5 ms·
Still think Microsoft should open source XP. They have no interest in developing it despite user demand, let someone else take over.
by 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 agoDo 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 agoJust 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 agoI 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 agoHey, 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!
- jodrellblank 13y ago"Market: the state of trade at a particular time or in a particular context" - Google definition. 29% of operating systems sold today are XP? 29% of computers sold today are running XP? When the article says "market share" I think that's misleading, there's no money or trade involved in people using an old thing. It's more indicative that such people are not willing to spend money on computing, than indicative that they are willing to spend money to stay where they are.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- jodrellblank 13y agoUser demand? You mean the people saying "develop and give us free updates forever because we don't want to pay you for Windows new edition"? They have no interest in developing it So... where did Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1 come from, if not "interest in developing Windows"?
- Touche 13y ago> User demand? You mean the people saying "develop and give us free updates forever because we don't want to pay you for Windows new edition"? Yep, those people. > So... where did Vista, 7, 8 and 8.1 come from, if not "interest in developing Windows"? Not developing the XP branch, that people are still interested in (as this article demonstrates).
- Guvante 13y agoIs anyone honestly using Windows XP because they don't like any of the more recent versions? Or do they just not want to pay? Customers not wanting to pay is not a good reason to open source your product.
- Touche 13y agoWhat about the goodwill among developers it would create? That worth nothing too?
- 6d0debc071 13y agoThey're already super-dominant. Diminishing returns on leverage, I'd imagine.
- Guvante 13y agoWindows made $6.37 billion profit in Q3 2012. Providing a way to get Windows without paying could potentially kill the cow which is worth unbelievable amounts of money.
- ams6110 13y ago
- kyllo 13y agoWouldn't open-sourcing XP be sort of meaningless unless they also open-sourced the Windows NT kernel, which Vista, 7 and 8 also run on? I can't imagine that happening.
- Touche 13y agoSure, do that too. Can't imagine it happening either, but am still suggesting that they do it.
- shmerl 13y agoThat's a good idea, but MS is still too stingy to do that. When they change their mind they can just give the code to ReactOS for example. Another thing which might prevent them from opening all code can be various "official" backdoors and other similar stuff
- bunderbunder 13y agoYes. Let them just give away a viable alternative to one of their primary revenue sources. What a fantastic idea; I wonder why they hadn't thought of it themselves.