Thanks, Andavari, I shall indeed try out nlite. Might be that having obtained Acronis at a good price (via a link in this forum, thanks) will prove to be the quickest route, but I'll sure try nlite.
Anomaly, I am not sure what slows this computer down. I install, try out, and remove lots of stuff, that might be it. I usually use some virtualizer App like Powershadow or Timefreeze to avoid changes to the kernel or the registry...but sometimes not. Anyhow, it has indeed slowed up. This last slowdown started after waaay too much partitioning, that's probably be the cause.
Redhawk, wish I had said that: "...I just don't see the point in switching over to Windows 7..." Win 7 offers nothing that I need. Some aspects are new and nifty, but I don't need them nor care about them. However, I will admit to being as lazy as a pig in a pie factory.
I have a friend who has little wipers on the headlights of his expensive car. He thinks he NEEDS them. I just never have felt like I need windshield wipers on my headlights. No offense to those who simply must have them. (Hope he doesn't read this)
Anomaly, I am not sure what slows this computer down. I install, try out, and remove lots of stuff, that might be it. I usually use some virtualizer App like Powershadow or Timefreeze to avoid changes to the kernel or the registry...but sometimes not. Anyhow, it has indeed slowed up. This last slowdown started after waaay too much partitioning, that's probably be the cause.
That wouldn't help any that's for sure.
Redhawk, wish I had said that: "...I just don't see the point in switching over to Windows 7..." Win 7 offers nothing that I need. Some aspects are new and nifty, but I don't need them nor care about them. However, I will admit to being as lazy as a pig in a pie factory.
Need it? If you look at it that way you could say you don't need XP either or even 2000. You could get by on Windows 98 or even 95 or something like that. I know people that do and they say the same thing as you. They say XP doesn't have anything they need. I think you see where this is going. It's not need that drives improvement it's the desire to better your situation that does. Everybody is being held back by the people that refuse to better themselves. MS needs to fix this and the sooner the better.
Thought maybe Aethec's thread would get some action. Good one.
I have been computering (izzat a word?) since before windows. Then win 3.0 or 3.1, don't remember, then win 95, win 98. Skipped win me, win vista, some of the more obscure others. Still have copies of most of those, plus OS2 . Now at win xp and holding...
Interesting quote from Hazelnut's link: "..[Microsoft] acknowledged that 74% of business computers still run XP." XP is pretty good, now, and business guys who think about the bottom line want to stay with it, I guess.
No offense meant nor taken respecting users who always use the new and improved versions, but historically every new OS from microsoft has needed tuning. Not their fault, probably, with their market share, they're a big target. Still, its a pretty good "business model": release the software, get the consumer to pay for it and then also tune it up.
May I suggest a good "User Model": wait till its tuned up, then get it. Certainly there is some value to being adventurous, trying out new stuff, etc, and if you enjoy it, go for it. But I try to avoid letting anyone persuade me that I NEED to change or am technically retarded if I don't. I already know that.
Thought maybe Aethec's thread would get some action. Good one.
I have been computering (izzat a word?) since before windows. Then win 3.0 or 3.1, don't remember, then win 95, win 98. Skipped win me, win vista, some of the more obscure others. Still have copies of most of those, plus OS2 . Now at win xp and holding...
Interesting quote from Hazelnut's link: "..[Microsoft] acknowledged that 74% of business computers still run XP." XP is pretty good, now, and business guys who think about the bottom line want to stay with it, I guess.
No offense meant nor taken respecting users who always use the new and improved versions, but historically every new OS from microsoft has needed tuning. Not their fault, probably, with their market share, they're a big target. Still, its a pretty good "business model": release the software, get the consumer to pay for it and then also tune it up.
May I suggest a good "User Model": wait till its tuned up, then get it. Certainly there is some value to being adventurous, trying out new stuff, etc, and if you enjoy it, go for it. But I try to avoid letting anyone persuade me that I NEED to change or am technically retarded if I don't. I already know that.
I am not one of those people that has to have the newest and have it right now. Far from it. I always lag behind and wait for the bugs to be worked out. I'm still using Mac OS 10.5 Leopard I have not upgraded to 10.6 Snow leopard. I skipped Vista. The XP situation is a totally different thing. We are talking bout a 10 year old OS. That is insane. There is waiting for the bugs to be worked out and than there is just no excuse like with XP.
Windows 7 is very stable. The Windows 7 service pack 1 that is coming out doesn't have anything significant in it except it adds all the Windows updates that have been released since Windows 7 has been out. This is because the bugs where in Vista and fixed in 7. I waited a while after 7 was released and read the reports and there where very few complaints so I than updated since XP is simply way past it's prime. I have to say 7 is much better in every way to XP.
As for the businesses that are still on XP they are just as bad as anybody else with the heel dragging. Most of them force their employees to use IE so what does that tell you? It's just ignorance and laziness. I'm not saying update every single time but XP is a decade old and Windows 7 is not Vista and is a very nice OS.
Anyway, in four years no program will be supporting XP.
IE 9 won't support it. The Windows Live Essentials won't support it, including Messenger which is widely used. Firefox won't support it for all eternity, especially if they are planning to use D2D - since it isn't supported in XP, maintaining two different rendering engines, one for XP and the other for Vista/7, will be a nightmare. I highly doubt the next version of Office will support it. Nor will freeware like Paint.NET. That is already a lot, in terms of market share.
