+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29
Windows Thread, "Windows XP costs 5X more than Windows 7 to support" in Technical; Anybody else seen this article? ( Microsoft warns Windows XP costs 5X more than Windows 7 to support | VentureBeat ...
  1. #1
    TheMan100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    156
    Thank Post
    8
    Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
    Rep Power
    11

    "Windows XP costs 5X more than Windows 7 to support"

    Anybody else seen this article? (Microsoft warns Windows XP costs 5X more than Windows 7 to support | VentureBeat)

    I know XP is a bit dated now, but 5x more expensive to support? Would you agree?

  2. #2

    Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    9,297
    Thank Post
    242
    Thanked 1,586 Times in 1,263 Posts
    Rep Power
    344
    I'm not entirely sure how they measure of calculate these findings, but it is fair to say that 7 is comparable with XP, although 7 is without doubt more resource hungry, but not to the same extent as Vista.

    I suppose from a deployment perspective, 7 is better than XP. If you were to install both from scratch (7 SP1 and XP SP3), then patch up-to-date, XP does have considerably more security updates due to its age. 7 also includes .NET 1.1 to 3.5 by default and only requires .NET 4 installing. XP needs all five of these installing which is incredibly time consuming.

    7 can also be deployed over different hardware out the box, whereas XP cannot without additional third party software, which is going to cost more money. There's also lots of hardware which don't have XP drivers, so companies may be forced to buy hardware that is XP backwards compatible.

    I think the thing to remember is each company or educational establishment is different with different requirements. It is possible many companies adopted XP from day one and still use it today. They understand how it works, what it can and cannot do and how to make it work as required.

    It's a fair assumption that when Windows 8 is released, Windows 7 will be classified as 'inferior'. Windows 8 probably will be quicker and probably will be easier to deploy but it's to be expected. It's also possible however that Microsoft themselves are their worst enemy releasing an OS like Vista. It was awful, it damaged consumer confidence and this is why there are still many sites on XP, slowly migrating to 7 (generally the current trend).

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    170
    Thank Post
    8
    Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
    Rep Power
    37
    if your a business, and you've waited this long still on XP, why would you upgrade to 7 with Windows 8 just round the corner.

    Especially if, from a 'user productivity' perspective, the previews indicate win8 to be better performing in a number of areas. Plus it doesn't have
    more demanding minimum system requirements. Obviously they'd like to convince all about these supposed productivity benefits from moving to 7, well presumably companies want their users to remain productive that's why they've stuck with XP rather than disrupt. Wonder if they've factored in the cost of implementing training and the time taken to test, learn and fine tune the processes and infrastructure for Windows 7 when coming up with this x5 figure....

    Companies have a timetable to work to if they want as far as moving off XP and will have a good enough idea of the merits of windows 8 well before the 2014 end of security updates for XP.

  4. #4

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,248
    Thank Post
    289
    Thanked 791 Times in 600 Posts
    Rep Power
    347
    The problem with Windows 8 is the Metro interface, that will put a lot of enterprises off straight away, tbh I've no plans to be moving to it after testing preview as it looks like it could well be Vista mk 2. I do tend to skip every other release of Windows anyway, got better things to do with our network.
    As for XP support costing more, I can see where they're going with that, our W7 client infrastructure has been rock solid compared to our previous XP clients, which needed an intricate spiders nest of patches, hacks and workarounds to get things to work properly.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    170
    Thank Post
    8
    Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
    Rep Power
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    The problem with Windows 8 is the Metro interface, that will put a lot of enterprises off straight away, tbh I've no plans to be moving to it after testing preview as it looks like it could well be Vista mk 2. I do tend to skip every other release of Windows anyway, got better things to do with our network.
    As for XP support costing more, I can see where they're going with that, our W7 client infrastructure has been rock solid compared to our previous XP clients, which needed an intricate spiders nest of patches, hacks and workarounds to get things to work properly.
    i just don't get what all the fuss is about Windows 7. Sure, it's an improvement over Vista, but that was improving on an abomination. The bar was low, and i have to say i may feel better about windows 7 deployment from a sysadmin point of view, but as a user i find my user experience and responsiveness is better by far when i'm using OSX on mac hardware. I still feel navigating around XP is more intuitive and personally i can do without the bloat that's been added to win7. Maybe i'm one of those users who's crying out for the performance increases of win8, the nice UI enhancements like ribbon in explorer, and it potentially having less resource requirements....and everyone else is just grateful that Windows 7 is not vista, that they've got their aero nonsense and fewer patches to deploy than XP sP3 ?

  6. #6


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.403651, -0.515458
    Posts
    9,635
    Thank Post
    250
    Thanked 2,909 Times in 2,141 Posts
    Rep Power
    829
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    tbh I've no plans to be moving to it after testing preview as it looks like it could well be Vista mk 2.
    Don't you think it would be better to base your opinion of Windows 8 on the final version when it ships? Microsoft will have made a huge amount of changes between the Developer Preview and RTM. Even the forthcoming Release Preview won't have everything the RTM version will have.

    Perhaps Microsoft would have been better off doing what Apple do and only allow developers access to betas etc.?

  7. #7

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,829
    Thank Post
    1,476
    Thanked 595 Times in 446 Posts
    Rep Power
    170
    B*******s
    Last edited by witch; 28th May 2012 at 09:36 AM.

