Still On Windows XP? Here’s Some Bad Advice

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Just what Windows XP users need...some bad advice!

There are two big reasons why this is a bad idea. The first: It probably won’t work. Your old Win XP machine likely does not have the horsepower, the hard disk space, or the hardware to run Windows 8. Second: You’ll hate it.
Click to expand...
 
PC Pro recommends Avast 2014. It’s free, and they say it’s better than Microsoft’s own Security Essentials.
Click to expand...
rolleyes.gif
 
I find it odd that the article didn't explore the reason why these people who still use XP don't upgrade. Some options like Chromebook or Mac or even Linux are downright crazy, if these users are worried about change or program compatibility they sure as hell won't be able to use these mentioned systems. Considering that you can get a proper Windows laptop or tablet these days for less than $300 I'm not sure why replacing such an old computer is complicated unless like I mentioned above, it's worry about app compatibility or simply worrying about switching to something different. Though I'd argue that having two computers will surely make it easier transition than upgrading Windows, I could guarantee that most of these users will not be able to reinstall the OS on their own and then also risk losing their data.
 
I don't think, aside from costs, that getting a mac is really a bad idea at all. The UI design is really a lot more reasonable on a keyboard and mouse or on a laptop. Apple's touch UI is only on iOS where it makes more sense. Going from XP to an Apple computer, in a weird way, makes more sense than trying to move to Windows 8/8.1.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I don't think, aside from costs, that getting a mac is really a bad idea at all. The UI design is really a lot more reasonable on a keyboard and mouse or on a laptop. Apple's touch UI is only on iOS where it makes more sense. Going from XP to an Apple computer, in a weird way, makes more sense than trying to move to Windows 8/8.1.
Click to expand...

Most people don't want to spend that much on a machine. That's the problem.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I don't think, aside from costs, that getting a mac is really a bad idea at all. The UI design is really a lot more reasonable on a keyboard and mouse or on a laptop. Apple's touch UI is only on iOS where it makes more sense. Going from XP to an Apple computer, in a weird way, makes more sense than trying to move to Windows 8/8.1.
Click to expand...

Still don't have a start menu. so you better go with some Linux distro
 
Exavior said:
Still don't have a start menu. so you better go with some Linux distro
Click to expand...

Not only that... but people I know that switched to a Mac (especially "older" people) tend to be just as frustrated as people that went to a Windows 8 machine. XP and OSX aren't even close.
 
This is great, read part of it and saving the rest for work. It's good to get a run down of all the irrational arguments you'll get.
 
Wonder who are these customers staying at Windows XP. Was at an American Airlines terminal. All the ticketing machines rebooted at the same time, and behold the good old windows xp start screen. Good luck to microsoft for trying to get these customers to switch. The machines still serve their intended function just fine.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I don't think, aside from costs, that getting a mac is really a bad idea at all. The UI design is really a lot more reasonable on a keyboard and mouse or on a laptop. Apple's touch UI is only on iOS where it makes more sense. Going from XP to an Apple computer, in a weird way, makes more sense than trying to move to Windows 8/8.1.
Click to expand...

Except for all the applications you own that run on Windows.... Many aren't available on the Mac. Cost is just one thing.

But, if you don't want to learn to use Windows 8.1 because of the learning curve, why would you switch to a completely different OS where the software you own no longer works and you have to learn a whole new OS? That advice doesn't make much sense.
 
That is some of the most bass-ackwards advice I have ever read.

"You might not want to upgrade to the latest MS OS because then you might need to upgrade your PC which will cost $$ to $$$ and you will need to learn a new interface that will take you a few days to weeks to get used to. Instead you should purchase a new MAac for $$$ to $$$$ and then spend a few weeks to months learning the new OS. Oh, and toss all your old software out because it won't work anymore unless you want to also pay extra for Windows 7 and spend a few more weeks learning how bootcamp works, and then confuse yourself and the learning process for both Win7 and the Mac OS, thus taking an even longer time to learn each of them."

Whoever wrote this is a complete genius, at stupidity.
 
People have already commented on the flaws of this article, no need to repeat them.

