Microsoft's smear campaign against XP?

[Ozymandias_117]

I just thought it was funny that Microsoft is running a smear campaign against XP on their website (In addition to their Mac smear campaign). Some of the things they say XP can't:

Open the programs and files you use most in just a click or two

Share files, photos, and music among multiple PCs at home

Print to a single printer from any PC in the house

And according to them, Macs:

"Spoil your fun"

"Don't like to share"

"Might not like your PC stuff"

I dunno, I just thought it was funny, so I wanted to post it somewhere... :D

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/compare/versions.aspx

[KiwiNZ]

Not a smear campaign. It's a product comparison. A common and legitimate marketing tool.

[Ozymandias_117]

Not a smear campaign. It's a product comparison. A common and legitimate marketing tool.

I thought claiming something couldn't do something that it is perfectly capable of doing to boost sales of another product was considered smear campaign?

[KiwiNZ]

In their comparison of XP , Vista and Win 7 they have made no false statements.

[Dustin2128]

In their comparison of XP , Vista and Win 7 they have made no false statements.
It depends on what you mean by false statement. Its true that out of the box XP couldn't do any of the things they mentioned, but with a bit of setup and modification it can do almost everything on the list. Not that I think XP deserves less than an immediate death, holding the industry back a decade like it is. As long as we're on that topic.. [Long anti-MS rant edited out due to... length]

[KiwiNZ]

It depends on what you mean by false statement. Its true that out of the box XP couldn't do any of the things they mentioned, but with a bit of setup and modification it can do almost everything on the list. Not that I think XP deserves less than an immediate death, holding the industry back a decade like it is. As long as we're on that topic.. [Long anti-MS rant edited out due to... length]

My point exactly, MS are comparing "included out of the box versions" and not what can be done after market.

[Ozymandias_117]

In their comparison of XP , Vista and Win 7 they have made no false statements.

How can (paraphrasing) "Not able to pin programs to taskbar" "Not able to open programs in several clicks" and "Print to a single printer from anywhere in the house" not be considered false?

Right click Pin to taskbar (No additional programs - Win XP)

Start -> Program (No additional programs - Win XP)

Install printer, right click, properties, share printer (No additional programs - Win XP)

[KiwiNZ]

How can (paraphrasing) "Not able to pin programs to taskbar" "Not able to open programs in several clicks" and "Print to a single printer from anywhere in the house" not be considered false?

Right click Pin to taskbar (No additional programs - Win XP)

Start -> Program (No additional programs - Win XP)

Install printer, right click, properties, share printer (No additional programs - Win XP)

They aren't "paraphrasing". Read the far right column then see what XP can and cannot do out of box compared to Win 7.

See no smear , no hideous conspiracy.:rolleyes:

But I am not here to convince I really have more to do

[drawkcab]

Well they are trying to tap into the market of those who still stubbornly run XP. It is probably true that this is the biggest market they have left to tap.

[CJ Master]

Well they are trying to tap into the market of those who still stubbornly run XP. It is probably true that this is the biggest market they have left to tap.

It is also the most futile market to attempt to tap.

[mendhak]

This is a smear campaign? I've seen armless gynecologists running better smears.

[betrunkenaffe]

Open the programs and files you use most in just a click or two

As pointed out, pinning existed in XP.


Print to a single printer from any PC in the house

Yes, and no, it didn't require anything more than drivers (something that 7 would require as well)



Simplify managing printers, cameras, music players, and other devices

I plug it in, it's there, I do stuff with it, I disconnect it. How do you simplify that?


Organize lots of files, documents, and photos effortlessly

It's called a filesystem.

Connect to any available wireless network in just three clicks

Disagree, pretty sure it was something like that on this comp.

It's not a smear campaign, just a fluffing and twisting of facts :P

[Zorgoth]

That was a very amusing read! Thanks lol.

[RiceMonster]

As pointed out, pinning existed in XP.

Pinning and the quick launch are not the same. Not to mention XP does not have jump lists, which is part of what they're talking about.

[betrunkenaffe]

Pinning and the quick launch are not the same. Not to mention XP does not have jump lists, which is part of what they're talking about.

You can see the 7 features they are referring to, however their descriptions aren't apt since you CAN do exactly what it said in XP for all the ones I pointed out, just not with those "features". Hence why I said, it's a twisting of facts to make it work and a fluffing out of issues with non-issues to make the list as big as possible.

