|
Mozilla surprised by Microsoft's abandonment of XP support in IE9
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 21 March, 2011
Mozilla has expressed surprise after hearing that Microsoft had abandoned support for Windows XP with the release of Internet Explorer 9.
IE9, released last week, does not support the decade-old operating system, which is still the most popular operating system, although 2009's Windows 7 is quickly gaining.
According to NetApplications, XP still accounts for 55 percent of all PC users, ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
21. March 2011 @ 20:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
Another way to force people on to windows 7
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
scorpNZ
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. March 2011 @ 20:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
lol..if ff stopped support for xp i could only imagine the out cry thats that in a nutshell,however i see no reason for micro to stop security support for IE8 at least for a little while assuming they have stopped support in that regard
|
Senior Member
|
21. March 2011 @ 21:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's so odd. Recently M$ has been doing a lot right from a consumer standpoint. And windows 7 is brilliant I've been using it since launch. But I think they really broke that trend with ie9 and it will cause them a whole lot of browser share. People want modern browsers as much than they want modern OSs
XXYYQQOO!!! Yeah WELCOME TO JAMROCK
 |
Member
|
21. March 2011 @ 21:21 |
Link to this message
|
Mozilla seems to have forgot their roots: Linux. They have actually given up on hardware acceleration on Linux and Mac OS X as apparently 'GL is too hard.'
Apparently not! Chrome is doing WebGL perfectly fine and they do not have any plans to start using DirectX even on Windows. Meanwhile, Mozilla is still continuing their complaining nonsense and gaining more irrelevancy.
On another note, by not giving IE9 to XP users, this is MS shoving the latest OS down people's throat just like they did with Vista. It's clear XP is still relevant today, and MS does not want to believe it.
|
|
biglo30
Senior Member
|
21. March 2011 @ 21:28 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by TBandit:
Another way to force people on to windows 7
+1
Yet another way Microsoft is trying to force people to upgrade to windows 7 and help deplete their own market share. Over 50% of the OS market is windows xp and you refuse to make IE9 available for your ow product. Damn, terrible marketing as usual kill it like u did to the zune.
|
|
lissenup2
Suspended permanently
|
21. March 2011 @ 21:57 |
Link to this message
|
Those that actually choose to stay on the outdated, boring, technologically deficient and antiquated XP are techno morons. It's 10 years old people. Let it die or GTFO of the world of tech!
Those that use the stupid reason "it works therefore I'll keep it" should bury their heads and consider keeping their Pentium Packard Bell 133MHz computers too..........because "they work".
XP users are lazy, cheap, simple-minded and can't be trusted.
As for TBandit.............YES..........those that invent and those that are innovators do want people to stay current by upgrading, and as an engineer myself.....I'm tired of people using old ass tech because of the compatibility issues with better, more current tech. Your tard way of looking at that makes you sound like you actually believe it's isolated to MS "forcing" people. IT HAPPENS EVERYWHERE WITH ALL TECH. What............you gonna bitch about using fuel other than gas because "it's another way for us to be forced to use electric, hydrogen, natural gas,etc"
Get a clue!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. March 2011 @ 21:58
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
21. March 2011 @ 22:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
lissenup2, i use xp so what does that make me then?
|
|
CF01
Member
|
21. March 2011 @ 22:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
i have windows 7 and xp and i honestly like them the same and isn't it what the consumer prefers that makes money?
|
Member
|
21. March 2011 @ 22:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
lissenup2 is under the impression that software ages. Software isn't physical let me remind you. It does not 'wear out'.
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
21. March 2011 @ 23:09 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by lissenup2:
Those that actually choose to stay on the outdated, boring, technologically deficient and antiquated XP are techno morons. It's 10 years old people. Let it die or GTFO of the world of tech!
Those that use the stupid reason "it works therefore I'll keep it" should bury their heads and consider keeping their Pentium Packard Bell 133MHz computers too..........because "they work".
XP users are lazy, cheap, simple-minded and can't be trusted.
As for TBandit.............YES..........those that invent and those that are innovators do want people to stay current by upgrading, and as an engineer myself.....I'm tired of people using old ass tech because of the compatibility issues with better, more current tech. Your tard way of looking at that makes you sound like you actually believe it's isolated to MS "forcing" people. IT HAPPENS EVERYWHERE WITH ALL TECH. What............you gonna bitch about using fuel other than gas because "it's another way for us to be forced to use electric, hydrogen, natural gas,etc"
Get a clue!
Tard, you work for Microsoft?
I'm sticking with XP because it does what I need it to.
About your Packard Bell and 133MHz computer statement, it makes no sense. My 93 year old grandfather wants a computer for just Solitaire and some other DOS based games. Your statement implies that I go out and buy him a Windows 7 machine. Why would I buy him a brand new Windows 7 machine when the old Packard Bell works flawlessly for everything he wants to do?