Actually good advice:

1) If you are still using XP as your personal computer, just buy a new one (small %)
2) If you are still using XP because of a specific app, that computer should never be on the Internet again. (Mostly companies)
3) If you are still using XP because you are either a cheapskate or don't feel you need anything more, nothing will convince you. Let ignorance console you at night when the inevitable bad thing happens to you.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I don't think, aside from costs, that getting a mac is really a bad idea at all. The UI design is really a lot more reasonable on a keyboard and mouse or on a laptop. Apple's touch UI is only on iOS where it makes more sense. Going from XP to an Apple computer, in a weird way, makes more sense than trying to move to Windows 8/8.1.
Click to expand...

A big loophole in this line of reasoning is app migration. Windows 8 makes it much easier to preserve software investments. And there hybrids and tablets with 8 that can not only use existing desktop software (and that software typically works with KBM just like XP) but offer of course tablet capability.
 
I built all new systems running Win7 (both based on AMD A4-3400 processors) over this summer to replace their old WinXP machines. They're both far faster (my mom's old machine was a single core AMD 3500 based machine, my dad's was a dual core Pentium machine) and have more memory (4GB) and more (1TB) storage. I also bought them a subscription for Office 365 and BitDefender, just to make sure. I almost promised to keep paying on the software subscriptions to keep them working.

It wasn't that expensive, though. The machines only cost me $300 each. The Office sub was $90 and the BitDefender subs were $80.

Still, geez, the things I do for family. :)
 
dagamer34 said:
3) If you are still using XP because you are either a cheapskate or don't feel you need anything more, nothing will convince you. Let ignorance console you at night when the inevitable bad thing happens to you.
Click to expand...

For many, the cost of repairs and maintenance will be the breaking point. When you're taking your PC in for repair (either software related or hardware repairs) for $100 a pop plus parts (or more), you'll eventually upgrade. Most people. There are those stubborn people out there.
 
What I wonder is why [H] would stoop to dredging up sludge like this in the first place? :(

C'mon, you can do better. Can't you?
 
QwertyJuan said:
Because the chances of getting Malware is going to explode in a few weeks.
Click to expand...

Why would it if you have a current AV's? that's their job.

I run avast and MWB.

XP does everything I need it to and it gets along great with my board and I have it set up just as I like it.

I have not had a blue screen in years.

Plus I have a few programs I cannot transfer.

I have a copy of 7 pro, just don't feel like installing everything all over again right now.
 
I suspect a lot of XP hangers on are businesses anyway. Our company just started upgrading everyone to Win7 this year. And honestly, if MS wasn't dropping support of XP, I doubt we'd be upgrading right now.

7 is my suggestion to anyone upgrading from XP (hardware permitting of course.) It's just the easiest transition available right now.
 
I have 7 pro on my new build and xp pro on my old. I like a few aspects of 7 but I am not keen on a few other aspects either.
XP is simple and effective for a interface. It might not be able to handle SSD's or GPT but if you do not need that your not missing anything.
Aero is nice to slide around tabs but when trying to move files or folders it can highlight and move the wrong ones, just little annoying aspects.
I suppose that is why they included the classic shell.
 
QwertyJuan said:
Most people don't want to spend that much on a machine. That's the problem.
Click to expand...

That's true. Computers are seen as being pretty much disposable things and Apple doesn't charge prices that agree with a lot of consumers.

Exavior said:
Still don't have a start menu. so you better go with some Linux distro
Click to expand...

In my opinion, I don't think the missing start menu is the only thing holding back adoption of Windows 8. There's some other UI elements that don't really work very well, but I'm glad that Microsoft is at least making Modern UI apps work inside a window which is a big backpedal kinda thingey and admission that they made some serious mistakes with the initial design.

Ur_Mom said:
Except for all the applications you own that run on Windows.... Many aren't available on the Mac. Cost is just one thing.

But, if you don't want to learn to use Windows 8.1 because of the learning curve, why would you switch to a completely different OS where the software you own no longer works and you have to learn a whole new OS? That advice doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

It does make sense. Apple's computer OS UI isn't familiar, but it's designed to match the available interface devices available to the user behind the screen. It has, I think, more reasonable context clues and hasn't drastically evolved in recent times for no good reason (or at least the reason that the company wants to take a percentage of 3rd party software sale revenues since they already do that). Also, there's emulation for Windows-based apps.

heatlesssun said:
A big loophole in this line of reasoning is app migration. Windows 8 makes it much easier to preserve software investments. And there hybrids and tablets with 8 that can not only use existing desktop software (and that software typically works with KBM just like XP) but offer of course tablet capability.
Click to expand...

