It's Windows XP's 20th Birthday and Way Too Many Still Use It (bleepingcomputer.com) 130
Today is the 20th anniversary of Windows XP, and although the operating system reached the end of support in 2014, way too many people continue to use the insecure version of Windows. BleepingComputer reports: Windows XP was released on October 25, 2001, and is considered one of the most loved versions of Windows due to its ease of use, fast performance, and stability. Today, after Microsoft has released Windows 7, 8, 10, and 11, a small but respectable number of people are still using the old operating system. This continued usage is a testament to its success but also raises concerns regarding its lack of security. [...] According to StatCounter, the percentage of Windows users using the XP version of the OS in September 2021 is 0.59%, a significant number when you consider how many Windows systems are deployed worldwide. One very notable case is that of Armenia, where Windows XP is the most popular OS, enjoying a share of 53.5% among Windows users.
Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, with extended support lasting another five years. This means that anyone still running Windows XP has not received support from Microsoft for roughly 7.5 years now, including almost all security updates and fixes for vulnerabilities that may have been discovered. That's a massive amount of time in tech and more than enough to render the operating system a security nightmare with likely a large number of unpatched vulnerabilities. While Microsoft has backported fixes for some of the more serious vulnerabilities in Windows XP, such as EternalBlue and BlueKeep, there are many more vulnerabilities that threat actors could exploit. This makes connecting a Windows XP device to the Internet a risky proposition and why all security professionals recommend users upgrade to a supported version of Windows.
Mainstream support for Windows XP ended on April 14, 2009, with extended support lasting another five years. This means that anyone still running Windows XP has not received support from Microsoft for roughly 7.5 years now, including almost all security updates and fixes for vulnerabilities that may have been discovered. That's a massive amount of time in tech and more than enough to render the operating system a security nightmare with likely a large number of unpatched vulnerabilities. While Microsoft has backported fixes for some of the more serious vulnerabilities in Windows XP, such as EternalBlue and BlueKeep, there are many more vulnerabilities that threat actors could exploit. This makes connecting a Windows XP device to the Internet a risky proposition and why all security professionals recommend users upgrade to a supported version of Windows.
Just the right amount (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems to me that exactly the right amount of people are using it.
They are the self-selected individuals for which it best serves their needs at this point in time. Who is anyone else to say otherwise?
Re:Just the right amount (Score:5, Interesting)
There are many reasons for using an old OS. I worked at a lab that had a really expensive system for analyzing comet assays. The software was tied to Windows 95. There was no way to use the assay system with Windows XP, so many years after Win95 was retired, that dedicated computer had to use Win95. I have an expensive microscope camera that barely works with Windows 7 (it was made for XP and they never made drivers for anything above Vista). So that computer is going to be a Windows 7 computer until the camera is retired. This is also a testament to the longevity of some older computers. I have one 20 year old computer here that I keep just for fun, to see how long it will last. It is running Windows 7 and I have no intention of upgrading it to Windows 10.
Re:Just the right amount (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup.. I've got two perfectly good Windows XP machines here which run like champs. They're both connected to various bits of hardware (mostly music related) which don't have drivers post XP. They're allowed on my LAN but are blocked from the internet by firewall rules.
Do I care they're "unsupported" ? Not in the slightest. I've got disk images (courtesy of Linux dd), the original OS CDs, all the service packs, program install packages, patches etc. backed up and even have spare motherboards, CPUs and RAM should anything die. They do exactly what they need to do *really* well and are good tools to have available. Hell I've still got an ATARI 1040 STFM for MIDI only work.
I've also still got some of my grandfathers tools in the garage which date from around 1940 and they still function properly. Why should computers be any different ? If they still run, and do what you need, keep using them.
Some of us don't give a rats ass about the latest and greatest, don't give a shit about "social" networking (advertiser led stalking) and all the modern crap that gets forced on you by the "operating system". In fact the older I get the more I find that most of the "upgrades" and "improvements" made to GUIs. OSs etc. actually seem to consist of things being dumbed down with all the useful features being taken away and replaced by crap which tries to hide what it's actually doing. Or someone deciodes to "reinvent the wheel"... badly. Because they clearly have no fucking clue how the useful, old, program worked.
And don't get me started on all the good UI desgins being replaced by "phone" style interfaces which are total unusable garbage, designed for out and out morons.
Personally I think that Windows peaked at 7 and has been slowly turning into an unusable. dumbed down, spyware riddled, pile of shit since then.
