Support for Win 2K, XP SP2 ends July 2010

[Guest]

Wow... MS is trying to make money by forcing people to get rid of their NINE YEAR OLD OS!!! God forbid!!

 

[JofaMang]

Xp64 SP2 is probably included in that factoid (and no sp3 will be released)

 

[techguy378]

[citation][nom]JofaMang[/nom]Xp64 SP2 is probably included in that factoid (and no sp3 will be released)[/citation]
Hardware support for 64-bit XP has been discontinued from most major hardware manufacturers.

 

[Gin Fushicho]

[citation][nom]ProDigit80[/nom]Ow,and also, one word where XP beats windows 7:netbooks!It is also a BIG market.I think MS needs to refocus on getting an ultra light OS, that is fast, compatible, and is Windows; and save the eyecandy,and total compatibility and automatic background activity for it's regular end users.[/citation]

I will agree with you on that 100% , as for the music and Graphics ... get a solid state drive and more RAM. and get a decent video card like an 8600GT. That'll solve the problems.

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

I'm sure the majority of users could just run linux instead. Especially if they're still running windows 2000 they probably don't use anything other than internet email and office.

 

[cj_online]

Finally !! i hate fkn XP...
Vista sucked too, but Windows 7 pwns...

 

[Guest]

I have dumped XP day 1 VISTA was released. And never looked back. There was some frustration with VISTA initially mainly due to lack of Creative drivers. But for Win7 , i haven't encounter any lack of drivers issue so far.

XP beats WIN 7 on netbook? I don't think so. Win 7 just runs fine on my ATOM desktop(which is no faster than most ATOM netbook). Even with Aero on.

ProDigit: And yeah, like there's 100 million musicians out there who cares about 12ms latency?? Most of us don't give a freak. No disrespect, i play guitar and keyboard myself (but i'm not a pro).

You can't satisfy everyone with a single product, but Win7 has a boat load of more pros than cons which only certain people are affected.

The problem with people sulking here i see is some people expecting a Porsche engine to runs smoothly in a mini cooper. If you're running on netbook or old and slow machine. Why do u even bother to upgrade? New OS is not meant for your hardware. You should stick to XP or Win98(if have even older machines).

Go Win7 Go!!!

 

[Hellboy]

yeah vista us a bit doggy but it is not as bad as everyone says.

you wait until you try some netgear wireless adaptors on windows 7 and then youll see what i mean.. There is still alot of hardware which require drivers that are not available.

Long live Win 2k.. Loved that OS. XP time has just now come. Windows 7 will soon be on everyones pc.

Saying that i have had issues with 7. Creative really need to remove their finger from their A$$ and produce some drivers which work, its almost like they want to destroy them selves... Any one who wants a XIFI - dont do it- for an extra fps the agro is not worth it. Itunes in windows 7 lost sound - which never happend in Vista.

 

[Mitch_74]

hmm so there stopping updates for win xp well i think that someone should tell them to stop selling it then or are thay going to sell it untill July 13, 2010 my friend has just got xp because his comp wont run vista (old comp)he will do his nut when he reads this

 

[belardo]

NO...

Microsoft will no longer support Windows XP SP2. IE: If you friend has a problems with Windows XP with SP1 or SP2, they will not help him when he calls Microsoft directly. If he installs SP3, then they'll be happy to talk to him.

MS will continue to release security patches, which is ALL that they do since around SP3. What else does WinXP need?

Summer 2014, Microsoft will END any additional updates for WinXP.

What does that mean? Well, you can re-install XP, download all the patches. Up until that cut off date. No more "updates". Microsoft may (can) shut down servers for XP, but that would be a bad thing to do... but who knows.

With Windows98 as of now for example. Microsoft says they are not providing anything for Windows98. http/support.microsoft.com/ph/1139

So there is a chance, in 4 years (1~2 years after Windows 8 is released) - that ALL Windows XP support (other than knowledge base) is dead. That should be WRONG - because people will still need to Activate the OS after a re-install on legit systems.

 

[marsax73]

[citation][nom]ProDigit80[/nom]Not in every aspect!For audio and video engineers, XP and Windows 98se where the best tools on the market (with an ASIO driver).The problems with bigger and heavier OS'es is that you have increased latencies for audio and in video. In order to synchronize audio and video is particular CPU intensive, and the switch from XP to Windows 7 takes several milliseconds tol on latency!For live synthesizer or musicians, anything beyond 12ms (or about 256 samples at 44,1kHz) is noticeable (much like LCD's with latencies of tens of ms of delay is noticable for experienced gamers).I'm convinced that unless MS is going to refocus on creating a platform that has a better solution than XP, most audio and video engineers will continue to use XP for perhaps many more years!And especially audio engineers,since Windows 7 offers no benefit whatsoever over XP on audio field.Video only if you're using DX11 effects within a clip.[/citation]

I agree with you there. Running Cubase and Reaper. XP has a small memory footprint allowing me to utilize the remaining memory for my software synths and plugin effects. I tried it on Vista and the latency was way out of control.

 

[tommysch]

[citation][nom]marsax73[/nom]I agree with you there. Running Cubase and Reaper. XP has a small memory footprint allowing me to utilize the remaining memory for my software synths and plugin effects. I tried it on Vista and the latency was way out of control.[/citation]

You should try DOS, it has a much smaller footprint and uses less CPU resources at the same time. I bet my video card has more RAM then your whole PC. Plz ditch your 486DXII.

