Still running XP?

[darklight7]

reason why i hate vista is because everything is too freaking different i miss the old functions of XP vista is like a new model which says it has better this better that but you know what i find that the interface SUXS Horribly something which many of the people is sooo used to for like around 8+ years (me) then it suddenly changes totally which pissed me off i just can't stand the interface of vista and yeah the multiple incompatible programs and software that goes with it adds to my rage

[Klocknov]

I am still running Windows XP Pro, I have a few reasons why. First of all I tried out Vista and threw all of it found a ton of stuff to annoy me like the administrator starting of more then half of the programs I ran, it gets annoying having to set that up for almost all your programs, not to mention the ones that don't like that setting and turn it off for some reason(heard they fixed that little bug). Second is the money, I would of went to Ultimate but couldn't afford and was sort of waiting out the next OS implementation. Then we come to some of the games I played didn't work on Vista when I was using it so that was the biggest factor for me. Though as of now they have fixed most of the stuff I ran into, minus the problems that were a part of my Pack of Vista I was using which were there for a reason... So all in all if I now had the money, well prior to Windows 7, I would of probably went up to Vista Ultimate. I will have to say XP Pro is treating me pretty well minus not being able to take gear of my DX10.1 compatible video card. Though something I've noticed with windows releases on there OSes we have 95 which blew chunks then we have 98, we have ME then we have XP (Well we had 2000 in the middle of those but that was initially intended to be a corporate release.) Then we hit Vista and now it's follower 7. Though I figured due to 2000 and XP following each other and breaking it that 7 was going to fail also... then I got reminded that 2000 was initially intended a corporate release. So it is an ongoing pattern with Microsoft, release a shit system to make money to make our next better system.

[Takeshi]

Though something I've noticed with windows releases on there OSes we have 95 which blew chunks then we have 98, we have ME then we have XP (Well we had 2000 in the middle of those but that was initially intended to be a corporate release.) Then we hit Vista and now it's follower 7. Though I figured due to 2000 and XP following each other and breaking it that 7 was going to fail also... then I got reminded that 2000 was initially intended a corporate release. So it is an ongoing pattern with Microsoft, release a shit system to make money to make our next better system.

Others have had the same theory as you, but I think it's this.

Vista and 7 look much like each other, Vista got out too early and that was why people didn't like it. + Microsoft started with a new foundation that made it possible for newer OS' to look like this. So of course there was problems. Win7 is just a improved version of Vista, and works so good because they've already had so much time to fix errors about Vista which would also be evident in Win7 fi thy hadn't.

That's my theory...

[UMMX]

I still have Xp I don't like the look of Vista and I don't like opinion menu for it. There was no real reason for Vista to come out. It just like ME , and I did use that ether.

[bloody000]

When will people stop spouting the "Vista is just like ME" bs?

[Lord of Fire]

I use XP because:
1) It works the way I want it to.
2) Stability. XP is quite stable on my comp. I remember using Windows 98 and experience a crash or BSOD at least once a month.
3) My comp's age. it's almost 5 years old and by far not capable enough of running something like Vista

I intend on buying a new comp by the end of the year. And I'll probably take Windows 7 with it, as that should be out by the time I do so.

[rl9009]

I'm still running XP on a few netbooks I have. Most of my machines at home are either running Windows 7 or Vista.

However sadly, the server counterpart for the machines was never upgraded to the Vista (or Server 2008). The reason I'm staying with Windows Server 2003 is that it just runs perfectly on an Intel Atom 330 without too much issues and it doesn't really lag considering the server is used as a Lightweight Active Directory DC and Routing.

Server 2003's code was just small and efficient: A clean install of Server 2003 will take approximately 2 to 3 GB of disk space. A core installation of Server 2008 or Server 2008 R2 will require twice as much of disk space.