Location:
State:
Carrier
Country
Status

Windows 'Threshold' and cadence: How fast is too fast?


Microsoft continues its struggle to convince users to move from Windows XP to a newer platform, but it turns out that many actually prefer to wait before making upgrading due to the upcoming launch of the new Windows 9.

As you probably heard by now if you’re a Microsoft enthusiast, Windows 9 is very likely to debut in early 2015, which makes the move to Windows 8 the second choice for many users out there.
Read the rest:

Although I personally like Windows 8 now that I have it tweaked the way I want it, I can't blame business owners for waiting until Windows 9 is released before updating their systems.

I would have thought with Windows 7 still available that the Xp users would have switched to that already. In any case some people just will not want to upgrade from Xp to anything at this point. Why? There are likely as many reasons as there are individuals still using Xp I guess.

I would have thought with Windows 7 still available that the Xp users would have switched to that already. In any case some people just will not want to upgrade from Xp to anything at this point. Why? There are likely as many reasons as there are individuals still using Xp I guess.
The main reasons that I see for users not switching from XP is $$$ and if its not broke don't fix it.

The main reasons that I see for users not switching from XP is $$$ and if its not broke don't fix it.

+1... I agree on the money part. I'm getting a new PC in March so I know it will work with Windows 9. But I was going to get one some time soon anyway. And Xp works so why change.. makes sense as well.

I know a few friends that use XP and will likely keep using it until that PC dies. I've tried to explain what will happen when support ends but I get that deer caught in the headlights, glassed over eyes look.

Sorry, just cannot feel sorry for those who are still using XP. The money thing is just a dumb excuse that is no longer a good excuse since Win 7 four years ago was put out for only $40.00 per copy, and just two years ago you could get windows 8 for the same price. So cost is just a poor excuse. And, now they will have to either buy a new computer ($400.00 or more), or spend $200.00 for a copy of Winodws 7 or 8.

I think the issue is the cost of new hardware vs the cost of the new OS. My guess is that the people still using XP just have a very basic PC and it's not likely to support anything higher than XP.

I think the issue is the cost of new hardware vs the cost of the new OS. My guess is that the people still using XP just have a very basic PC and it's not likely to support anything higher than XP.
Exactly, that's the scenario for the ones I know. Just you basic el cheapo Dell, etc. Onboard graphics with no PCIe slot or AGP slot for that matter. 512 megs of RAM, etc.

I know a few friends that use XP and will likely keep using it until that PC dies. I've tried to explain what will happen when support ends but I get that deer caught in the headlights, glassed over eyes look.
Well, XP users will have to get creative, like the 2000 Professional users have.

I did but got tired of all the fiddling so moved to XP SP3 rather late in the game.
Not sure on the possibilities though, using modified kernels from Win7 as well as the APIs. NT6.1 is a different animal from NT5.1 where they could modify kernels to work in 2000.


Sorry, just cannot feel sorry for those who are still using XP. The money thing is just a dumb excuse that is no longer a good excuse since Win 7 four years ago was put out for only $40.00 per copy,
In what universe? I never saw prices that low in the area where I live. :-(
Though the one I'm using was a birthday gift, used finally when this workstation was built.

Windows 'Threshold' and cadence: How fast is too fast?