Despite the generally positive reception of Windows 7 so far, there will still be many people who will want to stick to Windows XP. For these people, downgrade rights are particularly important, and Microsoft has confirmed the rules of the game to El Reg.
Two editions of Windows 7 will be eligible for downgrade rights: Windows 7 Professional, and Windows 7 Ultimate. Windows 7 Professional buyers will be able to downgrade to Windows Vista Business or Windows XP Professional, while Windows 7 Ultimate buyers can downgrade to Windows Vista Ultimate or Windows XP Professional. Downgrade rights will be granted for 18 months after Windows 7’s launch, so from October 22, 2009, to April 1, 2011.
Per standard policy, organisations with volume licensing deals with Microsoft will be able to downgrade to whatever version of Windows they please, at any time. Volume licensing deals are for organisations with 250 PCs or more.
There is one possible catch: downgrade rights to Windows XP will expire before 18 months if a service pack is shipped for Windows 7. Downgrade rights to Vista will not expire, service pack or no.
Windows XP is no longer available for normal computers or at retail; only netbook manufacturers have access to Windows XP Home, but only until one year after Windows 7’s release.
I think they should kill Windows XP completely.
I was asked to buy 3 laptops with XP downgrade kit. First I tried them with Windows 7 and they were pretty fast (2GB of RAM, P8600 cpu). Then I installed the downgrade kit and they were amazingly embarrasing… so slow – especially the UI was annoyingly slow.
I think it’s totally stupid to install XP on new laptops – even Vista is way quicker and more responsive than XP on these Core 2 Duo machines. Let alone the fact that XP can’t get in the security game anymore.
It’s the “Vista Ready” program that killed the proper perception of performance in people’s minds.
They no longer care about actual benchmark numbers, but only rants about how Vista is slow.
Fortunately Windows 7 has a positive “buzz”, and I hope you’re right and we all get rid of XP soon.
I am sorry, but if you installed Windows XP on a laptop and it was slower than Windows Vista, it makes no technical sense whatsoever.
Windows XP as a OS kernel is WAY lighter on CPU requirements than Vista.
Show me a Netbook with Vista on it? Yeah I thought so.
The downgrade kit you got from Microsoft is probably dishonestly making the hardware perform poorly in some way with XP on purpose to get you to switch or bad mouth XP and buy Vista.
Vista a pile of DUNG. I have several systems with XP and Vista and Windows 7 on them.
Vista is not stable, it works poorly and I was appalled at how the last service pak upgrade went. Half my machines simple would not either install the service pak upgrade or failed after the installation.
All of the Windows XP software I have which works JUST FINE WITHOUT VISTA do not work properly with Vista’s silly compatibility mode, which is a hunk of Junk.
Microsoft must think I am made of money so every two years I can upgrade to a new OS and re purchase all of my software, IF I CAN DO SO, for a X OS version flavor of the day to run on.
The only reason why Microsoft comes out with OS’s anymore is because they can’t make money actually building software that works.
I am sick and tired of this crap. I want Microsoft broken up into several companies so there is competition in the market place that actually understands a customers computing needs and provide software that works properly.
Linux doesn’t have this problem. I have software from 1992 I am still using on my Linux box!
-Hack
Edited 2009-06-19 12:17 UTC
ooooooor, it could be that the display drivers weren’t installed or weren’t working correctly so it was running with VESA. But who knows. I take everything anyone says on the internet with about 25 kilos of salt.
Everyone has some stupid ass agenda OR is just trolling..
*sigh*
It makes perfect technical sense.
Windows XP was released in 2001. We are now in 2009. In those 8 years, the hardware landscape has changed massively, with the most important change being multicore processors. another important change is the use of the GPU to accelerate the UI.
The reason why XP is slower on modern hardware than 7 or even Vista is because XP doesn’t take as much advantage of multicore processors as Vista/7 do. Similarly, Windows XP’s UI is not accelerated by the GPU, meaning it’ll be affected under load, and will show wear and tear all over the place.
Just because XP is lighter on resources doesn’t mean it’s universally faster on faster hardware. The world is more complicated than that.
That is a CROCK.
Xp is perfectly fine on multicore machines and yes, it does take adavantage of them up to 2 cores with service pak 3.
I would also like to point out, that most software today could give a rats arse about how many cores you have and really only about how effective a single core works in one clock tick.
Yeah things are more complicated in the world today, but thankfully simple things like XP work just fine.
-Hack
@Hackus: “I have software from 1992 I am still using on my Linux box!”
Really? Which programs?
@Hackus: “Linux doesn’t have this problem.”
Of *course* it does. Do you really mean to assert that Linux has *never* deprecated an API? Seriously? Even if you are just talking about the kernel, and not a distribution such as Red Hat or Ubuntu, that’s just remarkably naive.
Microsoft does a lot of things wrong, and I’m happy to bash them royally just on general principles. But complaining about Microsoft’s inability to maintain backward compatibility with Windows, when that’s one of their strengths, is just wrong.
MS: Hey guys okay, look. We are back and this time we are so sure it will work.
Consumers: Really? How so if you failed miserably in the past?