Besides, the benefits of using Win7 aren't simply fancy graphics.
Anomaly >> Companies staying with XP is neither ignorance nor laziness. It's called compatibility. And money. Most companies just can't afford re-creating all their internal apps, which often were built for IE 6 and IE 6 only.
Anyway, in four years no program will be supporting XP.
My feeling is that before the four years are over, there will be an SP4, maybe even an SP5. I will be sticking with my two XP computers as long as I can, as they do not have the hardware to upgrade to W7. (But the W2K computers will have to go soon.)
My feeling is that before the four years are over, there will be an SP4, maybe even an SP5. I will be sticking with my two XP computers as long as I can, as they do not have the hardware to upgrade to W7. (But the W2K computers will have to go soon.)
No there won't be. MS is not stupid. XP is in extended support. That means "no more SPs".
Annoyed that they look for any excuse to stagnate. I know many people still using XP. In fact still using IE 6. Money is not their problem. Having to use their brain is the problem. Can't be bothered to learn anything. Sit in front of the computer hours at a time blankly staring at the monitor playing moron games. Some of them have been using computers for a decade or more and don't know any more now than they knew 10 years ago. When they have a problem they come crying to me. When I try to show them how to fix what are very basic issues they can't be bothered to watch and learn. They just want you to fix it so they can go back to be total jerk offs and play their idiotic games. I'm sure everybody here knows some one like that. Well MS needs to cut this dead weight loose. I have started to. It's time these people realize computers are a major part of life and society now. I would say not being able to use a computer is almost as bad as being illiterate today and it will become even more important as time goes on.
I play games that are a few years old. Are you saying that I'm an idiot just because I play a game that's old? Please! I don't need any more nonsense. I'm also not a jerk just because I play an older game every once in a while for nostalgia. For your last comment about illiteracy, would you say that people in third world countries that may know how to read and write but don't know how to use a computer are illiterate?
I certainly won't stay in XP forever, and I can always install Windows 7 on my newer computer, but your comments about the stupidity of people that stay on XP just don't add up.
I play games that are a few years old. Are you saying that I'm an idiot just because I play a game that's old? Please! I don't need any more nonsense. I'm also not a jerk just because I play an older game every once in a while for nostalgia. For your last comment about illiteracy, would you say that people in third world countries that may know how to read and write but don't know how to use a computer are illiterate?
I certainly won't stay in XP forever, and I can always install Windows 7 on my newer computer, but your comments about the stupidity of people that stay on XP just don't add up.
Do you think you could twist my words any more than you have? I made no comments about playing old games. Where is that coming from? I CLEARLY said I know people who spend hours playing moron games staring blankly at the screen. How you managed to twist that into saying your an idiot for playing old games I don't know.
We don't live in third world countries so the comparison is nonsensical. In developed countries being able to use a computer is becoming as important as reading and writing. You are definitely at a disadvantage if you cant' use a computer. It's a basic skill like reading, writing, and math. This is not debatable it's a fact. If you want to use third world countries as a benchmark for your knowledge level than knock your self out. You obviously have a bright future ahead of you with those kind of standards
It's becoming very clear this forum is filled with people that are stuck in XP land and are resistant to change and have a lot of excuses to justify it. This forum has some knowledgeable people and a good atmosphere in general but I couldn't recommend it as a place for people to come and learn the latest things. There are Windows 7 and even some Vista users here but there are far too may XP only users and they can't offer you any help on the latest. MS is going to be drastically reducing the time between releases for their OS's and you will be absolutely irrelevant if things here stay this way and it sounds like it will. I won't be making any more comments in any other threads about people who refuse to upgrade to XP (I might in this thread if I feel something is posted that needs to be responded to but it will end there for me since I have better things to do like keeping up to date). It's your problem not mine and it's like talking to a wall. MS will also eventually decide it's your problem to and kill XP not matter how many cry about it. Than you can play catch up and wonder how you fell so far behind he curve.
You cannot seem to accept the fact that people are free to chose whatever operating system they want to use. People will move to different operating systems as and when they see fit not because you tell them that they have to.
Some of your comments have been insulting to fellow members.
You are banned from posting for 3 days, please take that time to adjust your attitude to other members, or at least keep it to yourself and not post it on forum.
The derogatory remarks made against us XP users just needs to stop, it's our choice to use it, and if you don't like that's your own problem better kept to yourself and I highly doubt it's "hurting" people using newer OSes.
Lets not forget that not everyone has hardware that's fully capable of properly supporting Win7 efficiently so it isn't just the price of the OS but also the buying of either new hardware or a new PC, and with people still losing jobs here in the U.S. it isn't completely practical to expect everyone to go buy the newest PC and newest OS when their old one still works fine.
Anyway, in four years no program will be supporting XP.
I wouldn't be sure about that, there's still some developers that support back to Win98 in their software and that OS is beyond ancient.
And who says Seven is better than anything else. I don't buy it. I have tested Seven on my AMD Phemom and although it isn't bad, it has a few things I dislike, specially not being able to turn off write combining (I am an avid gamer). On the other hand, Seven doesn't do anything fancy that XP can't (at least for me), so I do not understand the urge to change to an infant Operating System with all its possible bugs.