will Vista last longer than XP ?

[Bobby]

in year 2000, i bought my Windows 2000 workstation.
Within a year, XP come out and my 2000 looks so old.

i'm not the person who spend a lot on software, but i prefer to keep my OS
update.
So i wait for the next OS after XP which i expect to come out in 1 or no
more than 2 years.

however, XP seems to be the longest life Windows...
i should not buy 2000 but XP.

So now, I want to know if Vista will last as long as XP or not?

 

[John Smith]

Easy - No.

MS has very clearly stated that they are not going to "keep customers
waiting" for 5 years for a new OS. In other words, they want to sell a new
OS every 2-3 years.

So... Windows Vista will be relatively short-lived compared to XP.

 

[Mike Brannigan]

in year 2000, i bought my Windows 2000 workstation.
Within a year, XP come out and my 2000 looks so old.

i'm not the person who spend a lot on software, but i prefer to keep
my OS update.
So i wait for the next OS after XP which i expect to come out in 1
or no more than 2 years.

however, XP seems to be the longest life Windows...
i should not buy 2000 but XP.

So now, I want to know if Vista will last as long as XP or not?

Vista has experienced a longer then usual development cycle - so the
gap from XP to Vista is abnormally long.
So the gap between Vista and the next major OS release will be shorter
then the XP to Vista gap.

 

[Robert Moir]

in year 2000, i bought my Windows 2000 workstation.
Within a year, XP come out and my 2000 looks so old.

i'm not the person who spend a lot on software, but i prefer to keep
my OS update.
So i wait for the next OS after XP which i expect to come out in 1 or
no more than 2 years.

however, XP seems to be the longest life Windows...
i should not buy 2000 but XP.

So now, I want to know if Vista will last as long as XP or not?

I agree with Mike, but wanted to add - this "last longer" stuff. What do you
mean? It isn't like code rusts, or old operating systems get plucked off
your hard disk overnight by a magic flying monkey. If your current operating
install does everything you need it to do then it is still "lasting" just
fine, regardless of what else may be available.

 

[Mark Rae]

mean? It isn't like code rusts, or old operating systems get plucked off
your hard disk overnight by a magic flying monkey. If your current
operating

Actually, I've just been signed up as a beta-tester for MFD v1.0...

Looking good so far - the magic works, but the flying donkey keeps
crashing...

 

[Robert Moir]

Actually, I've just been signed up as a beta-tester for MFD v1.0...

Looking good so far - the magic works, but the flying donkey keeps
crashing...

You need to install the carrot registry patch if you have the flying donkey.

 

[Chris Game]

I agree with Mike, but wanted to add - this "last longer" stuff.
What do you mean? It isn't like code rusts, or old operating
systems get plucked off your hard disk overnight by a magic
flying monkey. If your current operating install does everything
you need it to do then it is still "lasting" just fine,
regardless of what else may be available.

By that argument one might as well stick with Windows 3.1!
Applications evolve to take advantage of new OS features, and OSs
evolve to meet consumer demands for networking, security,
reliability and so on.

 

[Mr. Vista]

Famous last words to which you will not be held.
Based on XP -> Vista expect Vienna in 2012.

 

[Roy Coorne]

Bobby schrieb:
....

i should not buy 2000 but XP.

....

With XP SP2 + updates, you would get a mature OS - with Vista now, you
get a brand-new OS full of bugs, with drivers not yet available, and
considerable resource requirements... you might consider buying XP SP2
now and upgrade to Vista when its SP2 is out;-)


Roy

 

[Robert Moir]

By that argument one might as well stick with Windows 3.1!
Applications evolve to take advantage of new OS features, and OSs
evolve to meet consumer demands for networking, security,
reliability and so on.

While I respect your right to disagree with me, you might read what I said
properly, first. I said that "If your operating install" (Ok I missed out
'System'!) "does everything you need it to do then it is still lasting just
fine". Notice the "does everything you need it to do". That would be a
central point of my reply. I'll try and make it nice and simple for you:

If your current OS meets your needs then there is no need to upgrade. If the
old/current OS does not meet your needs and the new OS *still* fails to meet
your needs, and doesn't even move you substantially closer to that goal,
then there is no need to upgrade.

