

Windows xp is way outdated, why do people still use it anyway (well, some programs need windows xp just like some need windows 3.1)

XP is just a malware magnet. There are known exploits in it EVERYWHERE.Because without any real hassle it goes on the internet, plays videos/music, manages phones/media players and such like, types documents/office stuff, can open pictures from a camera and fires things across to the printer which is all 90% of people do? That and a lot of stuff is coded badly and needs Windows XP but you already mentioned that.

And where do you see these resource sucking PC's? I never even had Vista go over 2.5GB.I see craploads of PCs with 4GBs of RAM on them having WinXP which just uses 3GBs (wasting one perfectly good GB of RAM) just because "hurr, but XP roxxx". Then they get their PC invaded by malware and viruses and have to re-format once a month

People opening 25 tabs in Firefox while listening to music on YoutubeAnd where do you see these resource sucking PC's? I never even had Vista go over 2.5GB.

So that's not really XP. Any OS would do that long before reaching 25 tabs.People opening 25 tabs in Firefox while listening to music on Youtube![]()

Meh, still not a good reason to stay on an insecure, old, resource-wasting OS.So that's not really XP. Any OS would do that long before reaching 25 tabs.

Honestly, I liked Vista POST-SP1* a lot, and would probably take that over XP now.Meh, still not a good reason to stay on an insecure, old, resource-wasting OS.
IIRC the later versions of Ubuntu have a full screen start menu as well...Sticking with Ubuntu until Windows 9.

Example of when this happened before please? In the past it's always been up to hacks and third party apps to restore old functionality.And history repeats itself once again..
Seriously.. Ths is the -same- thing every new release... 3.1 to 95.. 95 to XP, XP to Vista, Or Xp to 7... same damn shit... different names.
I could probably go find an article from 95 to XP and copy it word for word, except change it to 7 and 8... and it would be the exact same as you see in any new article.
Switching desktop manager in Ubuntu is a whole lot easier than in Windows though.IIRC the later versions of Ubuntu have a full screen start menu as well...

Indeed, I remember when first switching from 98 to XP, BSODs everywhere. I didn't actually touch XP before SP1, IIRC.And history repeats itself once again..
Seriously.. Ths is the -same- thing every new release... 3.1 to 95.. 95 to XP, XP to Vista, Or Xp to 7... same damn shit... different names.
I could probably go find an article from 95 to XP and copy it word for word, except change it to 7 and 8... and it would be the exact same as you see in any new article.

That's got nothing to do with the article though. I don't think he even read it.Indeed, I remember when first switching from 98 to XP, BSODs everywhere. I didn't actually touch XP before SP1, IIRC.

Well, yeah. True. But it's kinda on-topic since he's talking about how everyone trashes a new OS just because it's the new one (which is terribly on-topic, reading the reactions in the past three pages).That's got nothing to do with the article though. I don't think he even read it.

He said he could find an old article, swap the Windows versions, and match it up word for word.Well, yeah. True. But it's kinda on-topic since he's talking about how everyone trashes a new OS just because it's the new one (which is terribly on-topic, reading the reactions in the past three pages).


Everybody loves a threesome.or maybe people want a trio-os (trios ?) w/ windows, linux and android?




