6 ms·

Despite Attempts to Get Users To Upgrade From XP, 30% Still Use It

38 points by TheSurge 13y ago

eli 13y ago
Uh, ATMs use Windows XP Embedded, which isn't really the same thing and is not at EOL. Microsoft said they'll support Embedded at least until 2016.
- shmerl 13y ago
  I wonder, why would ATMs use XP instead of Linux which sounds like a much better fit?
  - eli 13y ago
    Driver support for various touchscreens? But that's just a guess. I would imagine the license cost is not a huge factor in the price of an ATM.
  - daigoba66 13y ago
    Hardware and software support mostly. OEMs and vendors often write software and drivers for Windows only, or have better support in Windows. But there's no reason I know of to keep using XP instead of 7 or 8 for these applications. Disclaimer: I work for a company that engineers software for self-service patient check-in kiosks.
  - cmircea 13y ago
    Because their software only runs on Windows. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
- skc 13y ago
  Funny enough, Diebold, one of the leaders in ATM manufacturing and ATM software, use Windows 7 for their latest ATM's. I know because my current gig is customizing the software for a very large South African bank.
brudgers 13y ago
Many XP systems cannot be upgraded to another version of Windows, at least officially the hardware isn't adequate. On the other hand there was a huge opportunity to switch these systems to Linux if there had been a savvy distro with a little cash and a business model. But I fear that bus has left the station.
- Moto7451 13y ago
  Just to add a bit of color, over the weekend I upgraded an old Acer netbook to Windows 8.1. The specs weren't great: 1.6GHz first gen Atom/945 PCH, 1GB Ram 250GB hard drive. Overall Windows 8.1 is faster and more usable, with the BIG exception of the screen's 1024x600 resolution being unsupported in Metro (which made getting Windows 8.1 interesting). Intel has a hack to show a "larger" resolution in that space. Once Windows 8.1 was loaded I gave the laptop back to my Aunt. She'll probably never think about the Metro side of things (she'll use it as a large start menu for her traditional Windows apps) so that will be fine. I'll probably throw some more memory in there and it'll work for the next couple years.
- shmerl 13y ago
  Not only that, a lot of times that hardware simply has no drivers for newer Windows! Linux indeed often works much better to address this (usually this happens with laptops). I installed Linux for quite a few people in such situation.
  - brudgers 13y ago
    I have a Toshiba Satellite 1805 laptop that I bought in August 2001. It runs Linux (Wary Puppy 5.5). It's that or Winodes 2000 [or the ME it shipped with] because XP ties itself to specific hardware. It's a handy third screen.
higherpurpose 13y ago
This is a good opportunity for institutions to move to Linux instead of Windows 8, if they're going to have to train their users to use it anyway: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/education-ministry-romania-endorses-ubuntu https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/education-mi... As for why ATM's aren't using Linux, is beyond me. I guess Microsoft got to them first. This is the problem with open source projects over commercial solutions - there's hardly anyone out there working hard to promote that solution to users, other than the "community". Things are changing and the community and social media can have a bigger impact, but not when these ATM owners had to make the choice, and Microsoft is still spending billions on promoting their stuff.
- TheSurge 13y ago
  Honestly, I would also think that most of the applications for ATMs were created before Linux systems gained much popularity. Plus in general Linux isn't used to often commercially, I believe.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jostmey 13y ago
Why do I still use Windows XP? Because Microsoft charges too much for Windows-8. Right now I am running XP in virtual box on my Linux workstation, and everything works fine. Why would I pay to upgrade to Windows-8 knowing that I might have trouble installing Windows-8 in virtualbox. There is no point.
- Touche 13y ago
  Just curious, why are you using XP in a vm instead of just using Linux?
  - eli 13y ago
    How else do you test on IE?
    - Touche 13y ago
      Ah, ok. I use browserstack, but I see your point.
      - eli 13y ago
        Microsoft actually offers VMs for testing various incarnations of IE. They can be kind of a hassle (I think the Win 8 based ones are timebombed and you have to periodically download a new VM), but they work and are free & legal. http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools
    - fournm 13y ago