  8. #8

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,270
    Thank Post
    884
    Thanked 2,747 Times in 2,321 Posts
    Blog Entries
    11
    Rep Power
    785
    Maybe not to that degree but I'd agree. XP is a giant freaking ant hill, a nest of more patches than OS at this point. Primative as hell from a deployment and recovey point of view.

    When we went to Vista our support time dropped by about 50%, yes it used more resources as it did more. There were way more GPOs which were more reliable in their application. Smart healing of registry and system files which fixed many issues transparently (the only way you knew is if you checked the event logs - same kind of fault killed XP). Monitering of SMART built right in to the OS giving the user an error generally in time to save data. There was not the massive effort of adding in drivers for every little thing as it was to new for XP to know about, drivers started to be easily grabbed from hardware manager driver search or just automagicly. Drivers were in general more stable as they were generally re-written. Malware and viruses became less of a hassle as the security model was better even comparing fully patched systems. Windows installer became much faster as the later versions were baked in. Offline files became even better (we had it working alright on XP but Vista/7 did improve it).

    Windows 7 improved on that further by upping the speed of some machines.


    Before I get yelled down I just want to say that this was my experience across multiple schools and computers and we used it to cut the support time required. Yes it took some time to setup but that time has been saved many, many times over. As to training, the teachers got used to it pretty quick and the students did not miss a beat. It actually led to a better base level on knowlege amount the teachers as the change gave them the oppertunity to ask questions they previously may have been embarised to. By going through each OS and Office version in series (all be it delaying some till SP1/2) the staff just had little increments to adjust to. The change from 2007 to 2010 went unnoticed by most staff for a few weeks till we enquired if they had noticed a change.

    Holding back forever just makes the gulf bigger for when you finally do need to move especially with training. Besides the whole wait till Windows 8 now excuse leads seamlessly into the wait till W8 SP1 and the W8 SP2 then the W9 is almost out argument. At some point you either need to make the jump or be contented crafting horse shoes out of iron with a hammer.

  9. #9

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,829
    Thank Post
    1,476
    Thanked 595 Times in 446 Posts
    Rep Power
    170
    Just a proper tuppence
    Xp machines generally start up OK - problems occur with apps not the OS

    Quite few of my Win7 netbooss are strating up sometimes in some sort of system recover mode (which they fail to recover from) but are fine when switched off and on again - go figure

  10. #10


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.403651, -0.515458
    Posts
    9,635
    Thank Post
    250
    Thanked 2,909 Times in 2,141 Posts
    Rep Power
    829
    Quote Originally Posted by SimpleSi View Post
    XP machines generally start up OK - problems occur with apps not the OS
    My experience is similar to Synack's. File system and registry corruption is far more common with XP than 7. XP just dies at the first sign of trouble.

    I don't think I have ever seen a Windows 7 PC with an UNMOUNTABLE_BOOT_VOLUME blue screen for example.
    Last edited by Arthur; 28th May 2012 at 12:30 AM.

  11. #11
    DrCheese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,038
    Thank Post
    97
    Thanked 161 Times in 110 Posts
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by SimpleSi View Post
    Just a proper tuppence
    Xp machines generally start up OK - problems occur with apps not the OS

    Quite few of my Win7 netbooss are strating up sometimes in some sort of system recover mode (which they fail to recover from) but are fine when switched off and on again - go figure
    By default, 7 will boot into this if it fails to boot up correctly or someone has turned it off without shutting down properly. In a school you'll often get the sprogs doing this.

    All you need to do is disable it from doing so by typing

    bcdedit /set {current} bootstatuspolicy ignoreallfailures
    into cmd.

  12. 6 Thanks to DrCheese:

    alttab (7th June 2012), AngryTechnician (28th May 2012), cpjitservices (28th May 2012), dave.81 (28th May 2012), Roberto (28th May 2012), SimpleSi (28th May 2012)

  13. #12

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,829
    Thank Post
    1,476
    Thanked 595 Times in 446 Posts
    Rep Power
    170
    What a saviour! :-)

  14. Thanks to SimpleSi from:

    DrCheese (28th May 2012)

  15. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    390
    Thank Post
    23
    Thanked 95 Times in 61 Posts
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by alttab View Post
    if your a business, and you've waited this long still on XP, why would you upgrade to 7 with Windows 8 just round the corner.
    Large organisations have extremely risk-averse IT departments, and those still using XP will have spent the last year or two building a support infrastructure for Windows 7 that includes compatibility testing applications, devices etc. They won't be able to go to Windows 8 as it takes a long time to gear up for such a big change.

  16. #14
    DrCheese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,038
    Thank Post
    97
    Thanked 161 Times in 110 Posts
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by SimpleSi View Post
    What a saviour! :-)
    Welcome. Annoyingly if you set this setting on your image it won't transfer to a new install, so you have to do it on every computer. Look at doing it as a startup script or something :P

  17. #15

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,676
    Thank Post
    640
    Thanked 2,158 Times in 1,476 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I'm not entirely sure how they measure of calculate these findings
    They use the same people who work out the financial "losses" caused by piracy.



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 7th July 2011, 01:14 PM
  2. [Windows Software] Windows XP VLK Licensing Question (Imaging)
    By mmoseley in forum Licensing Questions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14th February 2011, 05:27 PM
  3. [Windows Software] Windows XP as virtual machine
    By albertwt in forum Licensing Questions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 5th August 2010, 03:20 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 9th May 2010, 05:24 PM
  5. [Windows Software] Deploying Windows XP VM
    By albertwt in forum Licensing Questions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 5th April 2010, 09:29 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •