Ms - for people who NEED XP - what about XP mode on W10

Hi there

For some people XP is still a necessary OS -- lots of hideously expensive lab gear / construction stuff etc runs on dedicated XP systems. A lot of this hardware has life times over 20 - 50 years for example so is not quickly replaced - and the original manufacturers have either long since been taken over or gone out of business.

Now if Ms released an XP mode that would run on W10 - it would help in getting some of these old dinosaurs away from XP on really ancient computers. Plus they could gain some money in some sort of consultancy services.

Currently some people switch to VM's but that usually requires some I.T expertise and at enterprise level of course paying a (not insubstantial) fee to people like VMWARE.

Ms could "Muscle in" on this market and be ready when its time to actually upgrade the hardware.

Cheers
jimbo

jimbo45 said:

Hi there

For some people XP is still a necessary OS -- lots of hideously expensive lab gear / construction stuff etc runs on dedicated XP systems. A lot of this hardware has life times over 20 - 50 years for example so is not quickly replaced - and the original manufacturers have either long since been taken over or gone out of business.

Now if Ms released an XP mode that would run on W10 - it would help in getting some of these old dinosaurs away from XP on really ancient computers. Plus they could gain some money in some sort of consultancy services.

Currently some people switch to VM's but that usually requires some I.T expertise and at enterprise level of course paying a (not insubstantial) fee to people like VMWARE.

Ms could "Muscle in" on this market and be ready when its time to actually upgrade the hardware.

Cheers
jimbo

We had similar issues with Win98 and WinME when going to WinXP. A large part of the problems will be with newer hardware but then WinXP and some of those old programs won't run on newer hardware.

I have a WinXP computer in my storage shed for use when needed when clients need files retrieved from 5.25" and 3.5" floppies and ZIP disks, have the drives installed. Adding to the issues is the BIOS has to support those floppy drives and the very latest either don't support them or the motherboard may not have the floppy controller on it. Some BIOSes of the last several years may offer only the A: drive support.

But I certainly can support the effort in getting the Win10 capability of running Win7's WinXP Mode. And an interesting thing about WinXP not seen mentioned much is that there was a 64-bit version, Professional only, but there weren't many useful 64-bit programs 'back then'.

Berton said:

We had similar issues with Win98 and WinME when going to WinXP. A large part of the problems will be with newer hardware but then WinXP and some of those old programs won't run on newer hardware.

I have a WinXP computer in my storage shed for use when needed when clients need files retrieved from 5.25" and 3.5" floppies and ZIP disks, have the drives installed. Adding to the issues is the BIOS has to support those floppy drives and the very latest either don't support them or the motherboard may not have the floppy controller on it. Some BIOSes of the last several years may offer only the A: drive support.

But I certainly can support the effort in getting the Win10 capability of running Win7's WinXP Mode. And an interesting thing about WinXP not seen mentioned much is that there was a 64-bit version, Professional only, but there weren't many useful 64-bit programs 'back then'.

Hi there
@Berton
XP-64 Works really great as a VM BTW -- a mega problem with the native app was that drivers were a problem. Running on a VM solves most of those problems !!!.

On an SSD this VM really FLIES -= a shame Ms didn't continue with XP development -- I know W7 was well liked etc but remember before arriving at W7 people had to go through that VISTA experience which on the hardware available at the time ran like a "1-legged dog on a perfectly smooth ice pond" - or about as fast as a pile of thick molasses. VISTA runs fine as a VM on modern hardware if you want to give it another go.

I do like the "Glass" interface of Vista -- pity that was dropped in favour of more Bland designs and / or "Gamer looking platforms - with the dark Game of Thrones feel".

Gadgets on VISTA were also a good idea -- I HATE the new tiles that came up with W8 -- and (fortunately abandoned now) the idea that a computer should operate like a mobile phone with forever endless horizontal scrolling --give me a decent cascading menu system ANY time.

Cheers
jimbo

XP is end of life because it's an insecure, unmaintainable mess.

Microsoft doesn't want to maintain it anymore, and providing this would mean they would be forced to keep releasing security patches at the very least.

It won't happen. It's done. If you are bound and determined to run XP, you aren't buying new hardware.

I'm reminded of how Wordperfect once though that creating PerfectOffice for Windows 3.1 would be a great idea. They could make a ton of money on people who didn't want to upgrade to Windows 95.

The short of it is that they took a bath on it. They had warehouses full of unsold copies. Why? Because people who don't upgrade their OS's don't buy new software either.

Mystere said:

XP is end of life because it's an insecure, unmaintainable mess.

Microsoft doesn't want to maintain it anymore, and providing this would mean they would be forced to keep releasing security patches at the very least.

It won't happen. It's done. If you are bound and determined to run XP, you aren't buying new hardware.

I'm reminded of how Wordperfect once though that creating PerfectOffice for Windows 3.1 would be a great idea. They could make a ton of money on people who didn't want to upgrade to Windows 95.

The short of it is that they took a bath on it. They had warehouses full of unsold copies. Why? Because people who don't upgrade their OS's don't buy new software either.

Hi there

Running machinery that's digging huge railway tunnels under central London (Cross rail etc) for example on dedicated systems doesn't have the security problems of course --effectively in this case you are running an "embedded" OS. These giant Boring machines are MEGA expensive and only used with specific applications -- and - as in the case of the Channel Tunnel -if they can't be dismantled and removed then the equipment is just left "in-situ".

There's still a load of stuff (such as POS machines --which probably are "Real POS" !!) that run on XP CE or embedded -- these are taking a lot longer to convert than expected --probably we'll all be using mobiles for payment before those things are upgraded.

However expensive lab gear, measuring equipment and large plant and machinery doesn't have to connect with outside world - and by running as say XP mode on a modern OS doesn't mean Ms has to keep maintaining XP. The Host OS will have all the security required.

Cheers
jimbo

jimbo45 said:

Running machinery that's digging huge railway tunnels under central London (Cross rail etc) for example on dedicated systems doesn't have the security problems of course --effectively in this case you are running an "embedded" OS. These giant Boring machines are MEGA expensive and only used with specific applications -- and - as in the case of the Channel Tunnel -if they can't be dismantled and removed then the equipment is just left "in-situ".

There's still a load of stuff (such as POS machines --which probably are "Real POS" !!) that run on XP CE or embedded -- these are taking a lot longer to convert than expected --probably we'll all be using mobiles for payment before those things are upgraded.

However expensive lab gear, measuring equipment and large plant and machinery doesn't have to connect with outside world - and by running as say XP mode on a modern OS doesn't mean Ms has to keep maintaining XP. The Host OS will have all the security required.

And what benefit is gained by upgrading the OS on such ancient hardware, just to run a virtual machine under it?

I would doubt that most heavy machinery would function as a virtual machine anyways, they typically have special interface hardware that won't be visible from a VM to the guest OS. On top of that, something like a massive tunnel digger probably needs near-real-time response which cannot be guaranteed in a VM.

It just sounds like an idea without a real market to me.