Re: Just the right amount (Score:3)
I also see cases where the lack of drivers is why you can't upgrade.
In some cases it's because nobody dares to touch an old system that works though because the person that did set it up has retired and nobody else knows how it works on the inside.
At work we have a few. Most prominent is a presentation screen which just works and the secretary knows hoe to update the info on it but not much more.
Re: (Score:2)
At work we have a few. Most prominent is a presentation screen which just works and the secretary knows hoe to update the info on it but not much more.
Stop calling the secretary a hoe!
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like they did to Firefox?
Re: (Score:2)
How does the hardware connect to the computers? You might find an easier time managing the systems if you switched to a virtualized environment, if the connection can be upgraded to something a modern computer could use. My guess since you said music hardware is that it is MIDI, which looks like has been brought into the USB age, so it might virtualize pretty well, then you can upgrade the hardware, and get more performance, while still using the older version of Windows.
Re: Just the right amount (Score:3)
Amiga OS was recently updated.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're the biggest joke on the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Your database is a disaster
You're waxing your modem, tryin to make it go faster
Re: (Score:2)
Got a flat-screen monitor forty inches wide wide
I believe yours says "Etch-a-Scetch" on the side
Re: (Score:3)
What amazes me is that from Windows 3.1 through Windows 10, cold-boot times have been about the same, despite SSDs, faster CPUs and memory, etc. It's an empirical proof of Gates's Law (Corollary to Moore's Law): "Software speed is halved every 18 months." The bigger and faster the hardware gets, the more software bloat uses up those additional resources.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
One of my last customers while I still worked for a security installer was running their AMAG security system on a Win95 box with no CD reader or burner, no NIC (all serial connections to the controllers), and a failed floppy drive controller. They hadn't turned it off for at least 8 years because they weren't sure it would ever come up again. I tried everything I could to get a backup of the database and had to give up. When a power outage shut off the machine a year later (no UPS either, of course) the
Re: (Score:2)
It had an ancient Windows '95 (not '98) PC running the plant. I asked about backup in case of failure and the operating staff showed me the operating manual with a 5-1/4" floppy, saying that's the backup.
Let's just say it was a stack of floppies, that could actually hold the system. Unfortunately you would be pretty much guaranteed to have a failure, because they would have been 1.2MB floppies, and those are literally the worst floppies there are (5.25" DSHD that is.) The best floppies that are double-sided but not vinyl-sized are either 360kB 5.25" or 720kB 3.5", DSDD. They are best-suited to not lose data.
I usually had decent luck with high quality 3.5" DSHD floppies too. The low-quality ones were however
Re: Just the right amount (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a VMware cluster here at home and one of the VMs has Windows XP (I also have a Windows 98 and Windows 7 VM for no good reason other than I could do it). Anyway, it's because I have a perfectly good HP scanner that only works on XP and a perfectly good Sony Handicam that also only works on XP. Until I get tired of dealing with the hassle and bin these two perfectly good pieces of hardware, I'll keep running the XP VMs.
[John]
Re: (Score:2)
Nice FP and even a nicely suggestive Subject. Too bad the branch faltered.
I will add that I think Microsoft has missed an interesting business opportunity. How much would you pay to continue using Window XP?
XP was quite adequate for most of my needs, and if it was supported enough to be secure, then I'd still be using it on at least one machine, but possibly three or four of them. Actually, I am really hard-pressed to point at ANY new feature of a post-Windows-95 OS that really needed to be added at the OS
Re: (Score:2)
How much would you pay to continue using Window XP?
I'm not sure how much I'd pay - I guess that would depend on whether or not both new software and necessary upgrades for old software were still being written. That in turn would depend on how many people were willing to pay for continued XP maintenance and support to create an ecosystem big enough for application devs to continue devving.
Actually, I am really hard-pressed to point at ANY new feature of a post-Windows-95 OS that really needed to be added at the OS level.
I agree entirely. I think a lot of other people do as well. Computer GUI's probably peaked at around that time, and most 'innovations' past that point were in fact usability regressions.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
there are plenty of parties who have a vested interest in getting people off of archaic and dangerous OS's like windows 95. There's little to no telemetry baked into it, so MS isn't able to keep you safe from bad actors on the internet (nor keep track of what files/programs you use, to further enhance your computer experience). Further, without an enhanced ability to receive timely, relevant, and targeted advertisements, these poor lost souls are missing out on a great deal of advertising. And those are t
Re: (Score:2)
1+ Funny or
1+ Insightful...