      http://modern.ie/ http://modern.ie/ ? Microsoft's got VMs for almost every IE/OS combination you could want. Edit: meaning, why are you limiting yourself to just XP. I realize that was unclear.
      - Dragonai 13y ago
        Now this is cool. Thank you for sharing the link.
coreymgilmore 13y ago
What could be interesting will be percentage of computers running Windows 7 at EOL. My bet is it will be the same or higher. I don't see many companies jumping on the Windows 8 bandwagon any time soon, especially with how much "less buggy" 7 is versus 8.x.
- TheSurge 13y ago
  I don't either, but not just because the the bugs. The whole focus on tablets and touch screens is a big turn off to most businesses I would think. Even though Microsoft is finally considering switching 8 to more of a classic style, I think it's too late for that.
  - DougWebb 13y ago
    It's not too late at all. Microsoft has had a number of "skip this version" Windows versions, and the subseqent release has done well. WinXP did well despite WinME, Win7 has done well despite Vista, and Win8.1 or Win9 will probably do well despite Win8.
    - TheSurge 13y ago
      I have no doubt that Microsoft will do well on future editions despite Windows 8. What I do think is that anything with Windows 8 in it's name is always going to have the touchscreen/tablet stigma attached to it.
    - coreymgilmore 13y ago
      I do see your point...MS has had a hit-then-miss trend of OS's over the last few iterations. But my general thought is that 7 is just too good (in general, and as an alternative) to 8.x/9.
Touche 13y ago
Still think Microsoft should open source XP. They have no interest in developing it despite user demand, let someone else take over.
- nightski 13y ago
  Do you really believe there is any sort of significant demand for XP? Maybe you could make an argument for 7, but really the almost 13 year old Windows XP?
  - Touche 13y ago
    > Do you really believe there is any sort of significant demand for XP? Well, I RTFA, so yeah, I do.
    - nightski 13y ago
      Just because there is a large existing installed base does not imply demand for new installs. If you were able to start a business selling XP, I'd say you would have a difficult time.
  - pizza234 13y ago
    I think O/Ss are, in a way, overrated, as the core usage for non-power users is simply based on the applications. Most users probably use all the Windows-es exactly the same way. An acquaintance of mine was actually complaining that Windows 8 was too different. Of course, security is a different story. I personally still prefer XP, as I can tell you that Windows 7 is a horrible HD-eating monster, while Windows XP has a small footprint, and it's very lean. Note - I'm a Linux user, by the way.
  - PhasmaFelis 13y ago
    Hey, look, there's a link to an article up there! Let's read it together: "Currently, the more than a decade old OS still has a market share of 29.53%." Wow!
    - 13y ago
wnevets 13y ago
at this point they should be treated like ie6 users. Its been 15 years
- arbuge 13y ago
  13
PhasmaFelis 13y ago
"Shit, for some reason people don't want to drop a wad of cash on a upgrade that provides no benefit to them and may not run effectively on their hardware. I don't understand it! Haven't these jerks heard of progress?"
ck2 13y ago
I'm one of those people unfortunately. XP was all I needed for a decade. My firewall which has thousands of rules does not work with anything newer and other firewalls suck today, very badly. I have many many programs which are licensed and I do not want to have to try to find the key for each one again, heck find the program again, only to find out it doesn't work beyond XP. XP was just a launching UI for me, really could not care about how it looked. I have it very locked down and very tweaked. And I really do not want to lose the months of getting something configured again. But come mid-April I won't have a choice.
- eli 13y ago
  My guess is that someone will step up and continue to create patches for XP, because you're in a pretty big boat. But if I were you, I'd switch to a newer OS and run the whole XP box in a VM (note you may run into some MS licensing issues setting this up). Then at least you can slowly start migrating and at least your "main" hypervisor OS will be fully patched. Doesn't help you with the firewall, though.
  - ck2 13y ago
    What blows my mind is that XP still needs constant, serious security patches after 12 years. Think about that.
    - ams6110 13y ago
      I see constant security patches for Linux and associated userland, pretty much monthly also.
    - TheSurge 13y ago
      It's not because the software is necessarily "insecure", it's just because new ways of getting around protections are found every day. Plus, look at how much the technology landscape has changed since XP was introduced in 2001.

38 points by TheSurge 13y ago

eli 13y ago

Uh, ATMs use Windows XP Embedded, which isn't really the same thing and is not at EOL. Microsoft said they'll support Embedded at least until 2016.

shmerl 13y ago
I wonder, why would ATMs use XP instead of Linux which sounds like a much better fit?
- eli 13y ago
  Driver support for various touchscreens? But that's just a guess. I would imagine the license cost is not a huge factor in the price of an ATM.
- daigoba66 13y ago
  Hardware and software support mostly. OEMs and vendors often write software and drivers for Windows only, or have better support in Windows. But there's no reason I know of to keep using XP instead of 7 or 8 for these applications. Disclaimer: I work for a company that engineers software for self-service patient check-in kiosks.
- cmircea 13y ago
  Because their software only runs on Windows. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
skc 13y ago
Funny enough, Diebold, one of the leaders in ATM manufacturing and ATM software, use Windows 7 for their latest ATM's. I know because my current gig is customizing the software for a very large South African bank.

brudgers 13y ago

Many XP systems cannot be upgraded to another version of Windows, at least officially the hardware isn't adequate. On the other hand there was a huge opportunity to switch these systems to Linux if there had been a savvy distro with a little cash and a business model. But I fear that bus has left the station.

Moto7451 13y ago
Just to add a bit of color, over the weekend I upgraded an old Acer netbook to Windows 8.1. The specs weren't great: 1.6GHz first gen Atom/945 PCH, 1GB Ram 250GB hard drive. Overall Windows 8.1 is faster and more usable, with the BIG exception of the screen's 1024x600 resolution being unsupported in Metro (which made getting Windows 8.1 interesting). Intel has a hack to show a "larger" resolution in that space. Once Windows 8.1 was loaded I gave the laptop back to my Aunt. She'll probably never think about the Metro side of things (she'll use it as a large start menu for her traditional Windows apps) so that will be fine. I'll probably throw some more memory in there and it'll work for the next couple years.
shmerl 13y ago
Not only that, a lot of times that hardware simply has no drivers for newer Windows! Linux indeed often works much better to address this (usually this happens with laptops). I installed Linux for quite a few people in such situation.
- brudgers 13y ago
  I have a Toshiba Satellite 1805 laptop that I bought in August 2001. It runs Linux (Wary Puppy 5.5). It's that or Winodes 2000 [or the ME it shipped with] because XP ties itself to specific hardware. It's a handy third screen.

higherpurpose 13y ago

This is a good opportunity for institutions to move to Linux instead of Windows 8, if they're going to have to train their users to use it anyway: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/education-ministry-romania-endorses-ubuntu https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/education-mi... As for why ATM's aren't using Linux, is beyond me. I guess Microsoft got to them first. This is the problem with open source projects over commercial solutions - there's hardly anyone out there working hard to promote that solution to users, other than the "community". Things are changing and the community and social media can have a bigger impact, but not when these ATM owners had to make the choice, and Microsoft is still spending billions on promoting their stuff.

TheSurge 13y ago
Honestly, I would also think that most of the applications for ATMs were created before Linux systems gained much popularity. Plus in general Linux isn't used to often commercially, I believe.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jostmey 13y ago

Why do I still use Windows XP? Because Microsoft charges too much for Windows-8. Right now I am running XP in virtual box on my Linux workstation, and everything works fine. Why would I pay to upgrade to Windows-8 knowing that I might have trouble installing Windows-8 in virtualbox. There is no point.

Touche 13y ago
Just curious, why are you using XP in a vm instead of just using Linux?
- eli 13y ago
  How else do you test on IE?
  - Touche 13y ago
    Ah, ok. I use browserstack, but I see your point.
    - eli 13y ago
      Microsoft actually offers VMs for testing various incarnations of IE. They can be kind of a hassle (I think the Win 8 based ones are timebombed and you have to periodically download a new VM), but they work and are free & legal. http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools
  - fournm 13y ago
    http://modern.ie/ http://modern.ie/ ? Microsoft's got VMs for almost every IE/OS combination you could want. Edit: meaning, why are you limiting yourself to just XP. I realize that was unclear.
    - Dragonai 13y ago
      Now this is cool. Thank you for sharing the link.

coreymgilmore 13y ago

What could be interesting will be percentage of computers running Windows 7 at EOL. My bet is it will be the same or higher. I don't see many companies jumping on the Windows 8 bandwagon any time soon, especially with how much "less buggy" 7 is versus 8.x.

