Microsoft Windows XP - Second Edition Instead Of Vista?
- 9
- Add a Comment
Some where, someone made mention that Microsoft should of considered a Second Edition to Windows XP instead of releasing Windows Vista. Interesting observation. Or is it? If anyone remembers, Windows 98 had a Second Edition [Gold], that they introduced which included a number of tweaks, fixes and patches wrapped up into a refined Windows 98.
So why not SE for Windows XP? Could Microsoft of added UAP to XP? How about a pretty GUI? A sidebar? The answer to all of these questions would most likely of been yes. So what would that of meant to us Windows users?
I believe that it would of been an easier upgrade path for the majority of XP users. Drivers, hardware and software we already had would of worked without having to own a more powerful system. In fact most of the features that Vista employs could of been added to XP without a major change to the operating system. But would consumers have upgraded to XP-SE? I believe they would have just to take advantage of the new features. We could of had the best of both worlds. A pretty OS that people were already familiar with, added security and the other benefits that Microsoft insists that Vista has.
But what do you think? Would you of bought XP-SE? Let us know.
Comments welcome.
9 Comments
Ray Thompson
August 22nd, 2008
at 2:30pm
I have two machines with Vista.. I have Two machines with XP.
Widows Vista is good if you want to do local word stuff. Network issues are the big problem. Plus no matter what Microsoft says it is not totally plug and play like XP. I have never had any problems with hardware on XP. Plug and Play and that is it. If it were not for the cost I would have my two vista machines switched to XP. With Vista we use them to Surf the internet and that is about it. Any complicated Programs or activity we always use XP. For what it is worth I think Microsoft owes me a refund. Vist should have never been released.
leftystrat
August 22nd, 2008
at 3:25pm
I’m going to *guess* that SE would have been a marketing nightmare. My very small knowledge of marketing says that you want something new - or at least something CALLED new.
If they had made your suggested changes and called it Vista, they might have had real success.
I understand there’s another XP release that’s being used on mini laptops. It’s the only XP you can license today. It was put out to stop linux from getting a foothold on the market. Not sure how different it is from the former XP - I figure it’s lighter. Let’s face it - it would have to be.
How about a new version of XP with more of a CE focus. XP base with much less GUI intensity. It could be like running XFCE on top of Ubuntu. I’d certainly use it.
I’d *love* some sort of runtime Windows. Since I run it in a VM, I only need the most basic functions. I remember waaaaaay back when I got my first 386, one of the Adobe apps came with a runtime Windows (DOS days).
Ron Schenone
August 22nd, 2008
at 5:30pm
leftystrat,
Do you mean something like nLite where you can strip XP down and remove components ?
Jeffery Fox
August 22nd, 2008
at 7:35pm
I, for one, would be glad to have a Windows XP Second Edition. Windows Vista seems to want too much RAM and too much of a powerful graphics card. Some of us just can’t keep upgrading our hardware forever. We need an operating system that is optimized — that will run on any reasonable amount of RAM (not to mention any reasonable CPU and GPU). This dream OS would just have the essentials; leave the anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewall, web browser, etc. to third parties. Deal only with the file system and related functions.
Of course, Microsoft never seems to have heard of the saying “Less is more”. Can any of us teach the team in Redmond?
Buffet
August 23rd, 2008
at 7:05am
XP SE? A BRILLIANT idea!! Vista is for losers!
Nicolas LaBarre
August 23rd, 2008
at 6:36pm
I recently (3 months ago) got my first Vista machine and I like the UI. But it eats up memory and system resources. I would definitely buy a 2nd edition of XP. XP has been a great OS and its hard to watch it go.
Dan
August 24th, 2008
at 8:06am
They should keep XP and Vista and keep working on both. Then people would have a choice. If they wanted the fanciness of Vista and had the hardware to run it then they could, or if they wanted to stick to tried and true XP then n o problem. Then everyone is happy.
btw your use of of rather than have in your sentences is giving me a headache.
Lynn
August 25th, 2008
at 2:54am
I agree with blogger Dan that Windows users should have a choice between XP and Vista, but the chances of a that happening are slim to none. I also agree with Dan about Ron Schenone’s use of the word “of” in place of “have” in sentences. I hate to be picky, but it just about drove me nuts too! LOL
Dan
August 28th, 2008
at 8:04pm
Lynn,
You’re my kind of girl. Maybe we should discuss the benefits of have over of over dinner…
lol