Re: (Score:3)
Likely that most of the "users" are MRI machines, automated milling machines, and the like. When one spends $5 million on a piece of equipment they're not going to throw it away because the OS is no longer supported, and a lot of them can't use a newer OS because Win XP was much looser in permissions for hardware driver access than more modern versions. This is the same reason why there are still DOS and Win NT machines running sawmills and grain elevators.
Re: (Score:2)
Likely that most of the "users" are MRI machines, automated milling machines, and the like.
Machine tools can have a service life of at least 30 years. If you have a PC controlling a machine tool with some custom software, you will likely end up with a scrap machine if you can't run the software any more. It was not so long ago that a toolmaker friend of mine was running Windows 3.1, for that reason.
I recently had a customer from a previous business of mine come to me for help, because a PC-driven test jig at the contract assembler had gone wrong. This was running an old version of Linux. I can't
Re: (Score:2)
And we wonder why so many hospitals are getting hit with ransomware. Turns out they have ancient machines with decades old vulnerabilities on their networks.
Re: (Score:2)
And we wonder why so many hospitals are getting hit with ransomware. Turns out they have ancient machines with decades old vulnerabilities on their networks.
That rather makes the point for continuing to improve and secure older OS's such as XP rather than reinventing them into new OS's. People and institutions keep XP because it serves their needs in ways that its replacements either can't, won't, or make far, far too expensive. And yes, the subsequent security breaches end up costing even more - but both humans and our institutions suck at accepting that reality.
I think that if Microsoft had kept on with XP, extending and improving it while adding secure abstr
Re: (Score:2)
The argument can be made but unless someone is willing to pay for it, it won't happen. Windows or Linux.
If Microsoft have kept with XP then people would have moaned about compatibility, like they did when Vista came out. Those changes were necessary for security but broke stuff, and at least you could still run XP for old hardware that needed it.
Re: (Score:2)
In many of those apps security was never a consideration for the simple reason that the manufacturer never intended for the control machine to be networked. MRI and PET scanners in particular generate massive data files, and in the days of 10 megabit networks you would bring the entire hospital to its knees if you tried to transfer a 6 gig file across it, and that single machine would have filled up all the available data storage in no time. Instead they were designed to write the scan to a DVD that was a
FCKGW (Score:3, Funny)
FCKGW
Re: (Score:2)
RHQQ2
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
QWERTY!
I still use it. (Score:3)
It's on a machine that's not connected to the internet, but is connected to a 25-year-old Canon inkjet printer, for the very rare occasions when I need to print something.
Re: (Score:3)
Same. A buddy of mine bought an electron microscope. Of course the support computer runs XP.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am recalling right now how pleasing was process of slurping remains of the NT4 appliance's, we still use, dying HDD to reproduce operating replica. You can't expect that from your present SSD at all. A pile of leftover Compaq desktop boxes, still kept in the shed, is always there to serve what you might be missing for the challenge.
The box never reboots on its own, unlike modern Windows OS.
Re: (Score:2)
A buddy of mine bought an electron microscope.
Okay, I have some cool friends with some cool stuff, but that's another whole magnitude of cool.
I came close to buying a mass spectrometer once, which would have made me the cool friend, but several things didn't come together, like having a big enough space for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Disclaimer: IAAEM (I Am An Electron Microscopist). Or so it says on my business card.
The used market for SEM's and TEM's makes hobbyist ownership very possible. The instruments from the mid-90's were computer integrated, sure, running NT and later XP, but most of the manufacturers still had a 1970's mentality. Meaning: the instruments shipped with several dozen pounds of paper manuals, troubleshooting guides, full schematics, the boards were though-hole, etc.... These are very capable machines even nowaday
Re: (Score:2)
Just curious - is the occasional use of sulphur hexafluoride because of its ability to suppress high voltage arcing? I know it's used for that purpose in very expen$ive - and large - high-voltage power line circuit breakers.
Fun fact - SF6 is also among the worst possible greenhouse gases.
I always preferred (Score:5, Interesting)
Win NT 4.0 and Win 2k.
Yeah XP worked fine, better for some things (like wireless NICs) but Win 2k was (IMO natch) the best UI MS ever did.
XP was really Win2K with the Win98 UI stuff (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Old hardware that still works and cost a lot of money
In fact, good chance it costs peanuts, if somebody bothers to list it on eBay or similar. I get, you refer to repurchasing, but older units have that enormous deprecation to them.
Re: (Score:2)
I hung on to 98SE for many years. I had found the Auto-Patcher site, and they had you get at least 1 file from ME. It was fast and stable. I had found a USB 2.0 card with drivers that worked. I don't remember having problems with USB anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. 2K was the best Windows ever.
Re: (Score:2)
And 2K was the last MS Windows (from the NT line anyway) without online activation! That held me back from XP for a very long while.
Especially as I only used Windows for very specific stuff that wouldn't run on/with Linux (looking at a Windows-only film/dia scanner).
Re: (Score:2)
I like Win2k a lot but unfortunately it's a bug laden mess. With WinXP the source is "available" but no such luck with Win2k. That said, Linux eliminates the need for Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Win NT 4.0 and Win 2k. Yeah XP worked fine, better for some things (like wireless NICs) but Win 2k was (IMO natch) the best UI MS ever did.
I liked 2k better as well, and I still run it occasionally in a VM for some software that it still adheres to the 8+3 filename restrictions. But I got along well with XP too, once I managed to dial back some of the 'prettiness'. I saw the writing on the wall at that point though - I jumped to Linux either before or around the time Win 7 was announced. Thankfully, I haven't had to use Windows on a regular basis since then.
not really surprised (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems what most people use a PC for is very un-intensive, just internet browsing and maybe opening a word doc every now and again. Meaning regardless of the marketing bullshit that Microsoft and all the hardware manufacturers try and sell you, old hardware still works fine for the average person.
Besides, does anyone actually prefer all the shovelware crap, obfuscation and tons of god-knows-what that Microsoft built into newer versions of windows?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's be real here. XP can't run a modern browser and the last Firefox/Chrome that will run isn't functional on today's internet. And MS Word, the best you are going to do is 32bit 2010, which is a relic
Re: not really surprised (Score:2)
Well, I wouldn't have any issues running old Word versions.
But I agree that for regular browsing there aren't many sites left to browse with an old browser now wirh https and javascript everywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Office 4.2 did everything that 90+ percent of users will ever need, and it ran on Win 3.1. The install was a pain in the ass though, you got up to Disk 9 before it asked for the license key, and if you input it wrong the install would fail and you'd have to start over.
Re: (Score:2)
I could go back to WordPerfect 6, and I don't think my wordprocessing experience would be impacted in any way. Excel is a different matter, as I do make extensive use of more modern features.
Re: (Score:2)
And MS Word, the best you are going to do is 32bit 2010, which is a relic
Modern versions of word will open documents produced by much older versions, so the incentives to upgrade for a casual user are extremely dubious.
For my part I still (mostly) use Office 2003, on a couple of Win X machines. Other than some trivial issues it generally works fine; documents format fine, save just fine, print fine (to pdf if necessary), and can (apparently) be read by those I email them to.
I confess I have been tempted to buy / upgrade to the current version but I'm still not sure I see the poi
Re: (Score:2)
It seems what most people use a PC for is very un-intensive, just internet browsing and maybe opening a word doc every now and again. Meaning regardless of the marketing bullshit that Microsoft and all the hardware manufacturers try and sell you, old hardware still works fine for the average person .
Besides, does anyone actually prefer all the shovelware crap, obfuscation and tons of god-knows-what that Microsoft built into newer versions of windows?
If the computer is used to browse the internet, it means that the computer is conected to the internet.
If the average person is using the computer, it means that sophisticated firewall rules, OS/SW Hardening and even decent antivirus are out of the question.
While the old hardware may still work. the old SW in general, and old OS in particular, do not work. At least, not for the Average Person you talk about
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah ... except the web browsers keep getting hungrier and hungrier at a stupidly alarming rate. The browser I'm typing this on currently occupies 11.6 GB of virtual storage. I have maybe 20-25 tabs open spanning three windows. Tell me WTF does it need nearly 12 GIGABYTES of storage to do that?
Back on topic -- an old bit of hardware just isn't going to support a contemporary browser. It isn't that the old hardware isn't perfectly capable of running a browser, it's that it can't run the current versions
Re: (Score:2)
The "just internet browsing" seems to the the limiting factor. The 2002 Mac Quicksilver can still do everything I actually need except for the internet browsing.
The 2009 mini, it's replacement, can still run a current version of Firefox for at least a little while. LibreOffice 6.something is almost up to date. The old Core 2 Duo just keeps plugging along. So I could use that for real work, and a tablet to prowl the internet. The nice thing about a mini is it has no camera and no microphone. A step up in sec
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, this is where my professionally-non-glare iMac 2006 with OS/X 10.6.8 tanked at. There were Exchange 2FA issues for Mail client (horrible web interface for Outlook resolved this need satisfactory after going deep into text mode), also Cisco AnyConnect was enforced by corporation until out of support (shell level openconnect stood proudly for success there). But browsing is getting a stopper. Perhaps would throw $19.99 for one last Lion upgrade, this would pull another tier of browser releases up, yet
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft has been trying to ram features up the user's arse for decades now. Every time a new version of Windows comes out there are a bunch of new things enabled by default that nobody wants. After a while Microsoft accepts that they failed yet again and removes them.
MSN, Cortana, widgets (twice), the "my" folders, XPS document format...
Some people are just 'cost adverse'. (Score:5, Insightful)
I literally had to cobble together 'new' workstations for a client because they needed to be able to run the 32-bit version of Windows XP or their 30 year old DOS software won't run on it. These same people refuse to learn how to use an XP VM because it is two extra clicks and that is just too much for them (yes, we tried). So, they spent hundreds of dollars more per machine for me to piece together turds with 4 GB of RAM out of NOS parts rather than get a new machine for less and learn new software. They got bought out two years later and we ended up upgrading all of their machines again as a condition of the sale. They literally wasted thousands of dollars, all told, and had to learn the new software anyway. Penny wise, pound foolish.
Re: (Score:2)
If its DOS software then wouldn't dosbox be a way to run it on a modern system?
Re: Some people are just 'cost adverse'. (Score:2)
Only in some cases, try programming some older Motorola radios using anything other than DOS on a machine not faster than 233 MHz.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sometimes it's that. Sometimes the new version of the old software they're using has been ruined by a series of 'improvements' and the vendor won't sell a new license for the old version. Sometimes the software and drivers are needed to run a very expensive piece of equipment and there are no new drivers. Sometimes the old custom software depended on features of the old compiler that were removed in versions that will run on newer systems because "nobody needs that", so any 'update' would be an expensive co
Re: (Score:2)
What is missing from this story is what the software upgrade cost. It could have been far more than the occasional expensive hardware upgrades. Maybe the cash became available after the takeover. It could have been that the client was taken over because they were short of cash, which would lead to short-term penny-pinching.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a lie, any super specific piece of DOS software is probably some weird piece of software for some weird piece of custom/unique hardware and XP wouldn't give it the lowlevel rights needed to run and talk to the hardware.
It could also be something like an elaborate and expensive business application running under dBase for DOS. That wouldn't involve exotic hardware nor need low-level hardware access.
Re: (Score:2)
Which means it would run in Wine or as a VM without much issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As I explained, we tried the VM running in Windows 10 as a test and they didn't like it. They hated having to switch between old school Windows XP looking windows and Windows 10 apps because it looked different and it took extra clicks. They also hated the interface of Windows 10. They weren't happy and they were paying us to be happy, not for us to be right, so we did what they wanted. Hell as I s
What do you mean "the insecure version" (Score:2)
they all are and now work far more for the company than for you than ever.
scientific instruments (Score:2)
My company has several older, but perfectly functional, scientific instruments that attach to Windows XP computers. We don't use these instruments everyday, and they cost 6 figures or more to replace. I'd love to dump XP but I'm strapped to it. We no longer connect XP to the network and it works just fine. I do have to ebay parts once in a while to keep it all going. Sucks but it works.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel your pain daily.
I work at a university repairing lab equipment and instruments. I still have a few that I work on that are using embedded or standalone computers running DOS. Win 2k still lives on here and XP is very common for them. Like you, we keep them off the network, Far too often, the attitude of manufacturers toward older instruments is "buy our new model" rather than do any upgrades in software so that it can run on newer computers. Never mind that a replacement would cost a half million in
Re: (Score:2)
See it as an appliance. Once off-net, it is all beauty and security you need.
I am sad to recall backup classic DataProtector software - have happily used that grade of industrial software for well over decade under older Windows Server, but product was passed to current legacy maintainer company, where some folks decided to make it better. It hurts to see Windows application collapsing every now and then on basic Server OS release of today. Hoped for next releases to be better - lately they can't even upgra
Runs well without Internet. (Score:3, Interesting)
Blame Microsoft! (Score:3)
Why dump on the users? It's Microsoft that cut them off security upgrades.