MS: Dude, have you not seen the positive reviews on W7?
Consumers: Uh, yeah, but um, XP works just fine thank you.
MS: Oh yeah about XP. You can’t use it anymore, we really really need you to use this. IN fact, here’s the downgrade policy.
Consumers: *FacePalm*
MS: *leaves kit on table with policy attached to box and walks out*
Consumers: *middle fingers MS when back is turned*
Three people I’ve talked to who’ve actually tried Windows 7 have been less than impressed. It makes me wonder if we’ve got a huge mass market plant campaign going on.
Where’s my refund to “upgrade” to some other OS ?
Personally I tried it – and quite honestly it is rather how hum – I say ho hum because it addresses none of the problems with Windows that pushed me to purchasing a Mac. I went from Amiga to Windows (tolerated it for less than 6 months) to *NIX then to Mac. I’ve experimented with Windows now and then to get the feeling of where things are – and the short comings haven’t been addressed.
From Windows 95 to Windows 98SE to Windows 2000 to Windows XP and so on, the same UI design problems still exist, the same structural problems exist, the same flawed development model, the lack of coherency throughout the Microsoft organisation when it comes to developing products with a consistent look and feel, and supporting the latest operating system (why didn’t Microsoft provide a fix to Office 2003 so it works properly on Windows Vista instead of the lame work around they suggested?)
I some times wonder in my moments of conspiracy theory thinking that all this hype is orchestrated by Microsoft – notice all the new accounts that have suddenly started to appear on osnews.com in the last 1-2 months? not just a couple of extras but a whole swarm of people suddenly signing up; I’ve noticed that in a number of forums I’ve been part of for quite some time – a suddenly upsurge in registrations followed by rampant Windows 7 pushing by these new users.
An extreme side note; I downloaded Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard 10A380 – don’t expect some major changes because lets be honest, Leopard really doesn’t need major changes. Compared to Windows 7; Mac OS X might not have the huge breadth of changes that Windows 7 has but that is because Leopard doesn’t need the huge breadth of changes to get it up to date. For US$29 for Snow Leopard, it is a bargain considering that Microsoft charges a similar price for customers to obtain the 64bit version of Windows Vista.
What I am interested in, however, are the new applications that’ll use the new API’s – are we going to see Adobe turn around in their typical fashion and re-invent the wheel barrow that fails to take advantage of all the optimisations of Snow Leopard? more than likely. Don’t expect things to change; I hope that maybe in the future Apple does the right thing and buys out Adobe
Edited 2009-06-19 14:04 UTC
Astroturfing is the word you’re looking for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing
Canon is another company that likes to use it as a marketing strategy. You can say a lot about Microsoft, but their marketing department is top notch.
Well, usually top notch.
The “People-Ready Business” campaign comes to mind as one of the more “huh?” things they’ve done.
Also the insulting Office 2007 ads where they used dinosaurs to make fun of people who haven’t upgraded yet. Classy.
And they got thoroughly burned by the “Vista Ready” sticker fiasco.
Hands down my favorite is their frequent use of the word “experience”. If you feel like you have to keep reminding people how awesome something is to use, it’s probably not that great.
A large number of these marketing people tend to be detached from reality- most spending very little time understanding the target demographics let alone understanding the psychology of how people think when it comes to purchasing a product.
I too loath the use of ‘experience’. I don’t ‘experience’ a computer, I use it. I don’t ‘experience software’, I use it like a tool – I put stuff into it and get stuff out of it. If an individual thinks that using a computer is an ‘experience’ then heaven help them.
Well it pretty cheap to try windows 7, you don’t have to buy expensive apple hardware for it.
The installing experience was a lot better than windows vista or XP with it’s 100 updates since SP2.
I replaced my XP partition with it, cause it needed a fresh install anyway, it does get slower over time when you use it.
A lot of thing now work out of the box, printing seems slower.
As for consistency: Office 2007 is a fine example.
Outlook looks almost the same as the 2003 version and word 2007 is completely alien.
A Mac isn’t remotely expensive in all due respects. I am from the era where I purchase a machine for NZ$2 grand and make it last 3-4 years. When you break down a machine that is NZ$2 grand, you keep it for 3 years, it works out to be NZ$666 per year, NZ$1.90 per day. That is less than a cup of coffee, less than a muffin.
I’m not trying to be boastful but I have a MacBook and an iMac, and neither of them are remotely expensive; my MacBook when bought with Apple Care was around NZ$2 grand, and the iMac was a similar price. If you go into any of the big retailers in New Zealand, the price for a Mac is around the same price for a Sony or HP laptops being sold.
As for the iMac, the iMac cannot be compared to traditional computers because it isn’t a traditional computer; it is an all in one computer that utilises laptop components – so it is not comparing Apples with Apples when you compare an all in one to a piece meal PC system.
My parents two computers, Dell, have Windows Vista where I recently updated to SP2; everything works flawlessly. OpenOffice.org 3.1.0 works really well on it for what my parents need (well, they have only one Office 2007 licence – so the other computer uses OpenOffice.org 3.1.0 which my old man prefers anyway due to familiarity with ‘office classic’).
