Windows XP Still The Best

200motels

Windows XP in my humble opinion is still to this day the best O/S their is. Anyone else agree or disagree.

gouche

Disagree.

Lack of future support from Microsoft make it a very insecure OS to be using. Not to mention it's older than my two children put together.

SickBoy

200motels wrote: »

Windows XP in my humble opinion is still to this day the best O/S their is. Anyone else agree or disagree.

Windows XPs only downfall is memory expandability. In order to go x64 you have to use what is essentially Windows 2003 server and driver support is not robust enough for a home user OS, IMO.
Of course your going to miss out on features like DX11+, Internet Explorer 9+ and Media Player 10+ by staying on the XP platform, that will bring security issues into the equation.

Windows 7 is perfect.

Fysh

SickBoy wrote: »

Windows XPs only downfall is memory expandability. In order to go x64 you have to use what is essentially Windows 2003 server and driver support is not robust enough for a home user OS, IMO.
Of course your going to miss out on features like DX11+, Internet Explorer 9+ and Media Player 10+ by staying on the XP platform, that will bring security issues into the equation.

Windows 7 is perfect.

"Its only downfall is memory expandability?"

I disagree. It was fine for most of its life, but it's really showing its age at this point. Crap indexing, no TRIM support meaning that SSD usage is hampered compared to 7 or 8, limited PowerShell scripting support (and even that's non-native so it's not like you can deploy it out of the box).

7 has become the new standard for Windows, IMO, and will remain that for a while.

listermint

7 FTW

On the outside, yes. On the inside, no.

I much prefer the user interface in XP to any of the later versions. I don't use any of the bundled MS applications (WMP, IE, etc) so to me the OS is just a backend that I run my own applications on. With Windows 8, I felt like I had to butcher it to get it the way I wanted to, for example, by removing the Explorer ribbon and all of the Metro apps. In Windows 7 I was also using Classic Shell to re-implement some features that were removed from Explorer (though I didn't use the classic Start menu). I still hate the way Vista/7/8 handle file associations via the Default Programs applet.

On the inside it really shows its age now. No native AHCI support, no proper 64-bit support, no support for 4kB-aligned disks or TRIM on SSDs. If I could get an XP-style UI on the 6.2 kernel I'd be happy enough. :pac:

200motels

SickBoy wrote: »

Windows XPs only downfall is memory expandability. In order to go x64 you have to use what is essentially Windows 2003 server and driver support is not robust enough for a home user OS, IMO.
Of course your going to miss out on features like DX11+, Internet Explorer 9+ and Media Player 10+ by staying on the XP platform, that will bring security issues into the equation.

Windows 7 is perfect.

I have Windows 7 and it's an excellent O/S and the new Vista Windows 8 which is awful, I still use XP on an old PC and call me old fashioned but it's so easy to use, I know for security issues it's not as good as 7 which kinda makes me hypocritical but I like it as I remember when it came out a replaced the dreadful Millennium it was like a breath of fresh air.

wildefalcon

7 is good - solid stable, despite the junk I load on to it. Fast, too.

Looking forward to 9.

SickBoy

Fysh wrote: »

"Its only downfall is memory expandability?"

I disagree. It was fine for most of its life, but it's really showing its age at this point. Crap indexing, no TRIM support meaning that SSD usage is hampered compared to 7 or 8, limited PowerShell scripting support (and even that's non-native so it's not like you can deploy it out of the box).

7 has become the new standard for Windows, IMO, and will remain that for a while.

I did finish that sentence with "IMO".
Indexing, I alway turn it off.
TRIM isn't an issue unless you use SSD and if you use SSD in RAID then TRIM gets broke in Windows 7 anyway.
PowerShell scripting support, not an issue for me.

I did end my post with, "Windows 7 is perfect."

People could cut the OS to shreds if they wanted with technical flaws due to advancements in technology on a hardware and software level but for a lot of people it was(and still is) great.
If I could run my system with 12 gigs of RAM on Windows XP I think I would. Like Karsini said, when used as a backend OS for modern frontend applications it is a very productive platform.

Overheal

200motels wrote: »

Windows XP in my humble opinion is still to this day the best O/S their is. Anyone else agree or disagree.

You base that on what? Your opinion is not supported by any substance.

People could cut the OS to shreds if they wanted with technical flaws due to advancements in technology on a hardware and software level but for a lot of people it was(and still is) great.
If I could run my system with 12 gigs of RAM on Windows XP I think I would. Like Karsini said, when used as a backend OS for modern frontend applications it is a very productive platform.