Ford doesn't control when your car wears out, why should Microsoft be able to generate sales by dropping support for their products?
Re: (Score:2)
How long does Ford ow you something, past sale?
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone support a 20 year old version of their software?
Maybe Hyperion with Amiga OS. I don't think any Linux distros have LTS versions that old, and even if they did the kernel is way out of support now anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Release the copyright on XP and let the community handle it.
They don't sell or support XP anymore, they should lose the copyright on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Ford may not control when your car wears out but Microsoft also doesn't control when your computer wears out.
Ford does control when they stop producing replacement parts though.
How long does Ford need to provide free software updates for their cars? In most cases once the car is out of warranty you have to pay for the updates. I have no idea how long Ford will continue to even produce software updates. I'll get back to you in 10-15 years and see if they are better than Microsoft on that front.
Still see a few machines a year of that vintage (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm at a university, so I see this all the time. Many of the research instruments I work on were gotten from specifically written grants and it's nearly impossible to get a grant to replace it unless the new machine enables new capabilities. The grants process is often so competitive that just keeping your research happening isn't enough. You have to justify it with new capabilities and providing service to other research groups. That's a tall order, even when it's a machine that's crucial to your work.
And
Re: Still see a few machines a year of that vintag (Score:2)
0.59% is significant (Score:2)
Slashdot 2041: Way Too Many People Still Using Win (Score:2)
I suspect I'll be one of them...
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect I'll be one of them...
I won't.
I switched to Linux years ago :)
{ducks!}
Re: (Score:2)
"Too many still use it" (Score:3)
Maybe because it works for them, and they don't want or need the twinkletwat cruft and telemetery that infests all later consumer OSes?
Sometimes you have no choice. (Score:3)
We purchased several pieces of expensive lab equipment about 10 years ago which isn't "that long ago" given that they still work, do what we need them to, and would cost tens of thousands of dollars each to replace. Unfortunately they run windows XP as their built-in OS. There is no way to upgrade them (the vendor has no plans to provide updated software) so we are stuck using XP. It drives our IT department crazy as we need them on the network (to collect data) but they are out of support. They keep asking if we can stop using them and we tell them if they give use half a million dollars to replace them we will. We're still using them....
Re: (Score:2)
IT here in a lab environment.
We have similar (gene sequencers) and the solution was simply to firewall off the XP systems.
They can run about inside the network, but no going outside the firewall.
Solves the issue and makes everyone happy.
Did you ever notice... (Score:2)
XP just needs a good web browser (Score:2)
I'd still be using XP today if there was an up to date Firefox for it. Best UI Microsoft ever released (though 7 comes close and even surpasses it in some ways). Insult me for wanting to use an "insecure" OS all you want, but don't you dare claim that the newer Windows releases are actually more pleasant to use!
People forget... (Score:2)
Simple reason (Score:2)
Why are they still using XP?
Because it's world's better than Windows 10, 8, 8.1, 7, and Vista.
It doesn't constantly move things around and reset your preferred programs all the time.
It doesn't spy on you and advertise at you.
It's not a bloated mess that M$ can change at will on you.
Updates (Score:2)
Many of thee XP installs are still getting security updates from Microsoft. You just have to pay them and they oblige. I imagine some of the biggest blocks of XP get this updates. If you are spending millions of dollars for XP updates, hopefully you are deploying them to tens of thousands of pcs and not just 1 or 2.
Virtual Machines, Disconnected PCs (Score:2)
Not to mention that WinXP has the last version of Paintbrush before it got Ribbonized.
The pros (Score:2)
The main advantage of Windows XP, besides old software compatibility issues, is that it's still usable for basic tasks on very old hardware, such as a Pentium 3-class PC with only 512MB of RAM. I kept one such PC until 2010.
Obligatory comment (Score:2)
I'm still using Windows 98SE, you insensitive clod!
I still use XP (Score:2)
I still use Windows XP to run an old (but very good) version of Quicken whose data is too old to migrate to newer Quicken. The computer running XP has no internet connection so I'm not worried about security. :)
Re: (Score:2)
MS wants to kill off 3+ year old hardware with 11 (Score:2)
I made the same argument on another thread and got scolded for spreading misinformation.
The dude had a point, though. There is a distinction between whether you can run Windows 11 on older hardware, whether you should run it on older hardware with MS threatening to pull the update-rug out from under you and yes, whether MS wants you to run Windows 11 on older hardware.