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

General discussion

Poll: Why do you think XP is so resilient?

Mar 4, 2014 7:53AM PST

To give you some perspectives to this poll, check out this CNET article: Windows XP won't die without a fight

Why do you think XP is so resilient, even as support is coming to an end?


-- Businesses are the majority of users.
-- People in general just love XP.
-- Windows 7 and 8 are not worthy of upgrading to.
-- People don't like change.
-- Pirated XP versions make up most of those users.
-- If it isn't broken, why fix it?
-- People can't afford to upgrade the OS and hardware at the same time.
-- People have apps that run only on XP.
-- Other reasons. (What do you think?)

Place your votes here

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Good point, skipper32
Mar 6, 2014 2:26AM PST

I've long suspected even some updates to XP for opening back doors for the gubermint to spy through. Maybe this is a part of what is behind the mad push to get people off of XP??? It wouldn't surprise me at all to find that Vista, 7 & 8 are increasingly open to such invasion of privacy. Could this be just one more reason to stay FAR away from them??? No, it would not surprise me at all to find this is true.

Linux is looking better and better all the time. ...And I don't mean Ubuntu nor Google OS, either!!!

- Collapse -
sorry not pirated
Mar 4, 2014 2:01PM PST

i tend to collect older computers and have em on my home network (have 18 so far, great when people buy new puters and give me their old ones, or i get em for a buck at a flea market, goodwill, salvation army, etc hey, Cool... i'm a recyler! Happy

However, there were a few computers that didn't have xp already, there is a totally free alternative called "tiny xp" (put out/maintained by a group of disenchanted xp users, and in the public domain) runs on a flash drive (it's tiny) (or installs on the HD itself), runs all the xp stuff, is way smaller, and did I mention free?

- Collapse -
Because it works
Mar 4, 2014 2:04PM PST

I think people/businesses don't want to change because XP does what they want it to. Period. Why spend money on something new that you don't need?

- Collapse -
It's because it works, it's business like and why change it?
Mar 4, 2014 3:46PM PST

XP is still being used mainly because it works and people look at it with no reason to change.

Way back in the early 70's (1974 to be precised) VW introduced the world to a new car - the VW Golf Mk. 1. To this date VW are still making the VW Golf, ok it's now on Mk. 8 but in comparison to Microsoft's attitude the VW should have replaced the Golf in 1980 and forced all their users to upgrade to a new car. But VW didn't discontinue the Golf - why? because it works, people like it and it's still making them money after 40 years.

XP is a nice operating system, it is very basic and doesn't require a lot of hardware. It looks professional for a business - if you run a business you can either have an OS that your employees can just come in sit down, log in and get on with work, running the program they need from the desktop without having to battle with the distraction of the Metro interface and having to switch between Metro and Desktop to access major programs (or even worse try and use the program on a 17" screen using an interface that was designed for 7" screen)

Also the other thing that Microsoft has forgotten is that in businesses, many businesses run XP through thin clients from servers. XP is simple and doesn't put a huge requirement on the server to run it for each thin client. It is more secure and stops the employee from doing things they aren't supposed to because the thin client is running a basic version of Unix or Linux and the XP the end user sees is protected from any major changes - such as virus infection - by the server - putting an infected USB pen drive into a thin client running Unix won't affect the virtual machine because the Unix protects the copy of XP running on the server. 7 however takes so much extra resources it would be a major upgrade, and when you go up to Windows 7 what is the actual difference between XP and 7? Very little it's got a start menu, it's got a desktop, it runs programs, the only thing is 7 needs a lot more hardware so what is the point in upgrading?

As for Windows 8, ok it's a lot different to Windows 7 or XP, but I'm not 100% sure how or whether Metro would work through a thin client system. I've not seen it been done yet, but I guess it must have been. I tried through VNC and it was just too confusing 'cos VNC tried to fit both the metro interface and the desktop together onto one screen (although that 'could also be because my main computer has two screens where as the computer I was connecting it to only has one). I have found that Windows 8 does work much better with 2 screens - you have the desktop on one screen and Metro on the second one (although as MS developed it mainly for a single screened tablet I don't think that was quite Microsoft's idea) and even with two screens sometimes 8 does get a bit confusing especially when trying to access the hotpoints on the edge of the screen and there is a fine point between getting the hotpoint to appear and the mouse cursor going onto the second screen!

