Windows XP still in use on millions of machines

[anuseems]

Use still high despite endless warnings

From V3:

Data from Netmarketshare shows that the user base for XP was 16.94 percent at the end of March. This compares with 58 percent for Windows 7, which remains by far the most popular Microsoft operating system in use.

However, more notably, the Windows XP user base is higher than that of Windows 8.1 at 10.55 percent, and Windows 8 at 3.52 percent. Even combined, the Windows 8 user base is still lower than that of Windows XP.

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2402943/windows-xp-still-in-use-on-millions-of-machines

[banned]

Netmarketshare probably didn't consider the millions of additional XP machines that aren't actively browsing the net.

But Windows is Windows. Check e-mail, create an Excel spreadsheet. It works.

Micro$oft still patches Windows XP behind the scenes, which just goes to show how slimy they are for killing mainstream support.

[clubhouse]

They're probably used by corporations for intranet only.

[CPowell46]

I intend to continue using XP indefinitely. No matter how much disk space and RAM I have available, I refuse to use an OS that is several times the size of XP but gives me not one thing I want that XP doesn't give me. True, Java 8 and Calibre 2.x can't be installed under XP...bur so what? Java 7 and Calibre 1.48 work perfectly well and will continue to work perfectly well.

And I'm still waiting for the Attack of the Hacker Hordes.

[funkyy]

I intend to continue using XP indefinitely. No matter how much disk space and RAM I have available, I refuse to use an OS that is several times the size of XP but gives me not one thing I want that XP doesn't give me. True, Java 8 and Calibre 2.x can't be installed under XP...bur so what? Java 7 and Calibre 1.48 work perfectly well and will continue to work perfectly well.

And I'm still waiting for the Attack of the Hacker Hordes.

Well said!! I thought I was the only one left!!!! Win XP rules!!!! :showoff: :showoff: :showoff: :lol:

[clubhouse]

Just pretend you're using Linux only....Gets you out of uncomfortable situations :lol:

[VileTouch]

I intend to continue using XP indefinitely. No matter how much disk space and RAM I have available, I refuse to use an OS that is several times the size of XP but gives me not one thing I want that XP doesn't give me. True, Java 8 and Calibre 2.x can't be installed under XP...bur so what? Java 7 and Calibre 1.48 work perfectly well and will continue to work perfectly well.

And I'm still waiting for the Attack of the Hacker Hordes.

yeah yeah, and use only usb 2.0, no more than 3gb ram, no more than 2 cores, no more than direct x 9 or .net framework 3.5 (you don't really know what that is for, so you don't need it right?) oh and firefox 3, and no more chrome either (yikes)

so, yeah, you do have the right to go the way of the dinosaurs if you really want, but... it's just sad.

[CPowell46]

Another less-than-rational poster.

[CPowell46]

Incidentally...I'm only guessing, but my guess is that if VileTouch were asked to write an Adams-Bashforth-Moulton subroutine, with user-specified order and with mop-up for both predictor and corrector, he would have some difficulty. I even wonder whether he would be able to make an intelligent choice between Encke's method and Lagrange's planetary equations.

[STEEL]

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

[VileTouch]

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

is that 64bit version? because that one is a totally different codebase than the main branch x86 XP pro. in that version some things do work, but some do not and probably never will. i'm interested though in your usb 3... but deep down inside there's this little voice screaming bullshit

no offense though. but please, share with us how did you got it to work? (full speed i suppose)

[Arizin]

I intend to continue using XP indefinitely. No matter how much disk space and RAM I have available, I refuse to use an OS that is several times the size of XP but gives me not one thing I want that XP doesn't give me. True, Java 8 and Calibre 2.x can't be installed under XP...bur so what? Java 7 and Calibre 1.48 work perfectly well and will continue to work perfectly well.

And I'm still waiting for the Attack of the Hacker Hordes.

You could upgrade to Windows 7 as it give much more than XP could give in terms of security updates , a more recent DirectX version. Heck W7 might outlive W8 & W8.1 from support by MS due to popular demand. I would love to see a computer showing off Windows 7 ten year from now and it will go down as one of the best operating systems ever produced.

[CPowell46]

Anzin,

I used 7 for quite a while before going back to XP. For purely subjective reasons, I just don't like 7. I've never installed any updates othere than service packs, and have never had any security problems at all. DirectX is not relevant to what I do (scientific programming). So my objection to what is, to me, bloat applies to 7 (and 8 (ugh!), Vista (double ugh!), and 10).