Seriously, moving stuff like Office from one computer to another isn't easy to do when its all on some OEM restore disc. For home users, that's kinda a non-issue and this article is mostly targeted at home users, not businesses. You can tell that just by how its written.
 
ep0x73 said:
Why would it if you have a current AV's? that's their job.

I run avast and MWB.

XP does everything I need it to and it gets along great with my board and I have it set up just as I like it.

I have not had a blue screen in years.

Plus I have a few programs I cannot transfer.

I have a copy of 7 pro, just don't feel like installing everything all over again right now.
Click to expand...

Easy, because many hackers are sitting on exploits they don't want to use until they know they aren't going to get fixed by MS. Once the end comes, exploits are going to arrive like mad. On top of that, many exploits come in below the Anti-virus radar on XP, slipping in and disabling or hiding from any current anti-virus program. XP was designed with many things going on that escape the notice of anti-virus programs, and new viruses and malware can certainly take advantage of that. Also, XP's network structure has so many holes it makes swiss cheese look solid. There are many hacks that can get through Windows XP's firewall without the user doing anything.

That's why Windows Vista introduced the User Access Control, to bring things up that would normally escape a virus scan. Windows 7 and 8 tuned it down a bit because of user complaints. There are also many changes in the firewall and network structure that can prevent hacks and exploits as well. The newer OSes are far more protected on the network side, and nothing has been shown to get through without at least some user interaction.

If you keep running Windows XP, you will get viruses and malware, guaranteed. I'd say likely within 3 months. If not, then at the very least within a year. Your credit card and checking account info will get stolen and used, your phone number will be sold to telemarketers, and your personal info will be out there for a hacker to apply for credit cards in your name. If you really want to keep Windows XP, sign up for LifeLock. :)
 
blood said:
Wonder who are these customers staying at Windows XP. Was at an American Airlines terminal. All the ticketing machines rebooted at the same time, and behold the good old windows xp start screen. Good luck to microsoft for trying to get these customers to switch. The machines still serve their intended function just fine.
Click to expand...

XP Embedded is good to 2016. If it's POSReady 2009, which also looks like XP except for a few logo changes they have to 2019. It's also is worth noting most of these have licenses that expire a year or two after support ends. They won't be around forever.
 
I don't get why everyone here ignores www.classicshell.net
Honestly, there needs to be a stickied article about it on all tech sites at this point since sooo many just don't know.
Saying a Mac is better than 8.1 with Classic Shell? Fuck you article. Bad advice indeed.

I believe the reasons people stick with XP do not just include "because it already works", but also something almost every writer overlooks; "The interface is just plain better!"
This doesn't just include the wireless internet setup, or the start menu, or the control panel, or the network options, but random things like the default picture viewer as well (which is capable of playing animated GIF's when Windows Vista/7/8 all can't).

If you're running Windows 7, and even Windows 8...you're still putting up with the retarded, brain dead interface and layout changes that Microsoft has been uncomfortably cramming down our throats since 2006. Except now it's only getting worse because of Metro. (though Metro is at least completely avoidable)

Finally, I'd like to point out that if Microsoft were smart, it's time for them to announce development of Windows XP 2.
Which would feature a return of the familiar, user friendly, interface and layouts of all those things. People aren't sticking to XP because of Luna. Plex was worlds better, if you're still running Windows XP, chances are you're using a hacked uxtheme file, and maybe you're even running PlexRemix. It looks a hell of a lot more modern and easy on the eyes than Aero does in Windows 7.
 
If you are still using XP because you are either a cheapskate or don't feel you need anything more, nothing will convince you. Let ignorance console you at night when the inevitable bad thing happens to you.
Click to expand...

And here is a guy who has his finger right on the pulse of the problem but doesn't get the correct prognosis.

You guys need to face it, there are people out there that don't actually do anything important with their computers, it just a reference tool that they barely know how to use. They bought it because "everyone has one" and they never really learned anything beyond how to use a browser, which they don't even know it's called a browser. They don't want to spend more money on it because it is not worth it to them. They never bought anything online, don't do banking online, may not even use email, and if they can check the quick-pick wins or keep up with www.nascar.com and see the race schedule and read some storys, well that's all they ever did with it and it still does that, at 14K sqweee-weee-pong-sqweee-weeeeeeee-woo-bee-beep.