Maybe Microsoft should have took the VW attitude with XP and instead of renaming Windows, just kept with the XP name and made an XP Mk 2 which was similar to XP but had various things fixed. Maybe if Microsoft had tried this then people would be a lot more happier and in 40 years time we could be on XP Mk 7.

I've got a laptop and a main PC - the main PC was upgraded when Windows 8 first came out from Vista to 8 - At first I was glad to get rid of Vista, however after a week of running 8 I began to realise I might have jumped out of the frying pan into the fire - the only thing that actually made 8 usable was to install Stardock Start8 software and put the start menu back where it belongs - I've got a feeling the Metro is going to end up going the same way as Aero did in Vista. Vista wasn't that good, but 8 was even worse. At the time I also nearly upgraded my laptop from XP to 8 too, but after trying 8 out for a week I decided that my laptop was going to stick with XP if I need to run Windows - as having ADHD 8 is way too distracting to get any work done with it. At present my laptop runs Puppy Linux, and has a virtual machine set up to get into the XP that was originally installed on it and it works fine. I can do the most things through Puppy Linux, and it's only occasionally I have to switch to XP - mainly to learn Dutch 'cos my Dutch learning program isn't available on Linux and won't run through WINE.

- Collapse -
After Windows XP
Mar 4, 2014 4:06PM PST

My XP desktop took a lightning strike through the ethernet cable and after limping on with an new network card, "clattered" to a stop. My Toshiba laptop required a new HDD and the home brewed VIST backup disks would not install and are unreasonably expensive to replace in France, where I live. I am now running it on Ubuntu 12.04 and I find this entirely satisfactory. It installs with all the "Office" style apps included and I am using both Firefox and Thunderbird as before. The word processor, interestingly, will output directly to e-mail, even in a choice of formats including PDF, which is something I found lacking on several occasions with MS Word.
For simplicity, I shall undoubtedly continue to use a Windows desktop for some of my video and graphics apps, including a negative scanner app and video acquisition card driver/app.
For those people interested in having a machine run reliably for office type apps, I think that Ubuntu, which regularly received updates, is worth a try. It is still early days for me, but I appreciate the absence of intrusive software and the possibility of a machine which does not take the duration of a coffee break to start up.

- Collapse -
Windows 7 wont work on older pc
Mar 4, 2014 4:35PM PST

Many companies have older PC's that will not take windows 7. Also a large number of Software titles wont work on windows 7.
It would mean Companies having to replace all their PC's, purchase Windows 7, and purchase a number of new versions/makes of Software that will work on windows 7. Companies cannot afford to replace everything when purse strings are very tight.
you could be talking roughly £1000.00 to replace just one PC. Perhaps Bill Gates could purchase PC's and give them to businesses for free so they can continue in business.

- Collapse -
XP just keeps running
Mar 4, 2014 4:46PM PST

When Vista came out I mistakenly upgraded - and then reverted back to XP within a couple of weeks. I now have 2 high spec machines using W7 pro and W7 Home Premium. It cost a fortune upgrading all the software to run on these but I perservered. Both have been very unreliable freezing, crashing and just plain refusing to start and I've lost countless working hours sorting the problems out, time that I can ill afford due to tight work deadlines. Last week it came to a head and I got so desperate I got my old XP machine back out and now I'm working again with no problems. Does that answer the question why?

- Collapse -
In Reply to: Poll: Why do you think XP is so resilient?
Mar 4, 2014 6:53PM PST

Well, for me WinXP is the best OS Microsoft ever produced. I had a brief encounter with Win Vista-a real disaster. And as said above,I am pretty sure a lot of my WinXp software won't run on Win7or 8. So why should I change? I am a Linux user for 6 years now and only use Win occasionally in dual or multiboot for those things linux can't do although it is getting better all the time. WinXP gives me exactly what I need and what I expect from it. That's it-no need to change. BTW mine is a genuine copy!