 

[tommysch]

[citation][nom]marsax73[/nom]I agree with you there. Running Cubase and Reaper. XP has a small memory footprint allowing me to utilize the remaining memory for my software synths and plugin effects. I tried it on Vista and the latency was way out of control.[/citation]

64-bit, it allows me to use my 16GB of RAM instead of having 12.8GB unusable. Another prime example of someone with legacy hardware whining about a new OS.

 

[ssalim]

F*ck you, why should I pay more money to upgrade if I'm content with winxp sp3 (was sp2 last month). Greedy bastards, I don't need your support.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

[citation][nom]jhansonxi[/nom]Hard to believe but I still encounter companies running web servers on Win2K. I don't know if it is management ignorance or just lack of IT staff to replace it.[/citation]

Usually it's a little more complicated than that. Most (admittedly not all) IT departments aren't stupid and are more than willing and able to upgrade the server operating systems, but money and "what, this weekend? No, you cannot take down the server this weekend!" responses from managing partners for the firm makes it difficult sometimes (seriously, we had to delay upgrading our Internet lines TWELVE WEEKS because of crap like that).

We're still running Windows 2000 Server on three servers in our company because those servers are 5 years old or older. While possible, the hardware on our old servers are, well...old--all but one of them meet the minimum requirements to run Server 2008, but the performance disadvantages would outweigh the feature advantages of upgrading.

So...why haven't we just replaced the old servers? Primary reason: money. We've gone through several proposals to management over the past couple of years (when I started working here), all turned down (money), but we finally got approval to purchase one server first quarter next year. Fortunately, it will be able to replace two of our old servers, and the other one that is almost exactly 5 years old will have to be upgraded to Server 2003 for us to continue past July.

We in IT would love to be able to wave a magic wand and get the exact server hardware and software configurations we want, but with the money we are alloted for projects, we must make due with what we get. Fortunately, we can finally upgrade our ancient Windows 2000 domain with Exchange 2003 over to Windows Server 2008 (R2) domain using Exchange 2010. We'll just have to live with our secondary DC running on a five-year-old server that runs Windows Server 2003 for a while, but it's still better than a six year old server running Windows 2000.

 

[marsax73]

[citation][nom]TommySch[/nom]64-bit, it allows me to use my 16GB of RAM instead of having 12.8GB unusable. Another prime example of someone with legacy hardware whining about a new OS.[/citation]

So what DAW software are you running? Maybe you don't. Just posting lame responses on a website. Windows 7 is perfect for that. Vista had too many interrupts. Interrupts are not good when you streaming 30 tracks of 24 bit/48K audio with 12+ effects plugins and 6+ MIDI tracks utilizing software synth packages. Learn your shit first!

http/www.thesycon.de/eng/latency_check.shtml

Throwing more ram at it isn't always the solution. It's a matter of the OS backing off and letting the applications run the hardware. Not the other way around. XP clean install = 180 megs of memory and < 40 processes running.

 

[tommysch]

[citation][nom]marsax73[/nom]So what DAW software are you running? Maybe you don't. Just posting lame responses on a website. Windows 7 is perfect for that. Vista had too many interrupts. Interrupts are not good when you streaming 30 tracks of 24 bit/48K audio with 12+ effects plugins and 6+ MIDI tracks utilizing software synth packages. Learn your shit first!http/www.thesycon.de/eng/latency_check.shtmlThrowing more ram at it isn't always the solution. It's a matter of the OS backing off and letting the applications run the hardware. Not the other way around. XP clean install = 180 megs of memory and < 40 processes running.[/citation]

Sorry Im not in the 5 people world wide who do this, MS should obviously care about your problem. If you want more control over the OS, run a Linux distro.

And your little program tell me I have a DCP latency of around 250 MICROseconds and peaking at 600, that is a cheap business laptop. Ill check it out on my Quadcore.

 

[marsax73]

[citation][nom]TommySch[/nom]Sorry Im not in the 5 people world wide who do this, MS should obviously care about your problem. If you want more control over the OS, run a Linux distro. And your little program tell me I have a DCP latency of around 250 MICROseconds and peaking at 600, that is a cheap business laptop. Ill check it out on my Quadcore.[/citation]


My main point was not everyone is holding onto XP because we are cheap, lazy or ill-informed. I actually liked Vista's updated GUI. I just wasn't a fan of amount of resources it was using to just run the OS. I tested my DAW software on a Dell Latitude 630 with a 250 gig 7200 rpm HD, 3 gigs RAM & a Core2 1.8 Ghz cpu running Vista Business. I was hearing dropouts while recording. Win 7 is supposedly better so I'm interested.

I hate to break it to you but it's not 5 ppl running DAW software. I would love to run Linux but there's not enough software out there to do what I can do on a PC or Mac. Not my fault. I'm recording onto my old IBM r50e with a SINGLE core 1.6 Pentium M, 1.2Gb of ram and XP SP3. No dropouts. Is it progress if a 4 year old laptop can outperform a brand new one with the latest and greatest OS?

 

[Guest]

all about the buck suckers