For me Windows XP always had the problem of having awful networking tools (no native support for Wifi, being one of the most annoying parts of trying to refresh your OS install) and required liberal use of desktop space to plant shortcuts to places you needed to go frequently, or reorganizing your start-menu tree. Getting to things like the Calculator, Device Manager, etc. was always a multi-step process

Vista and 7 both brought far more powerful features to Start, and better networking tools to the table. with a few keystrokes you can pull up just about anything stored on the computer. Case and point I had no idea where I left a paper I wrote last year for English, I just knew it had the word Moses in it. It would have taken me quite a bit longer to find in XP, considering I had it under the filename giblets.docx for no apparent reason other than I thought it was an amusing word for a draft. It's even faster if I want to go to start and Add a printer, remove a program, check for updates, launch disk management, the event viewer, calcultor, resource monitor - theyre all about 10 keystrokes away from me instead of having to navigate through multiple clicks, hovers, clicks, right clicks, open this window, click this link to launch that window, etc.

8 Does this a little differently obviously, and it has its ups and downs, the downs being relearning it a smidge, the ups being the ability to run one search for pretty much anything.

How people think that XP UI was a productive way to interface with a computer (particularly in relation to newer versions of windows) will continue to baffle me.

The only thing I miss about XP was WMP10, but I've come to like 12. 11 was just awful.

Yakult

Still using XP. Prefer the look of it to 7 but no doubt its time to move on and I will do once I get the new rig going. XP has served me well and continuing to do so, will miss it!

P.s anyway to get 7 looking like XP?

200motels

Yakult wrote: »

Still using XP. Prefer the look of it to 7 but no doubt its time to move on and I will do once I get the new rig going. XP has served me well and continuing to do so, will miss it!

P.s anyway to get 7 looking like XP?

You could try windows blinds http://www.filehippo.com/download_windowblinds/

200motels

Overheal wrote: »

You base that on what? Your opinion is not supported by any substance.For me Windows XP always had the problem of having awful networking tools (no native support for Wifi, being one of the most annoying parts of trying to refresh your OS install) and required liberal use of desktop space to plant shortcuts to places you needed to go frequently, or reorganizing your start-menu tree. Getting to things like the Calculator, Device Manager, etc. was always a multi-step process

Vista and 7 both brought far more powerful features to Start, and better networking tools to the table. with a few keystrokes you can pull up just about anything stored on the computer. Case and point I had no idea where I left a paper I wrote last year for English, I just knew it had the word Moses in it. It would have taken me quite a bit longer to find in XP, considering I had it under the filename giblets.docx for no apparent reason other than I thought it was an amusing word for a draft. It's even faster if I want to go to start and Add a printer, remove a program, check for updates, launch disk management, the event viewer, calcultor, resource monitor - theyre all about 10 keystrokes away from me instead of having to navigate through multiple clicks, hovers, clicks, right clicks, open this window, click this link to launch that window, etc.

8 Does this a little differently obviously, and it has its ups and downs, the downs being relearning it a smidge, the ups being the ability to run one search for pretty much anything.

How people think that XP UI was a productive way to interface with a computer (particularly in relation to newer versions of windows) will continue to baffle me.

The only thing I miss about XP was WMP10, but I've come to like 12. 11 was just awful.

I believe you'll find that opinions matter, I've been using XP since 2001 so I think I know a little bit about it. Yes 7 is better at finding things but as I always label stuff I never seem to have the problem you had.

Overheal

200motels wrote: »

I believe you'll find that opinions matter, I've been using XP since 2001 so I think I know a little bit about it. Yes 7 is better at finding things but as I always label stuff I never seem to have the problem you had.

And? I used Windows 98 from 1998-2002, XP from 2002-2007+, Vista from 2007-2009, 7 from 2009-2012 and 8 from 2012. I know a little bit about all of them, so I don't understand the point you are trying to make. You still made no argument to support your opinion, which is no way to start a thread. It's about as useful as a thread about your favorite flavor of ice cream.

Irrespective of whatever you label your files, and where you gently and diligently place them, that's all simply busy work. It's also busy work having to organize your shortcuts and rearrange your Start tree to make it productive for the end user. The worst thing I have to do is link my Libraries to a handful of folders I keep off the main drive. As for my document finding its just one example. Another might be what if you filed all your customer's information on a file with their name, but all you had was their email address (contained within the file?) or a phone number? Ultimately I haven't had to waste far as much time having to digitally organize things that should already be organized for me.