If you can't understand that, or you can't tell the difference between what
I said there and "stick with Windows 3.1!" then I really don't have anything
to say to you.

 

[Mike Brannigan]

Famous last words to which you will not be held.
Based on XP -> Vista expect Vienna in 2012.

You missed my point.
You should not base the future development/release cycles on the XP to
Vista gap as this was an exceptional circumstance.
The gap to the next major release will be back to a more reasonable
level.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Sure, as long as it meets your needs.
Why switch just because there is something new.
However many things impact your needs, a few being:
Security
Required software or hardware does not support an older OS
The list goes on.

Every now and then I run across someone who is successfully using an older
OS for some reason or another such as a favorite game or program.
Usually the computer is never connected to the internet and no other
software is added.
And yes, some are efficiently using Windows 3.1.
While most have newer computers for other needs, the older computer meets a
specific need and does it well.
Windows 3.1 including the computers designed at that time are only obsolete
if it is obsolete to you for your uses and we all have our own uses.

Most people have no need to upgrade their computers to Vista.
Instead they should continue using what is already working as long as it
continues to efficiently do so.
Most of those will upgrade when they purchase a new computer with Windows
Vista at some time in the future.
Since Windows XP will probably be supported for several more years, there is
no rush.

 

[Mark Rae]

You need to install the carrot registry patch if you have the flying
donkey.

Is that an undocument feature...? I tried it but, alas, the poor old donkey
he keep on crashing.

I phoned the beta tester hotline and they said "Ee aw ee aw ee aw he always
does that..."

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

Agreed.

Almost all such cases can take advantage of VPC anyway, in which it is very
easy to isolate the legacy OS if need be.

I have already set up my XP SP2 web-surfing and legacy game playing client
in a virtual machine using VPC 2007. It all comes together very nicely.

 

[MicroFox]

every aspect of vista is abnormal

Vista has experienced a longer then usual development cycle - so the gap
from XP to Vista is abnormally long.
So the gap between Vista and the next major OS release will be shorter
then the XP to Vista gap.

 

[Mike Brannigan]

every aspect of vista is abnormal

Do you actually have anything constructive to say in this peer SUPPORT
newsgroup and backed by actual experience and real first hand evidence
or are you just a naysayer with no real evidence to back your negative
spoutings?
If you have no help to contribute others then your personal biases
then I suggest you just leave and allow us who are using the product
to get on with it.

 

[David Wilkinson]

You missed my point.
You should not base the future development/release cycles on the XP to
Vista gap as this was an exceptional circumstance.
The gap to the next major release will be back to a more reasonable
level.

I think you missed his point. If XP to Vista was longer than 2000 to XP,
the a reasonable person might conclude that Vista to Vienna will be
longer still.

Maybe Vienna will try to do all the things that Vista gave up on (think
longer). Or maybe it will be just a big bug-fix for Vista (then
shorter). Who knows?

David Wilkinson

 

[MicroFox]

I suggest you play netcop in your home network not here..

Here is a open multinational, multicultural, multifaceted and multithemed
vista newsgroup talking about general things regarding vista.

I dont have to explain anything. I have no need to prove anything. If you
don't like what I say, tough luck!

 

[Mike Brannigan]

I think you missed his point. If XP to Vista was longer than 2000 to
XP, the a reasonable person might conclude that Vista to Vienna will
be longer still.

Maybe Vienna will try to do all the things that Vista gave up on
(think longer). Or maybe it will be just a big bug-fix for Vista
(then shorter). Who knows?

David Wilkinson

Sorry David but you are still missing the point - one exception
circumstance does not change an overall plan.
It would actually be an unreasonable person that suddenly shifted
there position based on one unusually set of events.

As to "who knows" well some of us do, and we are not tarnishing our
perception of timescales based on one hiccup in a long term plan.

 

[Mike Brannigan]

I suggest you play netcop in your home network not here..

Here is a open multinational, multicultural, multifaceted and
multithemed vista newsgroup talking about general things regarding
vista.

I dont have to explain anything. I have no need to prove anything.
If you don't like what I say, tough luck!

"... I dont have to explain anything. I have no need to prove
anything..."

Then you have nothing of value to say - as statements without
substance are worthless.
Your anti Vista protestations are as transparent as you are.
Please feel free to contribute when you have something substantive to
say.