Second, it works. Why would I spend $100 to upgrade to a newer OS? Not to mention that if I upgrade, I'd rather go x64 which would require me to reformat my OS. I just don't have the time for that. It's not worth wasting all that time and effort just for a new OS. I barely deal with the OS directly, I deal with programs on the OS which I can install on XP.
Finally, XP is older, therefore it requires less system resources. You can argue that some programs work better on an x64 based OS but many as of now don't have any advantage on a x64 based OS. Yea, the Windows 7 kernel is smaller meaning a quicker bootup time but the amount of processes it runs on startup are way more than XP and I'm comparing a new formated XP machine with a 7 machine, both with all drivers installed. I know this for a fact.
Finally, 7 runs like crap on anything with less than 2GB RAM. Most people don't need more than 2GB RAM. Also I know many people out there who still use early Single core/early Dual Core (Core Duo) machines. 7 runs like garbage on those.
Gets your facts right before you go bashing everyone here. If you like 7, nobody's stopping you from using it but facts are facts. The most used OS in the world is still Windows XP.
|
Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 00:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
At this point just ignore lissenup2; none of his comments in previous articles make much sense and are usually fanboy bashing rants.
If only doing that too much was a bannable offense...
|
|
xnonsuchx
Senior Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 01:16 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ROMaster2:
At this point just ignore lissenup2; none of his comments in previous articles make much sense and are usually fanboy bashing rants.
If only doing that too much was a bannable offense...
He does do a lot of name-calling the moderators seem to have to edit.
|
Senior Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 03:21 |
Link to this message
|
Live Free or Die.
The rule above all the rules is: Survive !
Capitalism: Funnel most of the $$$ to the already rich.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. March 2011 @ 02:03
|
|
scorpNZ
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. March 2011 @ 03:37 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ddp:
lissenup2, i use xp so what does that make me then?
same here so i spose it's "birds of a feather"..lmao..that quote right there below has made my day
[quote=lissenup2,
"XP users are lazy, cheap, simple-minded and can't be trusted".
|
|
ps355528
Senior Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 04:32 |
Link to this message
|
windows users are little more than sheep .. accepting forceware and paying through the nose at the whim of a big corporation...
payware operating systems are obsolete before they hit the shelves
mozilla may be surprised, but I'm not.. this is just another way to force people to scrap perfectly capable hardware.. archaologists in the future will dig through landfill sites and have a nice dating point.. the vista layer... when perfectly good 5 year old computers were scrapped in their millions just because they wouldn't run the latest pile of shit from microsucks..
anyway.. if wincrap 7 is SO fantastic how come it STILL needs antivirus and antimalware things sucking up heaps of the massive amounts of hardware power people are forced to buy in the first place.. and how come it self destructs just as often as xp or fista? .. because it's the same monolithic crap they have been conning people with for 16 years...
|
|
SomeBozo
Member
2 product reviews
|
22. March 2011 @ 04:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
Or the converse, people that upgraded to Vista and Win 7 are stupid and demonstrate they are easily lead by Microsoft's marketing machine. Especially when using XP does everything needed. If it ain't broke don't fix it is my motto. There is absolutely nothing i would gain by upgrading my machine to Win7. If MS came out with a decent OS that has something of value in it or that i couldn't get my work done then I'll consider getting it, not until then. My compilers and other program run a lot faster in XP then in Win7 anyways, so in the end upgrading to Win7 would slow me down and be more of a hindrance.
|
|
molsen
Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 07:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
I used 7 on several machines and I like it, but I am of the philosophy: If it isn't broken don't fix it. I still run a dual core. It's a few year old, and I do not see the benefit for 7 on my machine. M$ should keep this in mind. I know they are trying to push people towards 7, but I will drag my heels for now.
|
|
lissenup2
Suspended permanently
|
22. March 2011 @ 09:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by core2kid:
Originally posted by lissenup2:
Those that actually choose to stay on the outdated, boring, technologically deficient and antiquated XP are techno morons. It's 10 years old people. Let it die or GTFO of the world of tech!
Those that use the stupid reason "it works therefore I'll keep it" should bury their heads and consider keeping their Pentium Packard Bell 133MHz computers too..........because "they work".
XP users are lazy, cheap, simple-minded and can't be trusted.
As for TBandit.............YES..........those that invent and those that are innovators do want people to stay current by upgrading, and as an engineer myself.....I'm tired of people using old ass tech because of the compatibility issues with better, more current tech. Your tard way of looking at that makes you sound like you actually believe it's isolated to MS "forcing" people. IT HAPPENS EVERYWHERE WITH ALL TECH. What............you gonna bitch about using fuel other than gas because "it's another way for us to be forced to use electric, hydrogen, natural gas,etc"
Get a clue!
Tard, you work for Microsoft?