Overheal

And there's this:

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9227490/Aged_Windows_XP_costs_5x_more_to_manage_than_Windows_7

One reason for the increased costs for supporting Windows XP is that it's typically running on older hardware that, independent of the OS, is more expensive to simply keep running.

The magic milestone is after the three-year mark, when "costs begin to accelerate" because of additional IT and help desk time, and increased user downtime due to more security woes and time spent rebooting, said IDC.

IT labor costs jump 25% during year four of a PC's lifespan, and another 29% in year five, IDC noted, while user productivity costs climb 23% in year four and jump 40% during year five. Total year five costs are a whopping 73% higher than support costs of a two-year-old client.

However, the operating system also plays a major role in the cost differences, said IDC, with XP more expensive to support in every category the research company surveyed.

Organizations reported that they spent 82% less time managing patches on Windows 7 systems than they did on Windows XP, 90% less time mitigating malware, and 84% less help desk time.

Benefits were also striking for Windows 7 users' productivity compared to XP. Windows 7 users wasted 94% less time rebooting their computers and lost 90% less time due to malware attacks.

200motels

Overheal wrote: »

And? I used Windows 98 from 1998-2002, XP from 2002-2007+, Vista from 2007-2009, 7 from 2009-2012 and 8 from 2012. I know a little bit about all of them, so I don't understand the point you are trying to make. You still made no argument to support your opinion, which is no way to start a thread. It's about as useful as a thread about your favorite flavor of ice cream.

Irrespective of whatever you label your files, and where you gently and diligently place them, that's all simply busy work. It's also busy work having to organize your shortcuts and rearrange your Start tree to make it productive for the end user. The worst thing I have to do is link my Libraries to a handful of folders I keep off the main drive. As for my document finding its just one example. Another might be what if you filed all your customer's information on a file with their name, but all you had was their email address (contained within the file?) or a phone number? Ultimately I haven't had to waste far as much time having to digitally organize things that should already be organized for me.

Okay then, XP uses less resourses than 7, it can play the older games I like which 7 can't, yes in the overall scheme of things 7 is probably a better O/S but I prefer XP, same way I prefer Strawberry icecream to Raspberry don't know why but there it is.

Fysh

"I prefer XP" is a much easier and less confrontational way of puting it than "XP is the best"

Certainly if you're on old hardware from the XP era, it'll probably run that bit better. Modern hardware will increasingly lack native support, which means more and more driver installations and potential compatibility issues.

I found the indexing in Xp and Vista to be a horrible system-punishing affair, but it's much improved in 7 and as a result it's possible to change to a working habit that makes more use of typing at the Start menu for searching. Similarly native TRIM support makes working on an SSD as your primary drive more practical, so you can get an even faster system (though RAID support depends on the controller you're using). The security model has also been fixed with UAC working reasonably well and increased network profile/lockdown options.

But all these arguments mainly make sense if you're looking at modern hardware.

I don't like the "search for everything, even if you already know where it is" mentality since Vista. With XP I could get away with not touching the keyboard at all - that's not the case now as you need to use keyboard shortcuts or searches to avoid tearing your hair out. I've never even touched Libraries either as I save all my data on a separate partition so don't see the point. The default system folders always seem to get filled with random rubbish (such as the craze of putting application data in My Documents) so I'd rather leave them alone.

But as I said already, the underlying system is very outdated so we have to move on regardless.

Fysh

Karsini wrote: »

I don't like the "search for everything, even if you already know where it is" mentality since Vista. With XP I could get away with not touching the keyboard at all - that's not the case now as you need to use keyboard shortcuts or searches to avoid tearing your hair out. I've never even touched Libraries either as I save all my data on a separate partition so don't see the point. The default system folders always seem to get filled with random rubbish (such as the craze of putting application data in My Documents) so I'd rather leave them alone.

But as I said already, the underlying system is very outdated so we have to move on regardless.

Ah, I'm the opposite - ever since that horrible Christmas where my mouse died and I knew it would be over a week before I could get a replacement, I've found I generally prefer the keyboard to mouse-oriented navigation, so I can see the value of the searching (I don't use it much, because the indexing in Vista was so system-intensive I mostly switched it off, but they've managed to tune it a lot better in 7). Libraries are a nice idea that would've made a lot more sense ten years ago, before you could buy a 2TB drive for a little over a hundred quid. Now they're kind of pointless, because you've generally got enough space that you don't end up with that "stuff all over the place" problem any more.

XP was an awful bastard for having developers stick files in random crap (not using the hidden Local Settings\Application Data for example) but also in a much more significant way for the sheer amount of software that just won't bloody work if you're not an administrator. Also, I used to really want to hurt people for the way that the root folder in which user profiles were stored is, by defaults, as stupidly named as "Documents and Settings". Why not call it Users? DOS/command-line friendly and shorter to boot.

juan.kerr

Windys 7 is where it's at.

