7 ms·

Yep, you'll have to upgrade your 12-year-old operating system. Positively absurd isn't it? Editted to elaborate: It's not upgrading for the sake of upgrading.

Yep, you'll have to upgrade your 12-year-old operating system. Positively absurd isn't it? Editted to elaborate: It's not upgrading for the sake of upgrading. 12 years may as well be 100 years in the tech sector. Windows XP is end-of-life'd in 2014. Why on Earth would Microsoft release a brand new browser on a dead OS? They're not going to spend another 5 years of time and money on that dinosaur patching security issues for something they haven't even sold in God knows how long. Expecting them to is completely unreasonable. The fact that they've supported us XP users for even this long shows how committed they are. It's also not upgrading simply because the OS is old. Lots of old things still run fine. Windows XP is not in that class of things. It will continue to have security issues for as long as people are on the platform. Also, if you're worried about whether you'll be able to eat tomorrow or pay your rent then upgrading your computer and upgrading to IE9 are both very irrelevant to your life right now. @politician: Because Chrome and FireFox strive for platform independence while Microsoft does not, which allows them to take advantage of Windows-only features and APIs; Some of which may actually be quite useful (like some kind of native DirectX rendering of pages, for example). It does come down to money though. As I said before, they don't have a good reason to support a new browser and its various security fixes on an operating system they're about to stop updating forever.