For all the moaning I hear; Windows isn’t as bad as some try to make out – many of the problems I see are actually problems created by the end user rather than something that has appeared out of nowhere. For me, I avoid it because I am incredibly fussy about things – I guess it is true that many Mac users must have OCD lol
Office 2010 apparently will finish off the transition fully to the ribbon interface (which funny enough I prefer the Office 2008 Mac user interface which retains the menu based system whilst keeping the toolbar and toolbox). For me, the only thing that would ever make me leave Mac would be if Microsoft created an operating system with an Amiga or IRIX like interface and made a clean start from the ground up.
Edited 2009-06-21 05:22 UTC
Offtopic, but what was the problem with Office 2003? I use it on Vista with no apparent problems, but if there is a way to make it somehow work better (speed- or stability-wise), I’d love to know it.
Windows 7:
Much less pile of DUNG than Vista, somewhere between a Elephant Pile of Dung that is Vista, and the toy poodle pile of dung that is Linux.
Maybe its a Mastiff dung pile?
Windows 7 is just a revenue generating stream from Microsoft in my opinion. It does not improve in any means, the operation of games,(Which by the way is the largest application of Windows) safety of the software as far as hackers and marginally improves on the stability of the OS by rehashing UNIX ideas we had about OS design from the Early 80’s.
-Hack
PS: I think all software is dung, but with that being said everyone relates to the fact the less dung you have to deal with on a day to day basis the better.
Ain’t nobody said you can’t still use it anymore, even if you can’t buy it. But then, the OS is nearly 8 years old, so whadya want?
That being said, tried to install Win7 on an older P4 2.8ghz (2gb RAM). Once installed, got an error message that said it couldn’t finish configuring the software, then rebooted, and got the same message… an endless loop. I am not impressed so far
@WorknMan: “But then, the OS is nearly 8 years old, so whadya want?”
Freedom?
It’s illegal in most real country where you can’t force people to buy another product to get to another one. But hey it’s Microsoft criminals they have their own set of laws … Let’s see how much time the EU give them on this one …
It’s illegal in most real country where you can’t force people to buy another product to get to another one. But hey it’s Microsoft criminals they have their own set of laws … Let’s see how much time the EU give them on this one …
If you buy the newest version of Windows they allow you to switch using an older version which is no longer being sold. There’s nothing illegal about that.
It’s called tying , you can’t force another product sale on to customer in order to get another product.
People who want XP on their New computer should only get XP if that’s what they want. Microsoft only legal choice is to sale or not sale the product … Actually they also could legally **give** XP away with all Windows 7 copy sold , but they are too greedy to go that route.
There is no way you need windows 7 in order to get Windows XP to work on someone else new computer release.
People want OS system designed in 2001. System that only safe to run with anti-virus software installed when you use internet. You invest 1000 euro and your speed become 500 euro (50% slower OS) after installing anti-virus.
Microsoft did not progress a single step from 2001.
People asking for disaster.
Unix/Linux already 100 years in front of competition with fully implemented 64 bit versions of OS and main applications. Hey Adobe when you will have Flash 64 bit version and Adobe CS5 64 bit. So far only Adobe Photoshop is 64 bit from all CS4 bloatware.
OS news comments posters seem to be infected with Slashdot lameness.
Have any of you bashing Windows 7 bothered to properly try it? Then bashing MS for offering people th eoption to downgrade if they so desire and winging about that. Do we see Apple doing downgrades for OS-X to Classic? Does Classic support modern Apple Hardware?
As for Linux on the desktop, fun if you are either a techhead or someone who has limited day to day computing requirements and a PIA for everyone else. Just pathetic the comments on this topic.
Let’s break MS up – ok lets do the same for Apple so they are 3 parts – Hardware – OS – and Applications as separate entities. As for the freedom comment – what country are you from cause the last thing any western country has is freedom it’s all relative but not free.
they completely kill off XP? I’m no huge fan of Windows 7–I find it to be better than Vista but that’s really the only praise I can honestly give it–but I think its time for XP to be put to rest. Eight years is long enough, especially if MS wants their new technologies–WPF, Directx 10/11, etc–to become widely used in the Windows world. If XP continues to have a large enough install base, which may very well be the case, ISVs will have to refrain from using technologies that won’t be available to everyone including XP users. In short, they’ll be restricted to the lowest common denominator (XP), and that’s not good for the evolution of either the Windows os or the software running under it.
There comes a time when you just have to pull the plug, so to speak, and move forward.
Why would I want windows 7?
The XP-software can only run in a virtual machine, you can do hat on a mac or a linux machine as well. the only thing is that you do not have the “ms errors by design”, they are more secure.
And to state Linux is no good for the desktop is pretty ignorant of the reality that more and more organisations are working with it. I have my machine running Linux since 4 years now and much less problems as I have with the winxp-machine my wife is working with. In the end it is not the OS that counts but the applications. Everyone that works with a computer knows that linux is more secure, more stable, and less costing then windows, . . and no problems with “genuine advantage” crap.