They don't want to spend any money and they are going to use it until it dies and then maybe they will buy another one, maybe.
 
B00nie said:
Friends advice friends to stay away from people like you!
Click to expand...


Nah I agree with him.

Running a Mac is just a bad idea for anyone.

It's a company with a poor track record for patching known 0-day exploits. They are very cavalier about security, instead hiding behind their reality distortion field claiming macs are not vulnerable...

Furthermore, the cost for what you get is absolutely INSANE, and with their modern practices of soldering ram to motherboards and limiting upgrades, you'll be forced to spend that same insane amount of money to upgrade again, sooner than you would have to if you could just upgrade.

If people care about software compatibility, Macs are also a problem. Sure there is more software than on Linux, but nowhere near the universal offerings for the Windows platform.


Don't get me wrong. I am not a Windows fan. I'm just saying OSX is NOT the answer. Anyone who takes advice to go out and buy a Mac without very specific mac based requirements is simply following bad advice.

Windows has its problems, but most of them are in its past. It's more stable and secure than it has ever been. Sure there are larger numbers of exploits that come out for Windows than for OSX, but these days that is primarily because it is a larger target base than other operating systems, not because of any inherent flaws. And when exploits are discovered, Microsoft is MUCH better at patching them than Apple is. Apple tend to just stick their fingers in their ears and s cream LALALALALALALA for several months before fixing serious security issues.

It is my strong opinion that no person well informed about computers can with a clean conscience recommend macs to latyman friends and family. It is simply terrible advice.
 
PimpUigi said:
I don't get why everyone here ignores www.classicshell.net
Honestly, there needs to be a stickied article about it on all tech sites at this point since sooo many just don't know.
Saying a Mac is better than 8.1 with Classic Shell? Fuck you article. Bad advice indeed.

I believe the reasons people stick with XP do not just include "because it already works", but also something almost every writer overlooks; "The interface is just plain better!"
This doesn't just include the wireless internet setup, or the start menu, or the control panel, or the network options, but random things like the default picture viewer as well (which is capable of playing animated GIF's when Windows Vista/7/8 all can't).

If you're running Windows 7, and even Windows 8...you're still putting up with the retarded, brain dead interface and layout changes that Microsoft has been uncomfortably cramming down our throats since 2006. Except now it's only getting worse because of Metro. (though Metro is at least completely avoidable)

Finally, I'd like to point out that if Microsoft were smart, it's time for them to announce development of Windows XP 2.
Which would feature a return of the familiar, user friendly, interface and layouts of all those things. People aren't sticking to XP because of Luna. Plex was worlds better, if you're still running Windows XP, chances are you're using a hacked uxtheme file, and maybe you're even running PlexRemix. It looks a hell of a lot more modern and easy on the eyes than Aero does in Windows 7.
Click to expand...

Sorry but Windows XP is incredibly dated and fugly as hell. It was a good OS in its time, but the UI always sucked balls. Tacky hacked themes are nothing but the equivalent of a coat of paint on a turd.. and the bottom line remains that if you're running XP in this day and age, you better not be connected to the internet.
 
Better idea #1: Upgrade to Windows 7
Click to expand...

Unless the motherboard mfr. doesn't have Vista/Win 7 drivers for the chipset running on the motherboard.

Some of these "consumer types" who think they know about computers because they can slap together a spreadsheet and do e-mail are in for a rude awakening.
 
blood said:
Wonder who are these customers staying at Windows XP. Was at an American Airlines terminal. All the ticketing machines rebooted at the same time, and behold the good old windows xp start screen. Good luck to microsoft for trying to get these customers to switch. The machines still serve their intended function just fine.
Click to expand...

Fortunately for most of these companies they are running Windows XP embedded or Windows Embedded Standard 2009, both of which have longer shelf lifes than Win XP. Win XP Embedded also doesn't handle patches the same way the rest of the world does. They have large patch rollups that can be installed. The new embedded OS like WES 7 is much more compatible with the workstation variant and uses the same patches as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top