- Collapse -
Giving up XP means giving up aLOT of apps!
Mar 4, 2014 8:21PM PST

I keep XP on one of my computers because it is the last OS on which many of my high learning curve, legacy apps (ie., Dragon, Photoshop 7) work and/or are fully functional. Giving up XP literally means (in addition to paying for the OS) wasting THOUSANDS of dollars and hundreds on BRAND NEW SOFTWARE .....for what? the "joys" of Google Chrome?? I think not!!

- Collapse -
Planned Obsolescence is Not Sustainable
Mar 4, 2014 8:40PM PST

I'm sure there are many people who are using older hardware and cannot afford to upgrade. I am using a 7-year old hp laptop that still does everything I need it to do.
If Microsoft does not want to be "burdened" with continuing to support xp, perhaps thy could release the code as open source and allow the Internet commnity to provide support. I would welcome this move as a good show of Mr. Gates' philanthropic side.

- Collapse -
Other reasons -
Mar 4, 2014 10:23PM PST

Oh, I don't know, perhaps some think that the older OS versions have no or less hooks for the NSA.

- Collapse -
Why bring on self-inflicted pain?
Mar 4, 2014 10:24PM PST

I have several machines going with XP, while I am not in love with it, I do not have a yearning for the pain and suffering in getting my large investment in software to work on a new operating system. There seems to be no way to completely test existing software to see if it will work. It is a different vendor but the scenario is often the same: Look at the recent update of Java that broke a significant number of remote deposit software installations.

I suspect that the new versions are compliant with the new industry norm wherein software is not supplied with instructions and the help systems are a joke. Too much of the development is devoted to the Gee Whiz! factor and not making the systems more productive and secure. By this point in OS development, we should be enjoying a solid bullet proof security system. Does the new iterations of Windows have those? Haven't received any assurances that they do.

- Collapse -
Why do you think XP is so resilient?
Mar 4, 2014 10:27PM PST

Most Windows users are reluctant to continually follow Microsoft's lucrative upgrade path. Windows XP works and has minimal computational load, so it loads quite fast. The upgrade path led first to Windows Vista. I still use a Vista Ultimate operating system that is blazingly fast, but sadly suffering only from a bad reputation and more hype to continue on to Windows 7. Windows 7 did little to improve on Vista. Windows 8 is a marketting disaster. I've decided to switch to an Apple computer for all my professional photographic needs.

- Collapse -
Why not?
Mar 4, 2014 10:54PM PST

Let me count the ways...
1) A lot of windows OS's have been terrible (at least every other one!); XP is one of the good ones. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it, at least from a user point of view. Windows 7 is OK, but not really any better. Windows 8 is primarily a tablet OS. So why bother changing? Other than so Microsoft can make a lot of money off PC users?
2) The longer I use a particular OS, the more I learn about both using it effectively and troubleshooting problems as they occur.
As soon as I "upgrade" I lose all that. I also lose hardware--printers are particularly susceptible to this--and favorite &/or much-needed apps that no longer run in the new "better" system. Plus, Windows 7 needs more resources to run effectively.
3) And that is not counting the cost of the software itself, which is generally ridiculously overpriced, as far as I am concerned. Or, worse still, the cost of a new computer.
4) Nor is it counting the impact of having one PC, say your desktop, running one OS, your laptop another, etc.
5) Last but not least, withdrawing support the way MS is doing leaves people no choice. They are being FORCED to change, whether they want to or not, and no one likes being pushed around and having his or her choices removed.
Not to mention a lot of us can't afford the cost of either a new PC OR new OS, particularly in this economy. Basically, Microsoft is just being a big bully, and making people change systems just because they CAN.