[CODYQX4]

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

is that 64bit version? because that one is a totally different codebase than the main branch x86 XP pro. in that version some things do work, but some do not and probably never will. i'm interested though in your usb 3... but deep down inside there's this little voice screaming bullshit

no offense though. but please, share with us how did you got it to work? (full speed i suppose)

You can actually add 3rd party USB 3 to XP, and use .NET 4.0 (not 4.5.X though, sadly). MTK runs on .NET 4.0 for Office 2010 XP users. I believe you have to add USB 3.0, even to Windows 7, via these drivers, because MS decided to stop doing SPs and couldn't be f***** to make/push these drivers themselves. Renesas drivers are what my VMs use of XP->7.

The latest Chrome and Firefox (for now) still run on XP. Some day they will stop being updated and they will plague us with pain just like IE 8 still does.

Though about the HW, just because XP will use it, doesn't mean it is optimal. XP wasn't designed to exploit things like multiple cores and SSDs to full potential. In fact, I find XP has the slowest OS install process on fast, modern hardware. 3-4 times slower than 7-10. Though the XP process sucked from day 1, makes sense some optimizations were made.

Still, that OS needs to die hard, regardless.

[VileTouch]

Anzin,

I used 7 for quite a while before going back to XP. For purely subjective reasons, I just don't like 7. I've never installed any updates othere than service packs, and have never had any security problems at all. DirectX is not relevant to what I do (scientific programming). So my objection to what is, to me, bloat applies to 7 (and 8 (ugh!), Vista (double ugh!), and 10).

maybe you are unaware of these things, so here , here , here and here but all that uses the DirectX SDK as a bridge to the CUDA engine.

so bloat? hardly. only to those who see it as "a thing for games"

[smallhagrid]

How lovely to see all these wonderful posts here:

I intend to continue using XP indefinitely. No matter how much disk space and RAM I have available, I refuse to use an OS that is several times the size of XP but gives me not one thing I want that XP doesn't give me. True, Java 8 and Calibre 2.x can't be installed under XP...bur so what? Java 7 and Calibre 1.48 work perfectly well and will continue to work perfectly well.

And I'm still waiting for the Attack of the Hacker Hordes.

I intend to continue using XP indefinitely. No matter how much disk space and RAM I have available, I refuse to use an OS that is several times the size of XP but gives me not one thing I want that XP doesn't give me. True, Java 8 and Calibre 2.x can't be installed under XP...bur so what? Java 7 and Calibre 1.48 work perfectly well and will continue to work perfectly well.

And I'm still waiting for the Attack of the Hacker Hordes.

Well said!! I thought I was the only one left!!!! Win XP rules!!!! :showoff: :showoff: :showoff: :lol:

Just pretend you're using Linux only....Gets you out of uncomfortable situations :lol:

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

Anzin,

I used 7 for quite a while before going back to XP. For purely subjective reasons, I just don't like 7. I've never installed any updates othere than service packs, and have never had any security problems at all. DirectX is not relevant to what I do (scientific programming). So my objection to what is, to me, bloat applies to 7 (and 8 (ugh!), Vista (double ugh!), and 10).

Like CPowell46, I have tried 7.

I now only have a tiny netbook with that OS that is only used for playing DVDs.

Sadly, it (like its poor brother veeester...), is just too microcephalic for my tolerance.

I'd rather use XP in a VM under Linux than any of the newer spewage that mikr0$0ft has managed to pawn off on the oblivious masses.

As with most things - this is a matter of taste and opinion - and these are just my opinions.

Give me the classic windows desktop with its non-lobotomized explorer and QT Tabbar over the trashed thing they replaced it with - anytime.

Files, good file management and hierarchical structure are all important parts of using a PC whether it be with Linux or ween-doze; only those who believe that apple still exists get to pretend to not need such skills and good tools.

[CPowell46]

CUDA Fortran works perfectly well under XP, although I haven't used it myself. (Yes, I use Fortan, like most other "dinosaurs" who do serious computational physics. Fortran may be a "dead language" to computer people, but to scientists and engineers, it's not only alive, it's in excellent health.)

[CPowell46]

I don't think I've mentioned it...my personal computer is an Acer AO722. It's all I need. I develop programs, I don't do "production" computing. And I've used an Atari 1040 to develop programs that were run on a Cray.