bunderbunder 15y ago
Meanwhile in the smartphone world, people are complaining that Android apps don't advantage of newer APIs in order to support OSes that are only a few years old.
techiferous 15y ago
The choice between (1) 12-year-old operating system and (2) current operating system seems like a no-brainer. But I suspect the choice for some people is between (1) upgrading 12-year-old operating system and (2) paying rent/eating.
kgen 15y ago
I'm not sure that's how people think of it, if someone just came up to you and said that your desk is coming up on 5 years and you should replace it, or your car is nearing a decade and you should replace it "just because", I'd be pretty hesitant.
- nkassis 15y ago
  Current cars aren't going to last a full decade without some repairs and maintenance. People don't maintain their computers very well. And upgrading your operating system is part of that maintenance process after a while. Plus changing computers is probably cheaper than a new transmission after 10 years.
  - Piskvorrr 15y ago
    Yup, exactly: Ashtray in the car is full? Well buy a new car then! (I'm exaggerating, but you get the point: most stuff is built shoddy and unrepairable - for you to buy new shoddy and unrepairable stuff to replace it)
- freehunter 15y ago
  If your current 12 year old car had a 2 star crash rating while the newer ones had a 4 star crash rating and you knew there were people on your daily commute actively looking to smash your car, you'd probably want to upgrade. Same as if there were people roaming with flamethrowers ready to burn down your wooden deck unless you get a fire-resistant deck installed. Also, this car/deck costs less than $100. Security holes aren't a "just because" thing.
Piskvorrr 15y ago
Well, y'know, back in the day, we used to say "if it's not broken, don't throw it out." Of course, that was before the current tech boom, where you absolutely must throw away anything that's older than a year (correction: older than two weeks), whether it works or not, else you'd be a social outcast - because the New And Shinier point release Sucks Less, And You NEED It. New iThisOrThat, gotta catch 'em all! As for that 12-year old operating system I paid for and which I still keep inside of a VM: I'd drop it, but the damn IE just refuses to run anywhere else. And now I'm supposed to shell out for another Win to run alongside that? Yes, I'm aware that's MS's main business model; happiness is not currently required for purchase (IANAL of course). Edit: I am definitely not facing a choice of food versus W7, that was some other poster; it just seems to me that I don't see that much extra benefit for me from paying MS for a new OS. (and no, XP is not my primary OS; that one was released some months ago)
- freehunter 15y ago
  Except XP is broken.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- freehunter 15y ago
  I don't know if there was a point in there or not, but... People don't generally use a C64 with an always-on Internet connection as their main computer. C64 viruses and malware are fairly rare. Windows XP malware, on the other hand, is all too common.
  - Teapot 15y ago
    Yup, eventually XP becomes less attacked, and in practice, more secure. While people moving in droves to newer untested Windows that are heavily attacked. I'll stay with XP until it becomes undefendable. Then i'll move to Linux.
    - freehunter 15y ago
      So the worms in the wild are just going to decide to stop spreading and move to Windows 7. Or not.
thaumaturgy 15y ago
Do you have a better reason why he should buy new software other than, "because it's old"? Sounds like his current setup does everything he needs it to do right now. I haven't seen any compelling reason why Windows 7 is better than XP for day-to-day use. A lot of people are getting Windows 7 now only because the computers they're running XP on are slowly dying out, and you generally can't buy a new computer with XP. Come to think of it, I have an entire shop full of all kinds of tools, many of which are more than 12 years old. Should I replace my workhorse power drill? My cylinder hone? My bench grinder? Heck, I've got a 1940's DeWalt radial arm saw with a neat feature -- I can unbolt the motor and flip it over and turn it into a router. Should I replace that with a new thing too?
- barista 15y ago
  There are many reason why you would want to upgrade: here I googled a chart for you: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/compare?T1=tab20 http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/compare... btw, I'd love to use siri on an iPhone 3G which I'm perfectly happy with...
  - thaumaturgy 15y ago
    I know there are some things that Windows 7 does better, and many things it does different, but the chart doesn't include anything I'd consider a compelling reason to switch, based on the usages we see. From the chart: Find files and programs instantly. People don't use Windows search to find their files and programs. They go to their desktop. Or to "My Documents" (or "Documents"). They go to that one folder where they always dump everything. And then they scroll through it and pretty quickly find what they're looking for because it's still in the same place it's been every other time they've gone looking for it. Open programs and files you use most in a click or two. The programs and files that people use most are always on their desktop, regardless of whether it's Windows XP or Windows 7. Connect to any available wireless network in just three clicks. Of all the complaints we hear about using a computer, this isn't one of them, except when the wireless network was incorrectly set up and the WEP key was entered into the hash boxes, which confuses the hell out of XP depending on the contents of the hash. (XP will sometimes think the wireless network is expecting a security certificate and will complain that it doesn't have one.) Navigate lots of open windows more quickly. This is a power user problem. Most of the people we work with have just a few windows open: email (Outlook, typically), a web browser (Chrome, if they're one of our clients), and then either Word or Quickbooks. Typically. Easily share files, photos, and music on your home network. Ha ha. People share photos on Facebook now. Very few of our home clients have anything that any reasonable computer nerd would consider a "home network". Print to a single printer from any PC in the house. I literally don't understand what Microsoft is trying to claim here. Windows XP works fine with sharing printers, and besides, I think most printers sold now have network capabilities built-in. Manage printers, cameras, and other devices better. Better how? Again, not a problem that people actually seem to have, and certainly not something that 7 does so much better that it's got a reputation for being "compelling" here. Organize lots of files, documents, and photos effortlessly. Again, how? Organization comes down to the user's habits, not the operating system. Last I saw, Windows 7 still used the same files-and-folders paradigm that XP did. Am I missing something huge here? Are files "taggable" now? Built-in defense against spyware and other malware. Funny, that still hasn't stopped Windows 7 from being infected. Oh, and Windows Defender was pushed to XP as an update ages ago. Help keep your data private and secure. Again, HOW? What does 7 do here that is fundamentally different from XP? Manage and monitor your children’s PC use. OK, this has actually come up, and Windows 7 does have some nice features for this. However, there have also been plenty of third-party tools for doing the same with Windows XP. Designed for faster sleep and resume. Who cares? Improved power management for longer battery life. More dependent upon hardware than software, and I see almost as many power cords as laptops every time my Go club meets at Starbucks. Create and share movies and slide shows in minutes. Amongst our clients, the people who actually do this are exclusively Mac users. Get the most realistic game graphics and vivid multimedia. ...If there are no XP-compatible drivers for your video card, that is. Stream music, photos, and videos around your house. We have maybe two or three clients out of several hundred that do this kind of stuff. One uses Apple TV, I don't know what the others use. Again, not exactly a must-have for a lot of people. Connect to your home PC media library while you're away. People have been doing this since long before 7. Touch and tap instead of point and click. Oh yay?
ZeroGravitas 15y ago
If it's still being supported, why should they? Has it gone stale? Bad case of rust in the networking stack? Or is it just because it would suit Microsoft's business model better if it did rust away?
politician 15y ago
> Elaboration: Care to explain why Chrome and Firefox run just fine on XP? It seems to me that every excuse for upgrading the OS is rendered moot by the observation that the two primary competitors have no problem running on XP. Just call it what it is - an attempt to increase the price of browsers from free to non-free by tying upgrades to the OS.