- Collapse -
been with it a long time
Mar 4, 2014 11:17PM PST

I pretty much learned what little I know on XP..I now use a laptop 7 and still don't like it as well as my XP.
Why oh why must we all change to suit a bunch of techies who like change!!!!

- Collapse -
All reasons apply in my case (except business)
Mar 5, 2014 12:18AM PST

I'm finally replacing my two home computers with Win 7 boxes. But I'm having to install a virtual machine running XP to access a networked print server and several XP-only programs. It's been a pain to set up but should give me full functionality as well as security.

- Collapse -
all of the above
Mar 5, 2014 12:29AM PST

Answer to the poll could be all of the above...I see the results so far are pretty even.

As a repair tech, I'm seeing machines I built 10 years ago with XP and as long as the hardware works, the owners have no desire or intention to upgrade. (In their view) If it's not broken, why fix it. I know many small businesses that have 6-10 year old machines. They will only go to a new O/S when their existing hardware dies and they have to replace it and find anything new comes with the latest Windows. My 80-year old Mother still uses Win98 (not for much mind you).

They don't want to change, they don't want something that looks differnt, they dont want to have to re-learn how to do things. They arn't that worried about "Security" (in their view, that's what they have anti-virus s/w for). Microsoft seems oblivious to (or contemptuous of) the way (the many) people like this think.

XP was the probably the most successful software Microsoft ever produced. Apparently they are determined not to make that mistake again.


PS I echo Ted De Castro's affection for LIST and other 'DOS' utilities and frustration that Microsoft did not see fit to include a 16-bit emulator to support them. The best replacements are in packages of Unix tools. But I too miss LIST!

- Collapse -
win XP
Mar 5, 2014 12:35AM PST

I get fed up with all software providers who push new upgrades which do more things I don't need, and even more fed up with MS for pushing operating system upgrades which do more things I don't need and screw up my hardware and software in the process! Long live my legal Win XP!!!!!!
andy

- Collapse -
Multiple choice
Mar 5, 2014 2:03AM PST

-- Windows 7 and 8 are not worthy of upgrading to.

Well, 7 is better than 8, but they both cut functionality. Especially 8. There are lots of things that XP did, some of which 7 still does, but 8 simply lacks. Who REALLY wants a mere shadow of the operating system that gave so much functionality???


-- If it isn't broken, why fix it?

Kinda speaks for itself. Beyond that all that needs to be done to XP to "upgrade" it is increase security. That's it.


-- People can't afford to upgrade the OS and hardware at the same time.

Speaks for itself. It's pure economics. It all boils down to money....or the lack thereof.


-- People have apps that run only on XP.

Again, speaks for itself. There is absolutely NO good reason that backwards compatibility was hidden in and partially removed from 7 and completely removed from 8. NONE.

- Collapse -
(NT) Why does Microsoft charge for OS upgrades while A
Mar 5, 2014 3:20AM PST
- Collapse -
Window XP to die?
Mar 5, 2014 4:39AM PST

So 30% still use XP including me and it runs ok. If nothing is drastically wrong with XP why MS won't support? The answer is MS wants you to buy Win 7 or8. Well do we have a choice. Can' wait for Google for an alternative PC O/S because MS is disregarding loyalty.

- Collapse -
Hey I use that!
Mar 5, 2014 4:51AM PST

The office picked up a few Google Chromebooks. Nice stuff!

- Collapse -
Exactly!
Mar 5, 2014 6:51PM PST

If I could do without Microsoft products, I would just love it!

- Collapse -
Hardware issues
Mar 5, 2014 5:33AM PST

Many of the systems that were built with XP as the default OS are hilariously outdated by todays standards. Many of them couldn't handle an update to 7 or 8 because they just don't have the horsepower. I have a computer running XP that I would gladly update to 7, but I know it couldn't handle it, let alone going to 8.