[Zorgoth]

I like how practically most of the Windows 7 window management features they talk about were available in Linux in either slightly inferior, equivalent, or better forms long before W7 was released:

W7 task bar features easily beaten out by any decent configurable Linux panel/dock - and gnome-do of course wipes the floor with any launching software :) - of course our widgets also pwn their gadgets

Snap - compare to compiz->Grid (each has their advantages there)

Shake - workspaces are much, much better - I don't understand why Windows doesn't have them by default, apart from MS is stupid

Peek - ummmm...Show Desktop, except show desktop is... umm... obviously better

And of course we have Expo, Scale, and configurable keyboard, button, and screen edge bindings

EDIT: Ok, currently they have one thing GNOME doesn't have, which is window thumbnails while minimized - but they're coming back soon!

[mickie.kext]

Not a smear campaign. It's a product comparison. A common and legitimate marketing tool.

Unless it is FSF campaign (http://en.windows7sins.org/). Then it's evil and FUD.

[kevin11951]

I like how practically most of the Windows 7 window management features they talk about were available in Linux in either slightly inferior, equivalent, or better forms long before W7 was released:

W7 task bar features easily beaten out by any decent configurable Linux panel/dock - and gnome-do of course wipes the floor with any launching software :) - of course our widgets also pwn their gadgets

Snap - compare to compiz->Grid (each has their advantages there)

Shake - workspaces are much, much better - I don't understand why Windows doesn't have them by default, apart from MS is stupid

Peek - ummmm...Show Desktop, except show desktop is... umm... obviously better

And of course we have Expo, Scale, and configurable keyboard, button, and screen edge bindings

EDIT: Ok, currently they have one thing GNOME doesn't have, which is window thumbnails while minimized - but they're coming back soon!

KDE has all the things you just listed, so yes Linux does have them.

[Zorgoth]

kwin has minimized thumbnails, but nonetheless is fail.

[RiceMonster]

KDE has all the things you just listed, so yes Linux does have them.

I haven't tried 4.5 yet, but 4.4 doesn't have peak, shake, or any of the super bar functionality. The super bar functionality can be obtained in part with smooth tasks, but it still does not have all the of the functionality (jump lists and pinning). I don't remember seeing anything about 4.5 obtaining those features in the upcomming features list either.


kwin has minimized thumbnails, but nonetheless is fail.

Right.

[oldsoundguy]

If you follow the figures from places like W3C, you will note that not only is Windows losing total market share at between 1/2% to 1% every month, most of those migrating to Win 7 are those that are disgusted with Vista. Since Vista was not that popular. So, MS is attempting to get the XP users to migrate also. But that is a battle for them in these economic times, as their largest market sector, businesses, just can't see their way clear to waste money needed for operational expenses on some new operating system. (why fix what to them ain't broke .. may be crippled, but ain't broke!)

MS will NEVER get any significant number of Apple users to migrate .. in fact, the OPPOSITE is happening there and will, most likely, continue.

[andymorton]

I just thought it was funny that Microsoft is running a smear campaign against XP on their website (In addition to their Mac smear campaign). Some of the things they say XP can't:

Open the programs and files you use most in just a click or two

Share files, photos, and music among multiple PCs at home

Print to a single printer from any PC in the house

And according to them, Macs:

"Spoil your fun"

"Don't like to share"

"Might not like your PC stuff"

I dunno, I just thought it was funny, so I wanted to post it somewhere... :D

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/compare/versions.aspx

They're basically saying XP is old, therefore you should buy Windows 7. Once that's installed you can have the pleasure of your web browser not responding every five minutes (if it's anything like my experience with it).

[KiwiNZ]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

[jrothwell97]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

Because people are stupid and don't want to have to learn something new, even if it's only mildly different and has substantial benefits. Some people, astonishingly, still hang on to Windows 98 on their home computers - connected to the Internet and everything.

For all the stick they'd get for it, there's definitely a case for OS vendors (Microsoft, Apple and Canonical included) delivering an update when support ends that pops up a warning to the effect that the system is out-of-date, insecure and you should really consider replacing it.