Overheal

Karsini wrote: »

I've never even touched Libraries either as I save all my data on a separate partition so don't see the point.

Everything in my library is actually stored on other partitions; you dont need to store library files in C:\

minotour

Its probably not "Still the best" officially as demonstrated by a lot of the comments made already but i think for a certain generation it still holds strong as the one that finally worked.

For those of us who came up through 3.x, win95/NT/98.ME win2k etc, WinXP was the one that installed quickly and effiicently, it had good driver support (at the time) and it was/is reasonably stable.

I for one will have to be dragged kicking and screaming like a young Magneto from my beloved WinXp when they finally drop support.

GreenWolfe

Overheal wrote: »

For me Windows XP always had the problem of having awful networking tools (no native support for Wifi, being one of the most annoying parts of trying to refresh your OS install) and required liberal use of desktop space to plant shortcuts to places you needed to go frequently, or reorganizing your start-menu tree. Getting to things like the Calculator, Device Manager, etc. was always a multi-step process

Don't forget the lack of built-in SATA support. Another irritating thing about getting XP going on vaguely modern hardware unless you wanted your HDD running in IDE mode. Although it could be argued that if you're running XP you wouldn't really care about something like that anyways.

As for getting to the system utilities, I just memorised their names and typed them into Run. Even now if I want to get to the Device Manager, I'd type 'devmgmt.msc' into the Windows 7 start menu.

Overheal wrote: »

How people think that XP UI was a productive way to interface with a computer (particularly in relation to newer versions of windows) will continue to baffle me.

Probably because people are more used to going through menus and finding that Windows 7 buries them just a little deeper, instead of just typing them into Start.

XP was fine for its era, but it's time to move on.

Fysh

Oh god, XP's SATA/RAID support is the stuff of the Devil's own bumhole.

A while back I had to do a reinstall of a machine in a hurry, and for some reason only had access to XP SP0 media. I figured "How bad could it be? I'll just stick the SPs on a pendrive along with the drivers and software I need".

Turns out, very frigging bad indeed. Firstly because the drives were SATA (yay, USB floppy drive and that wonderful game of "bash F6 repeatedly then add each one of the several dozen possible SATA drivers that might be relevant for this motherboard"!) and secondly because XP didn't introduce native USB 2.0 support until SP1. So copying over SP1 via USB was slooooooooooooooooooooow.

This is the sort of stuff that makes me glad to have seen the back of XP. 11 years ago, it was the start of a decent replacement for Win2k, although I'd argue you couldn't use XP as a drop-in upgrade to replace Windows 2000 until mid-2004. Today, though? It's as relevant to contemporary tech and culture as your Walkman or Discman.

(That being said, those of you desperate to avoid moving away from the Windows XP paradigm should keep an eye on ReactOS - essentially it strives to be an open-source alterative implementation of the Win32 API underpinning XP. I've only tried it in a VM, but it looks promising so far, if positively ancient compared to 7 or 8).

seamus

Any OS which requires you to connect legacy hardware (FDD) in order to install it on modern hardware, is well past its sell-by date, tbh.

Yes, you can blend your own install disk for XP with all your drivers onboard, but I'm sure the same is true for Windows 98 if you put enough effort it.

Windows 2000 really was the first stable and predictable Windows OS and Windows XP was a relatively small increment from that.

It's an absolute credit to Windows XP that most people considered it good enough and relevant enough as an OS to continue installing and using it for nine years (until Win7), but that doesn't mean it remains the best. A classic, sure.

unkel

I like classic cars, even for occasional careful daily use. I do not like classic operating systems for daily use

Windows XP should be retired. Windows XP was good in its day, which is now a lifetime ago in terms of computing. Windows 7 was good in its day and is still ok today. Windows 8 is better, cheaper, quicker, smaller, more secure and more stable

Capt'n Midnight

EarthlyPangaea wrote: »

Don't forget the lack of built-in SATA support.
...
Probably because people are more used to going through menus and finding that Windows 7 buries them just a little deeper, instead of just typing them into Start.

XP was fine for its era, but it's time to move on.

Fysh wrote: »

Oh god, XP's SATA/RAID support is the stuff of the Devil's own bumhole.
....
(That being said, those of you desperate to avoid moving away from the Windows XP paradigm should keep an eye on ReactOS

seamus wrote: »

Yes, you can blend your own install disk for XP with all your drivers onboard, but I'm sure the same is true for Windows 98 if you put enough effort it.