TheSurge 13y ago
I don't either, but not just because the the bugs. The whole focus on tablets and touch screens is a big turn off to most businesses I would think. Even though Microsoft is finally considering switching 8 to more of a classic style, I think it's too late for that.
- DougWebb 13y ago
  It's not too late at all. Microsoft has had a number of "skip this version" Windows versions, and the subseqent release has done well. WinXP did well despite WinME, Win7 has done well despite Vista, and Win8.1 or Win9 will probably do well despite Win8.
  - TheSurge 13y ago
    I have no doubt that Microsoft will do well on future editions despite Windows 8. What I do think is that anything with Windows 8 in it's name is always going to have the touchscreen/tablet stigma attached to it.
  - coreymgilmore 13y ago
    I do see your point...MS has had a hit-then-miss trend of OS's over the last few iterations. But my general thought is that 7 is just too good (in general, and as an alternative) to 8.x/9.

Touche 13y ago

Still think Microsoft should open source XP. They have no interest in developing it despite user demand, let someone else take over.

nightski 13y ago
Do you really believe there is any sort of significant demand for XP? Maybe you could make an argument for 7, but really the almost 13 year old Windows XP?
- Touche 13y ago
  > Do you really believe there is any sort of significant demand for XP? Well, I RTFA, so yeah, I do.
  - nightski 13y ago
    Just because there is a large existing installed base does not imply demand for new installs. If you were able to start a business selling XP, I'd say you would have a difficult time.
- pizza234 13y ago
  I think O/Ss are, in a way, overrated, as the core usage for non-power users is simply based on the applications. Most users probably use all the Windows-es exactly the same way. An acquaintance of mine was actually complaining that Windows 8 was too different. Of course, security is a different story. I personally still prefer XP, as I can tell you that Windows 7 is a horrible HD-eating monster, while Windows XP has a small footprint, and it's very lean. Note - I'm a Linux user, by the way.
- PhasmaFelis 13y ago
  Hey, look, there's a link to an article up there! Let's read it together: "Currently, the more than a decade old OS still has a market share of 29.53%." Wow!
  - 13y ago

wnevets 13y ago

at this point they should be treated like ie6 users. Its been 15 years

arbuge 13y ago
13

PhasmaFelis 13y ago

"Shit, for some reason people don't want to drop a wad of cash on a upgrade that provides no benefit to them and may not run effectively on their hardware. I don't understand it! Haven't these jerks heard of progress?"

ck2 13y ago

I'm one of those people unfortunately. XP was all I needed for a decade. My firewall which has thousands of rules does not work with anything newer and other firewalls suck today, very badly. I have many many programs which are licensed and I do not want to have to try to find the key for each one again, heck find the program again, only to find out it doesn't work beyond XP. XP was just a launching UI for me, really could not care about how it looked. I have it very locked down and very tweaked. And I really do not want to lose the months of getting something configured again. But come mid-April I won't have a choice.

eli 13y ago
My guess is that someone will step up and continue to create patches for XP, because you're in a pretty big boat. But if I were you, I'd switch to a newer OS and run the whole XP box in a VM (note you may run into some MS licensing issues setting this up). Then at least you can slowly start migrating and at least your "main" hypervisor OS will be fully patched. Doesn't help you with the firewall, though.
- ck2 13y ago
  What blows my mind is that XP still needs constant, serious security patches after 12 years. Think about that.
  - ams6110 13y ago
    I see constant security patches for Linux and associated userland, pretty much monthly also.
  - TheSurge 13y ago
    It's not because the software is necessarily "insecure", it's just because new ways of getting around protections are found every day. Plus, look at how much the technology landscape has changed since XP was introduced in 2001.