XP's slow death is approaching, according to Microsoft's timeline

[zridling]

David DeJean has a great article up on ComputerWorld, titled: Windows XP: Going, going... gone?



The approaching death of Windows XP may upset you, but it shouldn't come as a surprise. Microsoft Corp.'s product life-cycle guidelines have foretold the fate of XP since 2001. In fact, Microsoft has been killing off one version of a product as it is replaced with another for years now. But this time around, the approaching demise of XP is getting more attention than, say, the final passing of Windows 2000.... Why? For a couple of reasons: XP is the most widely used operating system on the planet, and its long-delayed successor, Windows Vista, is not proving to be universally popular. The companies that make up the enterprise market for Windows are dragging their feet about upgrading, and on the consumer side there are signs of a rebellion against Vista.

________________________________________________
This is not a trivial event, as we all know companies who have no intention of moving from XP (nor can they afford to), and are content to wait until 2010 and Win7 to upgrade if not switch by then.

[tinjaw]

It think that Microsoft will acquiesce to real world concerns of their Big Cu$tomer$ and extend the life of XP by two or three years. At least Microsoft can accomplish that with out much risk. There is a HUGE risk in saying, "No. Use Vita." when Microsoft knows, from internal experience non the less, that Vista is not ready for prime time in the 24 x 7 x $Millions enterprise arena. Risk mitigation will prevail.

[Dormouse]

I agree. If they want to hang on to the monopoly, they will have to release their post Vista windows before killing XP off AND it will have to be much better than Vista.

tbh, it doesn't matter greatly to me. I've got every system installed with Linux too (apart from the Vista laptop and that might change soon as I'm told it has got much slower). I won't be installing Vista on any system that currently has XP and I'll just keep XP going unless it becomes too risky or unproductive.

[cthorpe]

I recently upgraded to a brand new PC that came with Vista Home Premium.  All was well and good for a few weeks, and I actually found myself wondering what all the uproar was about.  Vista was running well and everything was great.  Then the crashes started.  I had used XP for years and could only remember a handful of bluescreens.  In a week's time, Vista BSOD'ed on me no less than 10 times.  Some of those occured in the wee hours of the morning and I woke up to them.  Next, programs started refusing to load or unload properly.  More than once, I thought everything was closed and found multiple instances of firefox or winword or even notepad in my process list chewing up memory and spiking CPU for no reason.  Luckily, I had a licensed copy of XP with SP2 available after converting my old PC to Ubuntu.  At this point, if MS pulls support on XP with a major fix to Vista or a new OS, I will jump ship entirely and go with linux. 

[Lashiec]

No, no, don't worry, XP is not going anywhere, this is the same old story that already happened with Windows 98 and the like. After all, XP could probably become the second flow of Windows revenue besides Vista thanks to a certain Taiwanese company who assembled a tiny computer that sells for less than $400, had a success with it, and now it's going to release a second version of this small laptop with Windows XP running on it.

And just like Asus did it first, so are other competitors going to do the same in the following months, so it would be quite foolish on Microsoft's part to kill a operating system that is starting to increase its market share again (how ironic). I mean, they want to stop Linux and at the same time, try to erode the increasing Mac market-share. I guess the two OSs are going to coexist until Windows 7 is released and even beyond. Who know, maybe Vista will get killed before XP, now that could be funny ;D

[johnk]

I agree that XP is here to stay for the foreseeable future.  Microsoft seemed delighted to be a supplier for the new version of the Eee (referred to by Lashiec above) which will have pre-installed XP as an option -- and that's not even due out for a month or two (I'll be first in the queue to buy one).  When a few mischief-making journalists asked why the Eee would not be using Vista, MS chose not to comment.

MS knows how unpopular Vista is in many quarters, and I think this goes above and beyond the normal moans and groans when a new OS appears.  In this month's Personal Computer World magazine (UK), columnist Guy Kewney urges readers to go out and buy a spare copy of XP to (a) make sure you never have to use Vista unless you want to and (b) to reinforce to MS that there is still a market for XP. But I think MS know that already.

However I was already planning to buy a spare copy of XP -- I don't intend upgrading to Vista. I know XP inside out, and I have no intention of losing the efficiency that brings.  I also find XP very stable. And Vista's only truly interesting and innovative feature (WinFS) was stripped out before release.

[zridling]

johnk: Microsoft seemed delighted to be a supplier for the new version of the Eee (referred to by Lashiec above) which will have pre-installed XP as an option -- and that's not even due out for a month or two (I'll be first in the queue to buy one).

Never made that connection, but that's a good point. Like cthorpe, many of the commenters on that article said that not allowing consumers to buy a legal copy of XP would finally push them into trying GNU/Linux. And I certainly agree with Lashiec, who says that Microsoft will have two coexisting OSes once Win7 arrives, since they've committed to supporting Vista until 2014, I think.