[VileTouch]

I don't think I've mentioned it...my personal computer is an Acer AO722. It's all I need. I develop programs, I don't do "production" computing. And I've used an Atari 1040 to develop programs that were run on a Cray.

your GPU

well, "perfectly" is a subjective term. perhaps your work has not gotten to a point that you can harness all of your computer's power. but i tell you this from the standpoint of having greatly surpassed anything that a dual core processor could offer. (currently using an i7 2600k for work [yes, production])

i'm surprised that cuda fortran would even start, let alone run "perfectly" but if you claim that's "all you need" then good for you :)

[STEEL]

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

is that 64bit version? because that one is a totally different codebase than the main branch x86 XP pro. in that version some things do work, but some do not and probably never will. i'm interested though in your usb 3... but deep down inside there's this little voice screaming bullshit

no offense though. but please, share with us how did you got it to work? (full speed i suppose)

:rolleyes: 32 Bit Bro. I Swear by my Master in Heaven. The 2/ USB 3.0 Ports works With adon Controller (Motherboard P7H55-M/USB3 ASUS EXTREME) The rest of the ports is USB 2.0.

Bought it in 2010. Never Looked back or any Problems :)

P7H55-M/USB3

• Overview
• Specifications
• Gallery
• Support

The most cost-effective USB 3.0 and SATA 6G solution for LGA 1156!

• Intel LGA1156 Platform / H55 Chipset
• ASUS Xtreme Design – Protect 3.0
• All Solid Capacitors
• GPU Boost – Instant iGPU Level Up
• Real-time O.C. Tools: Auto Tuning & TurboV
• USB 3.0 & SATA 6Gb/s Support

[STEEL]

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

is that 64bit version? because that one is a totally different codebase than the main branch x86 XP pro. in that version some things do work, but some do not and probably never will. i'm interested though in your usb 3... but deep down inside there's this little voice screaming bullshit

no offense though. but please, share with us how did you got it to work? (full speed i suppose)

You can actually add 3rd party USB 3 to XP, and use .NET 4.0 (not 4.5.X though, sadly). MTK runs on .NET 4.0 for Office 2010 XP users. I believe you have to add USB 3.0, even to Windows 7, via these drivers, because MS decided to stop doing SPs and couldn't be f***** to make/push these drivers themselves. Renesas drivers are what my VMs use of XP->7.

The latest Chrome and Firefox (for now) still run on XP. Some day they will stop being updated and they will plague us with pain just like IE 8 still does.

Though about the HW, just because XP will use it, doesn't mean it is optimal. XP wasn't designed to exploit things like multiple cores and SSDs to full potential. In fact, I find XP has the slowest OS install process on fast, modern hardware. 3-4 times slower than 7-10. Though the XP process sucked from day 1, makes sense some optimizations were made.

Still, that OS needs to die hard, regardless.

Agreed. I only use Current P.C. for Games, Fooling Around and DVD Transfers from Harddrives to Storrage Birds. But I tell U Brother, my Plan for my Next Update, will def. Invole the 7nm Intel indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs) Cpu.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/02/intel-forges-ahead-to-10nm-will-move-away-from-silicon-at-7nm/

[LeeSmithG]

I find it odd why M$ keep telling people how bad XP is.

So is smoking tobacco products, drinking alcohol or sexual intercourse without protection with an unfamiliar sexual partner.

But, the above, is still done by people.

I suggest M$ moves on and if the 'oldies' wish to catch all sorts of computer diseases, then so be it.

[anuseems]

Although Microsoft has ended official support for Windows XP in 2014, the operating system has a market share of 16.94 percent in March 2015. If you have to use Windows XP, whether at your school or workplace, you'll be glad to know that the Chrome browser will be supported for the platform until the end of the year.

From Windows Central:

Millions of people are still working on XP computers every day. We want those people to have the option to use a browser that's up-to-date and as safe as possible on an unsupported operating system. We previously announced that we'd keep supporting Chrome on Windows XP through 'at least' April 2015. It's April 2015 now, and we're extending that commitment. We will continue to provide regular updates and security patches to Chrome on XP through the end of 2015.

http://www.windowscentral.com/google-support-chrome-windows-xp-until-end-2015

[info999]

I use XP as a download machine, who cares about security ?

Nothing that a reinstallation can't fix, if its hacked

[VileTouch]

Well - Iam running Core i3 with Hyperthreading Enabled (3.4Ghz Stock Cooled), 3.5 Gigs Ram (total in Process), USB 3.0 (although Rears only) .net framework 4.0 {Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Extended} - and firefox 37.01, without any Problems on my X.P. Pro GasBurning P.C. :lol:

Unfortunately for you, a portion of the cryptographic functionality that exists in the .NET runtime is not available on windows xp even if you have the correct version of .NET installed. Functions not available include numerous SHA hashing algorithms and most of the CNG namespace classes.

edit: old thread, but thought it was worth it to include some missing info