bunderbunder 15y ago

Meanwhile in the smartphone world, people are complaining that Android apps don't advantage of newer APIs in order to support OSes that are only a few years old.

techiferous 15y ago

The choice between (1) 12-year-old operating system and (2) current operating system seems like a no-brainer. But I suspect the choice for some people is between (1) upgrading 12-year-old operating system and (2) paying rent/eating.

kgen 15y ago

I'm not sure that's how people think of it, if someone just came up to you and said that your desk is coming up on 5 years and you should replace it, or your car is nearing a decade and you should replace it "just because", I'd be pretty hesitant.

nkassis 15y ago
Current cars aren't going to last a full decade without some repairs and maintenance. People don't maintain their computers very well. And upgrading your operating system is part of that maintenance process after a while. Plus changing computers is probably cheaper than a new transmission after 10 years.
- Piskvorrr 15y ago
  Yup, exactly: Ashtray in the car is full? Well buy a new car then! (I'm exaggerating, but you get the point: most stuff is built shoddy and unrepairable - for you to buy new shoddy and unrepairable stuff to replace it)
freehunter 15y ago
If your current 12 year old car had a 2 star crash rating while the newer ones had a 4 star crash rating and you knew there were people on your daily commute actively looking to smash your car, you'd probably want to upgrade. Same as if there were people roaming with flamethrowers ready to burn down your wooden deck unless you get a fire-resistant deck installed. Also, this car/deck costs less than $100. Security holes aren't a "just because" thing.

Piskvorrr 15y ago

Well, y'know, back in the day, we used to say "if it's not broken, don't throw it out." Of course, that was before the current tech boom, where you absolutely must throw away anything that's older than a year (correction: older than two weeks), whether it works or not, else you'd be a social outcast - because the New And Shinier point release Sucks Less, And You NEED It. New iThisOrThat, gotta catch 'em all! As for that 12-year old operating system I paid for and which I still keep inside of a VM: I'd drop it, but the damn IE just refuses to run anywhere else. And now I'm supposed to shell out for another Win to run alongside that? Yes, I'm aware that's MS's main business model; happiness is not currently required for purchase (IANAL of course). Edit: I am definitely not facing a choice of food versus W7, that was some other poster; it just seems to me that I don't see that much extra benefit for me from paying MS for a new OS. (and no, XP is not my primary OS; that one was released some months ago)

freehunter 15y ago
Except XP is broken.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

freehunter 15y ago
I don't know if there was a point in there or not, but... People don't generally use a C64 with an always-on Internet connection as their main computer. C64 viruses and malware are fairly rare. Windows XP malware, on the other hand, is all too common.
- Teapot 15y ago
  Yup, eventually XP becomes less attacked, and in practice, more secure. While people moving in droves to newer untested Windows that are heavily attacked. I'll stay with XP until it becomes undefendable. Then i'll move to Linux.
  - freehunter 15y ago
    So the worms in the wild are just going to decide to stop spreading and move to Windows 7. Or not.

thaumaturgy 15y ago

Do you have a better reason why he should buy new software other than, "because it's old"? Sounds like his current setup does everything he needs it to do right now. I haven't seen any compelling reason why Windows 7 is better than XP for day-to-day use. A lot of people are getting Windows 7 now only because the computers they're running XP on are slowly dying out, and you generally can't buy a new computer with XP. Come to think of it, I have an entire shop full of all kinds of tools, many of which are more than 12 years old. Should I replace my workhorse power drill? My cylinder hone? My bench grinder? Heck, I've got a 1940's DeWalt radial arm saw with a neat feature -- I can unbolt the motor and flip it over and turn it into a router. Should I replace that with a new thing too?