Meanwhile, Joe Wilcox outlines 10 Ways Microsoft Can Make Windows 7 Lucky:

01. Windows 7 has to be a whole lot better than Windows Vista. Better doesn't mean tons more features.

02. Windows 7 must generate a compelling hardware refresh cycle. DVDs and CDs share one important similarity: They delivered such a good experience that people willingly repurchased the music and movies they already owned, but in the new formats. People squawked about Vista's hefty hardware requirements, but that's only because there weren't obvious upgrade benefits. Microsoft's fundamental development philosophy should be: one operating system to rule them all.

03. Windows 7 should go back to basics. The browser has got to come out of the operating system.

04. Call it Windows 7 Core. Nos. 1-3 are predicated on Microsoft stripping Windows 7 down to the kernel and building it back up in modular fashion. Windows Server 2008 and Windows 7 share common code heritage. Microsoft must bring the role concept from Windows Server 2008 to Windows 7.

05. Windows 7 should be familiar, and must remind people of something else, something better. Successful products share several attributes; one of the most important: They take a familiar motif, extend it and allow people to do something they wished they could do but couldn't before.

06. One Windows 7 version is enough. From the Windows 7 Core, OEMs should be able to customize the operating system for specific hardware and usage roles.

07. Put the user experience before bean-counter, monetary considerations. Microsoft won't fess up, so I'll do it for the company. Vista's SKU strategy was solely for the benefit of the company. From a bottom-line business perspective, the strategy worked. But at a greater cost: ticked-off customers and a damaged Windows brand. Microsoft can get there by adopting Nos. 1-6, particularly No. 6. One version is more than enough.

08. Windows 7 must give much, through sync. Synchronization is the other killer UI, and it's essential to fulfilling Ozzie's mesh vision. Windows 7 needs a synchronization engine bound to the IP stack.

09. Windows Vista Capable means backward compatibility. It's time Microsoft put all that virtualization technology to good use. The company should radically rearchitect the operating system, while using virtualization to provide backward compatibility to Windows Vista and XP. Then the company can put all those Windows Vista Capable stickers to good use, on Windows 7 PCs.

10. Windows 7 security features must increase usability by decreasing complexity.

[f0dder]

03. Windows 7 should go back to basics. The browser has got to come out of the operating system.

I disagree with this - it would be a bother going online to download firefox, if there was no default IE installed :]

Also, you can't really "remove IE" from a system, because so many parts of IE can be (and are!) reused by third-party software. You can't just make software depending on the IE HTML rendering core use another browser's core... also, IE is much more than just that, for instance the "Common Controls" where introduced with IE.

I do agree on "one version is enough" (though MS doesn't, wanting to charge more for the enterprise/datacenter registry tweaks versions), and having to be very modular (basically, nlite/vlite on steroids, and supported by MS).

[zridling]

Yea, I think that was the weakest one, too. Anybody who wants to use an alternative browser isn't obstructed from doing so. But decoupling IE from Windows might free up a lot of time for Microsoft programmers. Still, just as I don't see Apple giving up Safari, Microsoft ain't even gonna consider this one.

[f0dder]

Microsoft are working in teams, so it's not like stopping work on IE would give you more kernel developers... I wouldn't even want people from the IE team working on the kernel.

[Stoic Joker]

10. Windows 7 security features must increase usability by decreasing complexity.

This is the kind of absurd notion that helped to foster AOL's "Security is Simple...Just Click Here" campaign.

Security isn't simple, and it's never going to be simple until peoples attitudes are (forcibly) changed! A computer is not something that you can just flip on spin through the channels and then walk away from with impunity. (e.g. It's not a radio or a TV.) You are responsible for Your behavior, while You are rocketing down the Information Super Highway.

People have got to take responsibility for their own actions while driving their carputers. Microsoft isn't obligated to create a OS that will protect you from yourself while you go flying around the web like an idiot, any more that GM is required to build a car that keep you alive while plowing into a tree at 100mph.

You get Anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-lock brakes, and air-bags ... The rest is entirely up to you.

[f0dder]

One thing MS can do, though, is to not start services most users don't need, limit most services to only listen to "localhost", and set up sensible firewall rules by default. At least XP SP2 comes with a decent firewall, but there's still people running SP1 and RTM...

[Lashiec]

I do agree on "one version is enough" (though MS doesn't, wanting to charge more for the enterprise/datacenter registry tweaks versions), and having to be very modular (basically, nlite/vlite on steroids, and supported by MS).

-f0dder (March 25, 2008, 09:41 PM)

This is coming, but instead of a cool thingie to install/uninstall every component we need/hate (:-P) ala nLite or litePC, seems we're getting a modern version of Clippy: "I see you want to use the Calculator, that feature will cost you $10". As long as they only charge for the most exotic functions, like Media Center, and not too much, I think it's fine.

Microsoft are working in teams, so it's not like stopping work on IE would give you more kernel developers... I wouldn't even want people from the IE team working on the kernel.