I'm sticking with XP because it does what I need it to.
About your Packard Bell and 133MHz computer statement, it makes no sense. My 93 year old grandfather wants a computer for just Solitaire and some other DOS based games. Your statement implies that I go out and buy him a Windows 7 machine. Why would I buy him a brand new Windows 7 machine when the old Packard Bell works flawlessly for everything he wants to do?
Second, it works. Why would I spend $100 to upgrade to a newer OS? Not to mention that if I upgrade, I'd rather go x64 which would require me to reformat my OS. I just don't have the time for that. It's not worth wasting all that time and effort just for a new OS. I barely deal with the OS directly, I deal with programs on the OS which I can install on XP.
Finally, XP is older, therefore it requires less system resources. You can argue that some programs work better on an x64 based OS but many as of now don't have any advantage on a x64 based OS. Yea, the Windows 7 kernel is smaller meaning a quicker bootup time but the amount of processes it runs on startup are way more than XP and I'm comparing a new formated XP machine with a 7 machine, both with all drivers installed. I know this for a fact.
Finally, 7 runs like crap on anything with less than 2GB RAM. Most people don't need more than 2GB RAM. Also I know many people out there who still use early Single core/early Dual Core (Core Duo) machines. 7 runs like garbage on those.
Gets your facts right before you go bashing everyone here. If you like 7, nobody's stopping you from using it but facts are facts. The most used OS in the world is still Windows XP.
Get grandpa a meant-for-7year olds-handheld gaming device from Mattel then.
|
|
lissenup2
Suspended permanently
|
22. March 2011 @ 09:29 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ROMaster2:
At this point just ignore lissenup2; none of his comments in previous articles make much sense and are usually fanboy bashing rants.
If only doing that too much was a bannable offense...
Sorry ROM but you're a mod so I keep my opinions limited besides, your comments in the past have much merit.
|
|
lissenup2
Suspended permanently
|
22. March 2011 @ 09:49 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ROMaster2:
At this point just ignore lissenup2; none of his comments in previous articles make much sense and are usually fanboy bashing rants.
If only doing that too much was a bannable offense...
I'm not a fanboy of ANYTHING. I like certain things but recognize incoherent stupidity when I see it. I'm a pragmatic and highly objective and not subjective in the wrong situations so pipe down because you're sorely mistaken.
As for "fanboyism"......wake up! You're either a fanboy of Apple products or MS products or Hp, Dell, IBM, etc but calling out those that are lazy and cheap that retain severely outdated tech like XP is not being a "fanboy" because I'm not emphasizing anything other than GET CURRENT.
Being behind hinders the progress of modern day networks, the performance of employees and especially hinders tech trying to concentrate on resolving issues with CURRENT DAY TECH.
You really need to check your head before calling out someone that has clearly made a much more valid point than you. I see you as a politician.........the wrong people in positions of authority and power. You're a MOD man........set a better example.
|
|
IguanaC64
Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 10:25 |
Link to this message
|
@lissenup2 - Haha...that was a funny read. Can't be trusted? What? Do they look at you with strange intent when you walk by them? Are they conspiring to poison your lawn grass? Are they putting lsd in your drinking water? (ok...this last one I might believe) Honestly, your rant sounds like some weird 1950's anti-communist propaganda...
WinXP does what it needs to for a lot of people. I really do like Win7, but your comments about WinXP are just...weird. Many users do not need to burn another $90 for an OEM copy just because it exists. $90 is a lot of money to people. I can tell you're young, single, and childless because you obviously think everyone's #1 financial priority is keeping up with Microsoft's latest products.
|
|
brian480
Newbie
|
22. March 2011 @ 10:53 |
Link to this message
|
What it boils down to for me is this: XP works for me. I made a custom stripped down version to my liking/needs. It's small, light, and fast! I have zero interest in spending MORE money because M$ says so. You calling ME cheap for being an XP user...yes, I will agree with that. I'm a total cheap a$$ and PROUD of it! I work too hard for my money to just GIVE it away! If you want to pi$$ your money away, go for it!
I personally have zero plans of switching to 7 in the near future. Period! So please...STFU!! And btw...M$ can kiss my a$$!!!
|
Senior Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 11:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Of course they are. They need to fuel the people that feel an Operating System should be supported forever.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
IguanaC64
Member
|
22. March 2011 @ 11:43 |
Link to this message
|
No...I think most of us actually understand that. Microsoft makes money selling operating systems, and leaving behind OSs they don't want to support should make perfect sense. Nobody in particular is complaining that Microsoft doesn't want to support XP.
It's when the trolls start in and begin calling everyone who uses XP stupid, immoral luddites that people here are piping up in support of XP.
However, if Microsoft fails to support 55% of their installed user base it gives 3rd party browser providers an excellent opportunity to gain more market share.
|