(yes, I know XP is still supported - but this is mostly down to businesses waiting for the next round of solutions and hardware upgrades before upgrading to 7.)

[Tristam Green]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

Our company is still on XP SP3. Our refresh schedule was in-line with the release of Vista. After Vista's disastrous release, we consciously decided to sit tight with XP, a known well-working OS (in 2007) and decided to go with Windows 7 during the next refresh cycle.

[Mahngiel]

Interestingly enough, my LinuxPro mag arrived yesterday and the first page had a very interesting editorial.


...Google engineer exposed a serious security flaw in Win XP. Microsoft cried foul, arguing they didn't have enough warning... and attackers quickly started using the exploit.(View the article as a pdf: here (http://www.linux-magazine.com/w3/issue/117/003-003_comment.pdf))
@ KiwiNZ

People still run XP for about many reasons as they run Ubuntu - it does what they want and need. If you don't have to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to upgrade, you shouldn't have to.

@ OP

I'd agree that MS is attempting to persuade consumers to the newer product - that is, after all, where the funding is going. The attempt at downgrading the abilities of their legacy product so they purchase the new. Smear? Meh. Funny? Yeah.

[RiceMonster]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

In the home market, I think the reasons for hanging on to XP are very little, if at all. However, for businesses, upgrade costs can be huge, and the process can be difficult, especially for large companies with 10,000+ employees. Not to mention it probably works just fine in most cases.

[bobbob1016]

That XP stuff makes some sense, but their Mac comparison page seems to be more lies, or severely slanted truths.

"Hassle-free files at work.
Apple's productivity suite file formats won't open in Microsoft Office on PCs. This can be a real hassle for Mac users sharing work documents with PC users."

You can save in Office formats from Apple's productivity suite, as well as open said formats. It isn't Apple's fault that Microsoft doesn't support Apple formats.

"Programs you already know.
If there's a Mac version of a program you need, you'll have to buy it again and relearn how to use it on a Mac."

Most of the Mac programs I run work mainly the same as their PC coutnerparts, but you could also say:
"If there's a PC version of a program you need, you'll have to buy it again and relearn how to use it on a PC."

Those are the only ones I have the time to dissect at the moment.

[oldsoundguy]

I hang on to XP on a couple of boxes that NEVER GO ON LINE except for updates. It is all I need to run my photography programs (a pile of them), sync my PDA's or sit down for an instructional video that requires what they are teaching be on a Windows machine to have the instructional program be able to access it.

So, "upgrading" to Win 7 would be a waste of hard earned money for me.

[Mahngiel]

That XP stuff makes some sense, but their Mac comparison page seems to be more lies, or severely slanted truths.

You could say the same thing about the Apple commercials slandering MS

[KiwiNZ]

In the home market, I think the reasons for hanging on to XP are very little, if at all. However, for businesses, upgrade costs can be huge, and the process can be difficult, especially for large companies with 10,000+ employees. Not to mention it probably works just fine in most cases.

I agree, however putting my CIO hat on there comes a time when caution becomes procrastination, becomes fear, becomes incompetence and ultimately becomes unemployment.

[asddf]

I just can't see a reason why anyone would pay to switch from XP -> 7?

It just doesn't do anything new, sure pre installed on a store PC they will because they have no choice, but given the option?

[KiwiNZ]

I just can't see a reason why anyone would pay to switch from XP -> 7?

It just doesn't do anything new, sure pre installed on a store PC they will because they have no choice, but given the option?

then you haven't looked at Win 7 properly

[Zorgoth]

I just can't see a reason why anyone would pay to switch from XP -> 7?

It just doesn't do anything new, sure pre installed on a store PC they will because they have no choice, but given the option?

Win 7 is a big step up in security and window management from XP.

Ubuntu is better at both :P

Also, there are things that just don't exist on XP, like DX11.

[Zoot7]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.
I'm still hanging onto it because I have show stopping synchronization problems with Windows 7 when it comes to my own home recording. That may be Microsoft's fault or Zoom's fault, I neither know nor care, for me XP works the way I want in that regard whereas Windows 7 does not.

Were it not for that, I'd dump the XP install that I have at the minute, as not counting that (rather substantial for me) annoyance I'm pretty happy with Windows 7.