-f0dder (March 26, 2008, 08:40 AM)

Indeed

[f0dder]

seems we're getting a modern version of Clippy: "I see you want to use the Calculator, that feature will cost you $10". As long as they only charge for the most exotic functions, like Media Center, and not too much, I think it's fine.

I don't like that... or, well, for things like media centre it's OK, but I'm afraid greed will win as always. And one of the big points of componentizing, for me, would be having a less bloated base system.

I also hate subscription licenses...

[Stoic Joker]

One thing MS can do, though, is to not start services most users don't need, limit most services to only listen to "localhost", and set up sensible firewall rules by default. At least XP SP2 comes with a decent firewall, but there's still people running SP1 and RTM...

-f0dder (March 26, 2008, 06:56 PM)

Sad but true ... and they're usually the same people that scream bloody murder when they get a bill for $1,000 for a new engine ... when they could have just paid $15.00 for an oil change if they just weren't so damn busy...

I just did a spyware clean-up on a machine today that took less than an hour because the machine had been kept up to date. 6 months ago I did a cleanup on the same machine when it wasn't up to date ... and the bill was so high I flinched. However... being a kind soul...I also gave the lady a considerable break and a Stearn lecture about the importance of letting Windows update do its thing. She listened, it helped, that's a start.

Any matching that comes it the shop, leaves with all current updates installed. I don't give a rats ass if it only came in for a battery change ... It's getting updated.

[comment on later post] And yes subscription licensing is a nightmare.

[zridling]

Sadly, Windows is already one of the most pirated pieces of software on the planet (next to MS Office and Photoshop); modularity is a much better alternative to selling 7 different versions, of which we only want the best version. But once it goes subscription, it will be another bitter pill to swallow. I can't say enough curse words without hyperventilating about that idea.

[johnk]

An interesting Engadget article which backs up my previous post on the Eee.

Asus and Microsoft seem to agree that Vista is just a non-starter for machines like the Eee, but the Engadget article says that the Windows 7 kernel will make it easier to build an "Eee-friendly" version, and Asus and MS are already discussing this.

This also begs another question: if Windows 7 is due anytime between 2009 and 2011 (depending on which rumour you believe), how long will MS allow vendors to offer XP in Eee-style machines? If they withdraw XP as scheduled, that would just kill the Windows version of the Eee until Windows 7. And with the Eee predicted to ship 5m units this year (and many copycat products on the way), MS is hardly likely to reject the opportunity to sell millions of XP licences.

All of this suggests that XP will stick around for some time.

[Stoic Joker]

I like have your cake & eat it too solutions. (..and toward that end...)

MS dropping support for XP really won't have any impact on the Asus eee. Mainly because MS doesn't "support" OEM copies on any OS in the first place ... that job is left exclusively up to the OEM.

MS can drop support for the public sector according to schedule.

Asus can use the 2-3yr "Extended Support" period which is part of the life-cycle for (a small fee) those that just aren't ready to adopt the new version.

Asus then has a backup plan (if needed) to support their XP/eee end users until Win7 arrives.

[app103]

Comparing Windows versions and the length of time in which they recieved official support from Microsoft (in days), XP users reallly don't have that much to complain about, especially when you consider the fact that the release of SP3 adds more time to its support life cycle.

The ones that still have the most right to complain are the ones that paid for WinME and devices running some older versions of WinCE.

It's slightly outdated (some of the dates need to be changed for more recent OS's), but I put this together a little while back to show exactly what I was talking about and support some of my views on how WinME users really got the short end of the stick when it came to product support from Microsoft. (it missed the red zone by only 19 days)

http://appsapps.info...Days_of_Support.html

And it doesn't matter how you feel about WinME as an operating system. Love it or hate it, the fact remains that PEOPLE PAID for it just like they did with any other version of Windows, and the numbers say exactly what they got in return for their cash.

And unless there is going to be a few more service packs for Vista, those that buy into that OS are also going to get the short end of the stick, especially those that have bought any of the home versions.

And the idea of a subscription based Windows is just going to further decrease the value you get by choosing Windows as your OS. Microsoft's goal isn't to give users a great value, or make Windows more affordable...their goal is to make as much money as possible and giving as little as they can in return.

For those K.W. Jeter fans out there, keep your eyes open for the future release of "Windows TOAW". 

[johnk]

The almost inevitable postscript to this thread:  Microsoft extends XP--for budget laptops only.

[Edvard]

Oh, but haven't you heard? Vista SP1 simply installs XP
 
ok, so it was only a joke, but personally I am fearing Windows 7
 

[kfcrosby]

The almost inevitable postscript to this thread:  Microsoft extends XP--for budget laptops only.

-johnk (April 03, 2008, 09:38 PM)

XP Home Edition apprarently...

I did contact our Commercial Vendor, and supposedly there will be a program for downgrade licenses.

Anyone heard any details on this?

KC