What you say is quite true. And therein lies the problem. Computers can last for a long time -- I'm still using a number of 1996 vintage Pentium and Pentium Pro machines, though for work and not connecting to the Internet. (I'd have to scrounge around for an antivirus and a firewall which would work. And it's not worth it to me because I get more work done by having to go to another machine for net access -- grin.) They've bloated Windows so much that an XP machine a few years old can't run Vista or 7? Or Vista machines just a year or two old can't upgrade to 7 because they're obsolete? This is a problem.
If you want me to believe that you've got a better, more secure OS, it should operate on a leaner machine. Otherwise you are just trusting that more machine cycles and more memory devoted to the OS is the answer. That sounds more like a kluge than a new OS. Which is very much the Windows programming paradigm.
I still know a number of businesses running critical systems on Windows 2000 Professional. And I routinely do writing on machines running Windows 95/98SE/98Me/NT4. The release of Windows 7 doesn't break the previous OSes.
I hadn't seen the April 2014 date. What I had seen a while ago was MS trying hard to push the December 2009 cutoff date. If they're still doing security patches for another 4½ years -- I could be happy with that. In two years I might be able to trust a Windows 7 Service Pack 2. In four years, I suspect my XP machines will have gotten long enough in the tooth to be consider another wave of hardware upgrades. But until then...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: Friday, 23 October 2009 17:27 (UTC)If you want me to believe that you've got a better, more secure OS, it should operate on a leaner machine. Otherwise you are just trusting that more machine cycles and more memory devoted to the OS is the answer. That sounds more like a kluge than a new OS. Which is very much the Windows programming paradigm.
I still know a number of businesses running critical systems on Windows 2000 Professional. And I routinely do writing on machines running Windows 95/98SE/98Me/NT4. The release of Windows 7 doesn't break the previous OSes.
I hadn't seen the April 2014 date. What I had seen a while ago was MS trying hard to push the December 2009 cutoff date. If they're still doing security patches for another 4½ years -- I could be happy with that. In two years I might be able to trust a Windows 7 Service Pack 2. In four years, I suspect my XP machines will have gotten long enough in the tooth to be consider another wave of hardware upgrades. But until then...
Dr. Phil