeted at you alone... But you really need to get over yourself. I am hardly a libertarian "let's let companies do whatever they want and to hell with the consequences" sort of person, but at what point is a company allowed to fully discontinue a product?

The simple fact is, XP is about 10 years old. It's an ancient, decrepit pile of crap in more ways than one. There are many things that are simply not possible with XP, and plenty more which XP does poorly. One example is the fact that XP is very inefficient in how it handles multi-core CPUs. It treats them like discreet CPUs, and there's a subtle, but VERY important distinction to be made there. When XP came out, multi-core CPUs didn't exist. The XP installer has no concept of SATA HDDs because SATA did not exist. It wasn't until I think XP SP1 that there was support for drives over about 137GB. So much has changed since XP first came along, and that was at least a part of why Vista took so long to come out. Microsoft was busy ripping out pretty big chunks of the under the hood components of the OS, and replacing them with newer versions that are much more reflective of changes in technology. Vista's process scheduler is significantly more efficient at making use of multi-core CPUs, and 7's process scheduler was tweaked a little further yet. Both of them have native support for SATA drives in the installer, and plenty of other things.

Then there's the fact that MS rejiggered the driver model in Vista to make it more secure, which also broke compatibility with XP's driver model. So at what point is it acceptable for a company to stop supporting an OS with stagnant to negative growth? When it stops personally inconveniencing you? If not, then how long is long enough? One year after they no longer sell the product, two, five, ten? Where does the line get drawn? Do we factor in the millions of dollars that a company has to spend to support this OS? As I said, I'm far from someone who is willing to let companies just do whatever they please, but I do not begrudge them the right to try and make a profit.

So again I will state that yours was just kind of the proverbial straw, and so it's not aimed at you alone... But things are not as simple as some big bad company conspiring to make your life miserable by taking away choices you might have liked to have. Also, part of being an adult means accepting the fact that you will not always get your way without throwing a tantrum like a toddler. You specifically have been far more tempered than some, but you are walking a very fine line.

- Collapse -
Thank you
Jun 21, 2012 9:56PM PDT

Jimmy, Thank you for taking the time to reply and explain a few things to me. Going by the answers it looks as if I will have to bite the bullet. I am one of these human beings that rejects change.

Thank you to all that have replied.

- Collapse -
XP is old but is it down and out
Jun 21, 2012 11:58PM PDT

Hi DrHoy

I believe that most of what Jimmy has said is true but it is not the whole story and rather waste time considering what Microsoft wants you should spend your time thinking about what you want and need.

Now, if you want to use the latest computer technology along with the latest software then by all means get Windows 7 or, better still, get Windows 8, which is on the verge of being released.

However, if you have older applications that runs under Windows XP (Pro SP3) which you use to run your business, i.e help you to make money, or is required to organise certain aspects of your personal life then upgrading to Windows 7 or 8 is a much more daunting problem.

For example, I use a piece of software called MightyFax, it is no longer being made or supported. However, I still find this application extremely useful, especially when communicating with organisations that do not use (or allow) external emails.

There are also other older applications I use which would not run under Windows 7 or 8 and that for me is the most important thing. You see, I did not buy my computer to play games or marvel at it's new found technical ability nor do I want my computer's operating system to be the centre of my computer usage. Instead, I have a number of practical tasks I need my PC to carry out, e.g faxing, emailing, personal Information management, etc., not only for myself but for my extended family as well. Therefore, I will not jeopardise the practical functionality I have now for the latest bells and whistles on a new O/S.

At the moment, I see "no rhyme or reason" to upgrade to Windows 7 or 8, while knowing this will break my current applications, which are constantly in use, and leave myself running around trying to buy updates or alternatives for the applications I already have.

However, I will admit that at some stage in the future I will have to buy, or assemble, or new computer which will not work with XP, then I will have to buy a whole new collection hardware and software (which is what the industry wants) but I will only do so when I have absolutely no choice.


UK Bob

- Collapse -
And as a counter argument
Jun 22, 2012 12:47AM PDT

And as a counter argument, I would point out several posts on just these forums alone, where someone waited so long to upgrade software, that now they are looking at a significantly more expensive and time consuming upgrade process.

While there is certainly merit to the idea that just because something is old it doesn't diminish its utility, you have to balance that against the fact that everything else is still in motion, and the longer you remain stationary, the harder it will be to catch up.

Personally, I would always advocate that people migrate away from any program that is no longer under active development or being supported by the vendor ASAP. While it may still work, and do everything you need, what happens when something breaks? Maybe, unbeknownst to you, this program relies on some bug in Windows (it happens more than you think) to function, and Microsoft fixes that bug, rendering your program useless. Normally the developer of said program would go back and fix their mistake of relying on a bug in Windows (assuming they were even aware they were doing it), they issue a minor update, all is well with the world. If the company is out of business or just no longer supporting that program, you're SOL. Now you have to scramble to find a new program, meanwhile you're left with the unenviable choice of either rolling back a security update for what might be an actively exploited security vulnerability, or being left without the utility that program provided until you can find a replacement.

Basically, it's a matter of being able to migrate on YOUR schedule as opposed to it being forced on you suddenly. You don't need to upgrade the first day some new version is released, but you should take the time to map out an upgrade strategy, and you should NEVER allow yourself to become so dependent upon any single piece of software that it might cause your entire company to come grinding to a halt. Even what might seem like obvious exceptions in terms of Windows, are not immune from this. You should have a contingency plan for a forced migration to a Mac or Linux based setup. You can still strongly prefer Windows, but you should at least have something in place for the possibility that Microsoft decides to stop producing Windows to focus on the Xbox or maybe this idiotic race to copy Apple and turn computers into ridiculously overpowered and oversized tablets doesn't work for your business, means that you need to look elsewhere. You should have some basic outline for what you would do ready so if that day ever comes, you just pull it out, as opposed to make it up on the fly.

- Collapse -
Futility
Jun 22, 2012 11:33PM PDT

Jimmy

Believe it or not, I do agree with everything you have said in your post but as an individual PC user I see the futility of this constant churning of applications and hardware.

For large companies it is extremely important for them to have a policy on new IT equipment and strategic planning on how to deploy new kit without damaging the business. For medium sized companies maybe only a policy document, and someone to implement it, is necessary.

However, for "one man and his dog" type operations and home users such detailed planning may not be necessary but should be aware of the inevitable forthcoming changes.

For myself, I see it as inevitable that change must come and that some of the applications I use now may not be available in any updated format in the future. But while I have them now and they run under XP as expected I will be in no hurry to upgrade (and join this never ending churn).


UK Bob

- Collapse -
Answer
re think
Jun 23, 2012 5:40PM PDT

Yes Im re think about buying a new computer. I turn 70 years old next birthday, just getting too old to learn new tricks.

I only use the computer for email and browsing, I also own a web site nothing flash just an information site for Australian pensioners.

After my experience last year with windows 7, I think I will just stick to my 3year old Lenovo.

Thank you everyone for your imput.