Damn XP is fast

TheRift

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
2,533
I installed SP3 about 2 months ago. I actually did feel a speed difference with SP3 on my XP. :) But about 3 weeks ago my RDP came up with an expiry warning, so I had to get the newer SP3. The newer SP3 was smaller in size. Has anyone noticed a little instability with the latest SP3?
 

Ekhaatvensters

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
7,247
I installed SP3 about 2 months ago. I actually did feel a speed difference with SP3 on my XP. :) But about 3 weeks ago my RDP came up with an expiry warning, so I had to get the newer SP3. The newer SP3 was smaller in size. Has anyone noticed a little instability with the latest SP3?

The latest one would be the final SP3, unless you installed another RC or Beta?
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,371
See that's why I say remember the early days of XP. Everyone hated it. Most of the industry swore blind that M$ would can it and that 2000 was going to remain the OS of choice.

As someone who used 2000 very little and came primarily from NT/Windows98/ME, XP was a huge improvement in STABILITY. Look NT and no doubt 2000 were stable enough but they had multimedia and hardware incompatibility problems. XP because the OS you could run games on (3D) and it had the 2K/NT foundations which albeit not as good as UNIX were much better than Win98's DOS foundations. So yeah for me XP was a huge wonder, it solved most of my problems all of a sudden my Win98 box became stable (without upgrading ram or hdd space). I didn't even notice much of a performance drop - in fact for the first time (outside of NT) I could see real multi-tasking,
ie doing something heavy didn't stop everything else. Sorry but Vista is not like that, it doesn't bring in any more stability and use, but it does drain resources terribly (it's slow). Jump from 16bit/32bit hybrid OS's (Win9x) to
XP was a quantum jump, the jump from XP 32/64 to Vista 32/64 is not.

Remember for cosumers, 98SE was the OS of choice. I used NT3.5 at university and Win98/ME at home.
Maybe many business users didn't need the extra bling of XP but for home users XP was IT! XP still
does all I want on this box, I can play games, run applications (surf, email, ps, word, excel, pp)
and Vista just doesn't offer me any extra incentives - what a prettier screen? Who cares about that?

Windows 2000 was not a consumer /home user OS. It was an enterprise/business OS. Maybe if I had the ability to purchase 2K easily and run my basic apps and games on it I would still be on 2K now. Suffice to say
although XP may be a little bloat over 2K, this is no EXCUSE to add even more bloat in the form of Vista.
Even by your own standards two wrongs do not make a right.
 
Last edited:

mancombseepgood

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
9,351
The hardware will catch up and they will drop support for XP... that's the way M$ usually make the users spend more money... observe the number of OEMs no longer offering XP on new hardware. Sure, you can beg for it, but the average joe will take what comes with the box. M$ get their sale and we end up moving backwards again with the speed cycle... when the hardware catches up, the latest M$ OS will be waiting in the wings to make them an extra buck.
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,371
The hardware will catch up and they will drop support for XP... that's the way M$ usually make the users spend more money... observe the number of OEMs no longer offering XP on new hardware. Sure, you can beg for it, but the average joe will take what comes with the box. M$ get their sale and we end up moving backwards again with the speed cycle... when the hardware catches up, the latest M$ OS will be waiting in the wings to make them an extra buck.

Maybe but this time around most businesses are sticking with previous versions of Windows and Office, while at the same time looking at opensource solutions (OpenOffice). Since Vista is genuinely a dud, most enterprise
users may wait till Win 7 comes along and skip Vista altogether. You know
there are many companies which still use 2K so keeping XP around longer is not such
an alien idea.

Remember current hardware still works well. Why upgrade a Pentium III, Athlon XP or Pentium 4 machines when they do everything you want them to do and fast enough too. We're not talking games here, we're talking spreadsheets, word processing, email, etc.
 
Last edited:

milomak

Honorary Master
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
12,571
I agree with PeterCH, as long as business does not install Vista then XP is still very relevant. and from a business perspective Vista offers nothing that XP does not have.
 

HavocXphere

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
33,155
What is that built in search function? A poorly designed clone of google desktop?
Kinda, except that this one actually kinda works. The main advantage is that one doesn't have to hunt through the startmenu/control panel for stuff.
 

milomak

Honorary Master
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
12,571
That search thing is a huge resource hog. Uninstalling it also took some effort.
 

AntiThesis

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
5,583
Maybe but this time around most businesses are sticking with previous versions of Windows and Office, while at the same time looking at opensource solutions (OpenOffice). Since Vista is genuinely a dud, most enterprise
users may wait till Win 7 comes along and skip Vista altogether.
You know
there are many companies which still use 2K so keeping XP around longer is not such
an alien idea.

Remember current hardware still works well. Why upgrade a Pentium III, Athlon XP or Pentium 4 machines when they do everything you want them to do and fast enough too. We're not talking games here, we're talking spreadsheets, word processing, email, etc.

I wouldn't lump all enterprises/large companies in with that group. A lot of them are taking on Vista and have recognised benefits. We have a task team with a number of large multi-nationals which is planning how best to roll out Vista on an enterprise scale.

2000 has already been taken completely off every location to be replaced by XP up to SP2.

I agree that they certainly should keep XP around, it's senseless to try and force people to use something against their will but the argument that "current technology works" is a silly one IMO. If we all thought like that, the abacus would never have been replaced.
 

PeterCH

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
18,371
I wouldn't lump all enterprises/large companies in with that group. .

Of course not, but there are still many companies around the world which use 2K which is an ancient OS but if it works...... Even your company is only planning a roll out and still wondering how to go about doing it.
 

AntiThesis

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
5,583
Well we did that with XP as well. I'd love to roll it out en masse and watch the ensuing chaos among users but for some reason they don't want to ;)

Aah well, what can you do eh?
 
Top