[PhilGil]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.
My daughter insists on using Windows because she's a gamer and because she's 16 (yes, she's used Ubuntu in the past). Money is really tight in my house and there's almost nothing left for discretionary purchases after the bills are paid. Spending $100 to upgrade her computer from XP to Win 7 is very low on the priority list.

[Ozymandias_117]

@ OP

I'd agree that MS is attempting to persuade consumers to the newer product - that is, after all, where the funding is going. The attempt at downgrading the abilities of their legacy product so they purchase the new. Smear? Meh. Funny? Yeah.

Yeah, it was prob a bit hyperbolic of me to call it a "smear" campaign, but still, you get the idea :P

[KiwiNZ]

My daughter insists on using Windows because she's a gamer and because she's 16 (yes, she's used Ubuntu in the past). Money is really tight in my house and there's almost nothing left for discretionary purchases after the bills are paid. Spending $100 to upgrade her computer from XP to Win 7 is very low on the priority list.

My apologies, I tend to forget that aspect. My kids have all grown and I forget the tight money days. You are right, there are a million higher priorities with a growing family.

At 16 she can save her allowance and pay for her computing needs to help the family unit ;)

[JP121]

I still have XP on my netbook, it's what came on it a year ago when I bought it. I still have a desktop with XP on it. The desktop and XP work fine, so it is hard to reason why I would change it. Another one of our computers run 7. IT was upgraded because XP got too slow on it thanks to viruses.

There are plenty of reasons to still run XP.

[Chronon]

I don't know why people are hanging onto XP anyway. Install Win7 , install Ubuntu or buy a Mac.

Is there a reason I shouldn't keep XP as a dual boot on my Ubuntu box? I don't wish to pay for Windows 7 and a Mac is definitely out of my price range.

[benerivo]

I the UK, stores still sell XP machines off the shelves, and most companies still use it, so i couldn't see a reason to reject it as a windows os. Microsoft will continue to support it until 2014.

[PhilGil]

My apologies, I tend to forget that aspect. My kids have all grown and I forget the tight money days. You are right, there are a million higher priorities with a growing family.

At 16 she can save her allowance and pay for her computing needs to help the family unit ;)Apology accepted, sorry if I came off sounding defensive. She's starting to pay for her own stuff - just recently bought herself a new video card.


Is there a reason I shouldn't keep XP as a dual boot on my Ubuntu box? I don't wish to pay for Windows 7 and a Mac is definitely out of my price range.There's no reason to remove XP as long as Microsoft is still pushing out security updates.

[Dustin2128]

Is there a reason I shouldn't keep XP as a dual boot on my Ubuntu box? I don't wish to pay for Windows 7 and a Mac is definitely out of my price range.

not really, especially if you're a gamer or something. Its just insecure and outdated.

[PryGuy]

Open the programs and files you use most in just a click or two

Share files, photos, and music among multiple PCs at home

Print to a single printer from any PC in the houseCmon, that's ridiculous! Any modern OS can do it!

[murderslastcrow]

Windows XP has Windows Movie Maker. Just because they changed the product name suddenly it doesn't have that feature anymore?

And I second that- all of the features listed are common features of any OS. Including XP Mode, which is a shoddy Virtual Machine. (better off running VirtualBox in Windows 7)

Let's all just admit it- Windows 7 is maybe a tiny bit better with compositing and security than XP, but none of the changes are major enough to spend upwards of 200 dollars to get. Especially when you can use wineD3D in Windows XP and get addons for XP to give it the same functionality as Windows 7.

And if you start comparing Windows to any other OS, all you can compare is the applications. Everything else is pretty much the same or worse in Windows. I know I'm generalizing here, but it's obvious.

[kaldor]

Against Mac:

"Apple's productivity suite file formats won't open in Microsoft Office on PCs. This can be a real hassle for Mac users sharing work documents with PC users."

erm.. http://www.microsoft.com/mac/default.mspx

[Khakilang]

Every product they come out will be better than the previous product. That is the way of marketing if not how else will the consumer buy the new product if it isn't better. In order to boost sale of their new product they have to do it. Unlike Linux. If you want to keep on using old hardware you still can run the various version of Linux to make it works. Even the older one.