SATA support can be slipstreamed / added in via sysprep
But the easiest way is to go into the BIOS and turn on legacy mode (name varies a lot) do the install and then install the SATA drivers.

I've found that settings and accessories move down a layer every second version of windows. Program manager in windows 3.x. Windows 7 - start - all programs - accessories - system tools - control panel - display - change display settings ( what is the longest way of getting to something in windows 7 ?? )

Windows 98 was great for hardware support in the sense that if you moved the drive to different hardware it was like an excited puppy "hey I found new hard ware !" a Brazillian times , but it would boot up and then you could install the drivers, very forgiving. With XP it was pretty much "Game Over" ( Unless you set it to std HDD controllers and std vga - must try that some time with an unattended script )

XP is still fine as a classic OS for use with legacy hardware, but internet connectivity is a problem in that you have to have a decent firewall, and use apps that are more secure in and of themselves - like locking down multimedia and links in Foxit instead of trying to keep adobe acrobat reader , and using firefox/noscript or chrome instead of IE

It reminds me of a guy who kept an old 386 for burning CD's on. His main computer was a pentium but the other one was nice and stable.

Must have a look at ReactOS again, but it's been in development forever and (at a guess) you could get most of the functionality using wine / sourcing replacement apps. ( still raging I missed the codeweavers give away a while back )

Fysh

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

SATA support can be slipstreamed / added in via sysprep
But the easiest way is to go into the BIOS and turn on legacy mode (name varies a lot) do the install and then install the SATA drivers.

Ah yeah, but come on - sysprep for anything outside of a BigCorp support environment is a pain in the hole and far more faffery than you should really have to deal with. If you reinstall so often that the time spent getting sysprep ready is a worthwhile investment, you're either not a home user or you're doing something very strange

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Windows 98 was great for hardware support in the sense that if you moved the drive to different hardware it was like an excited puppy "hey I found new hard ware !" a Brazillian times , but it would boot up and then you could install the drivers, very forgiving. With XP it was pretty much "Game Over" ( Unless you set it to std HDD controllers and std vga - must try that some time with an unattended script )

I've been helping a couple of our experimental users at work move their control installations that run on Win98 from dead hardware to other ancient but working hardware, and it's gas watching a 98 disk essentially say "Ah, brilliant! You've replaced every single part of me! Gimme a minute while I figure out what all this new stuff is..." as compared to the XP equivalent which is "AH! You changed the disk controller slightly! F U! STOP CODE 7B 4 EVA!".

I've been meaning to look into making a script for updating the device drivers to allow for maximum portability on an XP box, but ever since I discovered the Acronis TrueImage Universal Restore function it got relegated from "useful tool" to "interesting but not needed" in a work context.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Must have a look at ReactOS again, but it's been in development forever and (at a guess) you could get most of the functionality using wine / sourcing replacement apps. ( still raging I missed the codeweavers give away a while back )

I think it's still very much an in-development thing but let's be honest here, if someone's still clinging onto XP 11 years after it launched, they're not going to move away any time soon so I figure they'll probably still be around when it finally gets to some sort of final release status

I've managed to transfer XP installations to pretty much anything. The CriticalDeviceDatabase is your friend there. I won't say it's easy but I have it down to a tee these days. I've even done it with different HALs, for example moving from a PIC single core motherboard to an APIC dual core.

Re integrating SATA drivers, nLite is probably the easiest, albeit unofficial, way.

Fysh

Karsini wrote: »

I've managed to transfer XP installations to pretty much anything. The CriticalDeviceDatabase is your friend there. I won't say it's easy but I have it down to a tee these days. I've even done it with different HALs, for example moving from a PIC single core motherboard to an APIC dual core.

Re integrating SATA drivers, nLite is probably the easiest, albeit unofficial, way.

Please to be sharing your process for this in some form? I'm bullying my experimental users to pay for Acronis licences to backup & migrate their systems that require legacy OS/hardware, but it's never a bad thing to know alternative options for those cases where the old hardware's not bootable (so you can't run the migration utility).

Fysh

Fysh wrote: »

Please to be sharing your process for this in some form? I'm bullying my experimental users to pay for Acronis licences to backup & migrate their systems that require legacy OS/hardware, but it's never a bad thing to know alternative options for those cases where the old hardware's not bootable (so you can't run the migration utility).

Sure, here you go. Made this one for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_SDWTEOny0

That's the gist of it. I could have gone into doing RAID and AHCI controllers too but that's a little more complicated.