barista 15y ago
There are many reason why you would want to upgrade: here I googled a chart for you: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/compare?T1=tab20 http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/compare... btw, I'd love to use siri on an iPhone 3G which I'm perfectly happy with...
- thaumaturgy 15y ago
  I know there are some things that Windows 7 does better, and many things it does different, but the chart doesn't include anything I'd consider a compelling reason to switch, based on the usages we see. From the chart: Find files and programs instantly. People don't use Windows search to find their files and programs. They go to their desktop. Or to "My Documents" (or "Documents"). They go to that one folder where they always dump everything. And then they scroll through it and pretty quickly find what they're looking for because it's still in the same place it's been every other time they've gone looking for it. Open programs and files you use most in a click or two. The programs and files that people use most are always on their desktop, regardless of whether it's Windows XP or Windows 7. Connect to any available wireless network in just three clicks. Of all the complaints we hear about using a computer, this isn't one of them, except when the wireless network was incorrectly set up and the WEP key was entered into the hash boxes, which confuses the hell out of XP depending on the contents of the hash. (XP will sometimes think the wireless network is expecting a security certificate and will complain that it doesn't have one.) Navigate lots of open windows more quickly. This is a power user problem. Most of the people we work with have just a few windows open: email (Outlook, typically), a web browser (Chrome, if they're one of our clients), and then either Word or Quickbooks. Typically. Easily share files, photos, and music on your home network. Ha ha. People share photos on Facebook now. Very few of our home clients have anything that any reasonable computer nerd would consider a "home network". Print to a single printer from any PC in the house. I literally don't understand what Microsoft is trying to claim here. Windows XP works fine with sharing printers, and besides, I think most printers sold now have network capabilities built-in. Manage printers, cameras, and other devices better. Better how? Again, not a problem that people actually seem to have, and certainly not something that 7 does so much better that it's got a reputation for being "compelling" here. Organize lots of files, documents, and photos effortlessly. Again, how? Organization comes down to the user's habits, not the operating system. Last I saw, Windows 7 still used the same files-and-folders paradigm that XP did. Am I missing something huge here? Are files "taggable" now? Built-in defense against spyware and other malware. Funny, that still hasn't stopped Windows 7 from being infected. Oh, and Windows Defender was pushed to XP as an update ages ago. Help keep your data private and secure. Again, HOW? What does 7 do here that is fundamentally different from XP? Manage and monitor your children’s PC use. OK, this has actually come up, and Windows 7 does have some nice features for this. However, there have also been plenty of third-party tools for doing the same with Windows XP. Designed for faster sleep and resume. Who cares? Improved power management for longer battery life. More dependent upon hardware than software, and I see almost as many power cords as laptops every time my Go club meets at Starbucks. Create and share movies and slide shows in minutes. Amongst our clients, the people who actually do this are exclusively Mac users. Get the most realistic game graphics and vivid multimedia. ...If there are no XP-compatible drivers for your video card, that is. Stream music, photos, and videos around your house. We have maybe two or three clients out of several hundred that do this kind of stuff. One uses Apple TV, I don't know what the others use. Again, not exactly a must-have for a lot of people. Connect to your home PC media library while you're away. People have been doing this since long before 7. Touch and tap instead of point and click. Oh yay?

ZeroGravitas 15y ago

If it's still being supported, why should they? Has it gone stale? Bad case of rust in the networking stack? Or is it just because it would suit Microsoft's business model better if it did rust away?

politician 15y ago

> Elaboration: Care to explain why Chrome and Firefox run just fine on XP? It seems to me that every excuse for upgrading the OS is rendered moot by the observation that the two primary competitors have no problem running on XP. Just call it what it is - an attempt to increase the price of browsers from free to non-free by tying upgrades to the OS.