[murderslastcrow]

I think that citation is referring to iWork (which does support Microsoft formats anyway, but most Mac users I know get OpenOffice anyway). Of course, they would have more to lose advertising Macs with Office than Windows PCs with Office. Again, the FUD may continue until Microsoft's last breathe. We're getting along pretty well without them, and things only seem to be getting easier for the alternatives.

Hopefully some day software freedom will be a convenience taken for granted, rather than a perceived disadvantage saved for the few.

Then again, I guess most people who spend any considerable amount of time with their computer tend to install Firefox and OpenOffice, anyway, even on Windows. Either way, since Vista was so crappy, the hype is much easier for many consumers to swallow this time around.

And still, they aren't, and they're going to cling to XP as long as they can, since it's perfectly adequate for what average people need computers for. I heard a lot of people saying, 'already!?' when Windows 7 came out, although they're trying to get back on their 3 year release cycle. I don't imagine the next Windows will impress many people at this rate.

[cascade9]

I dont see why XP gets people so worked up. Its just an OS.

As for the general idea of upgrading to win7- LOL. You have seen the requirements for win7? -


f you want to run Windows 7 on your PC, here's what it takes:



1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) (http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/features/64-bit-support) processor.
1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit).
16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit).
DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/get/system-requirements.aspx

Virtually no Pentuim 3 will run Win7 (512MB limit on the vast majority of Pentium 3s), lots of machine that do meet the CPU and RAM reqiurements wont have a good enough video card, etc.. Those same machines will run XP really well.

There is always the upgrade option, but that costs money, and its not that enviromentally friendly. People shouldnt have to upgrade the wholte computer just because there are newer OSes out. Like other people have said on this thread, XP is still supported, and will be for another 4 years......


Every product they come out will be better than the previous product. That is the way of marketing if not how else will the consumer buy the new product if it isn't better. In order to boost sale of their new product they have to do it.

:lolflag: Not every product is better than the pervious version- with computers, see "Windows ME" and "Intel Pentium 4" (though the cynical border-line tinfoil hat view is that MS made ME bad to encourage users to move to Win2K and XP, and as for the P4- intel under presure = bad CPU releases)

Marketing departments will always declare the newer version better, but its not always true.


Unlike Linux. If you want to keep on using old hardware you still can run the various version of Linux to make it works. Even the older one.

Not everybody even knows that linux is an option. Even people who might know that will probably have seen the FUD around about linux.

[gradinaruvasile]

Well the campaign is similar to that of the 7 vs Vista - bash the old (overtly or directly), make room for the new. In that case was simple, but the blasted XP made some really long roots since its release.

For home users the switch is simple - they either buy a new computer with preinstalled Win 7 or buy 7 and install it.

But for the market that really supports income is the enterprise market - here are some problems regarding the switch. The enterprise customers pay lots of $ on a switch like this and they usually go by "if it aint broke why fix it?" mindset.
Workers in this sector use their computers for lighter tasks, there is no relevance of Directx11 like components availability. Or the flashy interfaces - they want something that works the way XP does for them (and in this sector usually works, it is tested for many years).

Also remember XP is 10 or so years old, this means that many companies designed their internal softwares around it so they have to remake them in addition to hardware costs. Many programs come from the 95 era, modified a little to work on XP and will not work at all under Win7.
The "XP compatibility" thing is another mainly salesman talk, why on Earth would you buy the Professional version of Win 7 and install a virtual machine that is Windows XP to run your needed programs when you already have Windows XP? And this means your older (P4 or Celeron or even lower end recent Intel Pentioms) machine will need to be replaced because its CPU doesnt support virtualisation, a requirement for the XP compatibility...
And Vista wasnt exactly a good Microsoft commercial.

The "downgrade to XP" program is still running and it seems it still around for some years to come. Many people, especially in corporations downgrade their laptops OS to XP from Win7 even now - the reasons are mainly compatibility with the established infrastructure or the lack of testing, so the IT guys who give advices just go with the known stuff.
So, Microsoft has some work to do before the business sector is convinced that they *really* need Win 7 (and Office 2007/2010/...).
Probably they will try the starvation tactics, slowly ending support for key components that are actively used in enterprise, but this will take time because whole ecosystems are already designed to work on Win XP and some customers just might change their minds on the platform they prefer on the next upgrade cycle if they feel pressured. Maybe Microsoft just make sure that really creepy exploits appear on the net that works only pre-Vista to put some additional pressure.