- Collapse -
Windows 8.0/8.1 why stay an hold on for dear life on XP.
Mar 5, 2014 6:45AM PST

1. I've wanted to like and use FILE HISTORY in Windows 8/8.1 but I've reached the breaking point. I do regular backups with another program but also wanted to take advantage of File History, so I got a RAID0, 8TB NAS. I have about 3TB of data (and growing.) Bottom line, File History Filled Up my 8TB NAS in less than 3 weeks. And I've added just a handful of data in those 3 weeks, so technically, I shouldn't have that much growth. Something it detected changes in most of my Files and File History is treating them as new and makes a full copy.
2. I went from Windows 2002 XP to Windows 8.0 to 8.1 "Culture Shock"
3. Windows 8.2 is going to stear towards Windows 7 stuff , RRRRRRR I spent 6 months learning, purchased Windows 8 Bible. do you know how long that book is! Longer than that other fairy tale The Holy BiBLE.
Enough said

- Collapse -
upgrading means losing everything we've created
Mar 5, 2014 6:56AM PST

The programs that ran on XP don't work on anything new. We have to buy a Windows 8 system, replace all the peripherals (printers, etc.), buy all new programs, and most of the documents we use will have to be redone. None of the labels, for instance, created by our label program, can be converted by the recent version of their software--we've been through this already when Windows 3.31 was updated to XP. It took months to re-do every file, and we're facing the same problem, again--lost productivity and lost income..

As for the software being pirated, we have every version of Windows in its original diskette or disk form from Windows 1 to Windows 8--we have an entire binder of Windows software disks. Since most of the new "programs" were just bug fixes, Microsoft should be ashamed to bring up piracy--they're the worst pirates of all, selling buggy programs under false pretenses and letting the users suffer the consequences.

- Collapse -
Very odd. And not what I have experienced.
Mar 5, 2014 6:59AM PST

We have one lone app that is XP only and our printers are fine on Vista, 7 and 8. Your post is something I've never seen since Windows 3.0 days.
Bob

- Collapse -
XP usage
Mar 5, 2014 10:13AM PST

I upgraded to Windows 7 Professional because I thought that I would use the virtual XP to continue using many programs that only ran in XP. I followed the instructions to migrate the programs to the "virtual XP". I found out after the completion that the Microsoft programs did not transfer. I had to re-install the programs back into my new computer. I also found out that some of my disks were corrupt and would not re-install. I could not find another copy of the disks so I lost many of my letters, pictures, documents, and files. This is probably one of the biggest reasons not to upgrade.

- Collapse -
Just got the end of XP support notice.
Mar 5, 2014 7:56PM PST

I am posting this on laptop that is using XP....that I bought!
Yes, it might not have all the gizmos newer computers have, but it works and connects me with my work websites, and all the internet, including streaming movies from a paid service.
I absolutely agree with all the posts for "if it's not broke, why fix it/"
SO lets start a campaign and tell Microsoft what we think. We have lived through their old systems, dealt with their os crashes, and have landed on XP and stayed. Our systems cannot upgrade and we do not want to pay them once more for an OS that is faulty.
Yes this is about brand loyalty, and if they want us to stay with them, then they need to do something to keep us loyal (I also own a google phone and an apple Ipad)
And don't forget, my local library still uses XP computers and they cannot afford the upgrades.
My message sent to me was to, of course, upgrade to Windows 8 and buy a new computer.
I have filled out the form on their page and complained.
Anyone want to complain with me?
This is what I received:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2934207

And here is the support page, and of course they suggest shopping for a windows 8 computer:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help

- Collapse -
XP O.S.
Mar 5, 2014 11:17PM PST

Most Business operations have VERY EXPENSIVE CUSTOM MADE SOFTWARE designed to work with XP. TO CHANGE TO ANOTHER O.S. REPRESENTS VERY LARGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY REDOING THE CUSTOM MADE SOFTWARE TO WORK CORRECTLY ON A DIFFERENT O.S. NO BUSINESS CAN JUSTIFY SUCH LARGE EXPENSES ON A SYSTEM THAT IS WORKING WELL IN SUCH BAD ECONOMIC TIMES!
JW