Agree with above, I have an older computer and it probably won't fit or stay on it very well and well I want to stay with it thus far
Why do you stay with Windows XP?
- Thread starter GreenNY
- Start date
Well XP is great for old pc's
Can't say it better my freiend
Yet another issue with Windows 7 that XP does not have:
Not only can 7 not do flawless HDTV recordings, it can't even record 2496 PCM stereo analog audio without having a dropout every few seconds. Card is a M-Audio US41750 Audiophile 192. No amount of tweaking of the buffers, recording to SSD vs. spinning helps. Perhaps it just doesn't like the drivers. Tried Audition 3 and CS6, Soundforge 11, and Audacity v2.1. Playback of audio-video recorded elsewhere is flawless. I didn't waste much time troubleshooting it. I just set up my analog videocapture box (XP 32bit) with a decent soundcard- M-Audio Delta 1010 (rackmount), and XP records flawlessly (used Audition 3).
I now have 2 of those Delta1010s- the other runs on a P4 on Windows 2000 (never had a reason to put XP on- box is 16 years old and was my first 2TB drive- 12 200GB IDE drives on a 3Ware card). It can record, but I primarily use it for my jukebox hooked to a Crown MA-3600vz- 1800 watts per channel. I have Magnepan 3.6R speakers which are like 84dB/watt and need a powerful amp to get decent dynamics.
Not only can 7 not do flawless HDTV recordings, it can't even record 2496 PCM stereo analog audio without having a dropout every few seconds. Card is a M-Audio US41750 Audiophile 192. No amount of tweaking of the buffers, recording to SSD vs. spinning helps. Perhaps it just doesn't like the drivers. Tried Audition 3 and CS6, Soundforge 11, and Audacity v2.1. Playback of audio-video recorded elsewhere is flawless. I didn't waste much time troubleshooting it. I just set up my analog videocapture box (XP 32bit) with a decent soundcard- M-Audio Delta 1010 (rackmount), and XP records flawlessly (used Audition 3).
I now have 2 of those Delta1010s- the other runs on a P4 on Windows 2000 (never had a reason to put XP on- box is 16 years old and was my first 2TB drive- 12 200GB IDE drives on a 3Ware card). It can record, but I primarily use it for my jukebox hooked to a Crown MA-3600vz- 1800 watts per channel. I have Magnepan 3.6R speakers which are like 84dB/watt and need a powerful amp to get decent dynamics.
I deal with this at work every day:
Often I need to rename some files from a search dialog. For unknown reasons, this doesn't work properly on Windows 7- it either won't rename at all, or partially renames... I end up having to find the file(s) in another Windows Explorer sorted appropriately (usually date modified is fastest). What a time waste.
I have no problem renaming files in an XP search dialog. At home, the workaround for files on a WIn7 box is to do all renaming from XP via the drive mappings.
Often I need to rename some files from a search dialog. For unknown reasons, this doesn't work properly on Windows 7- it either won't rename at all, or partially renames... I end up having to find the file(s) in another Windows Explorer sorted appropriately (usually date modified is fastest). What a time waste.
I have no problem renaming files in an XP search dialog. At home, the workaround for files on a WIn7 box is to do all renaming from XP via the drive mappings.
I have many reasons, but I'll list only three:
1) Low overhead/system requirements. XP was designed to work even on ancient (pre-MMX) Pentiums and 64MB of RAM. On the other hand, Windows Vista/7 require at least a Pentium II & 512MB of RAM. Windows 8/8.1/10 require a Pentium 4 & 1GB of RAM.
2) The impressive compatibility with older software. I run older versions of many programs--most of what I have installed will work with Win98, and in a few cases even Win95. When I try to run the same versions on Vista/7/etc., they oftentimes do not work the same way there that they do in Windows XP & in other cases have weird bugs & glitches that don't ever happen in Windows XP.
3) The lack of susceptibility to hackers. XP-era viruses aren't in the wild; new ones aren't coded for XP compatibility in most cases.
1) Low overhead/system requirements. XP was designed to work even on ancient (pre-MMX) Pentiums and 64MB of RAM. On the other hand, Windows Vista/7 require at least a Pentium II & 512MB of RAM. Windows 8/8.1/10 require a Pentium 4 & 1GB of RAM.
2) The impressive compatibility with older software. I run older versions of many programs--most of what I have installed will work with Win98, and in a few cases even Win95. When I try to run the same versions on Vista/7/etc., they oftentimes do not work the same way there that they do in Windows XP & in other cases have weird bugs & glitches that don't ever happen in Windows XP.
3) The lack of susceptibility to hackers. XP-era viruses aren't in the wild; new ones aren't coded for XP compatibility in most cases.
Maybe I should add another reason that looks increasingly compelling.
Until the turn of the millennium "newer is better" used to be a matter of course, no doubt, upgrade and it will work better. And old habits die hard.
But in the following that old-fashioned motto has been gradually replaced by the various "newer is greedier", "newer is nosier", "newer is trickier", in any combination thereof: in the course of those decades we all saw the performances growing logarithmically, the complexity growing exponentially, the privacy dropping to very near zero. Perhaps Microsoft got it started but it spread like wildfire.
Now the current trend seems to be to put a leash on all the users, to make them pay by the month for software and services that cannot be purchased anymore, to squeeze out of them any bit of even vaguely marketable personal information - with or without warning.
The new generations may have no objection to having a webcam installed in their bathroom, but we from the old school keep valuing our own privacy and our liberty to choose with whom we want to share our thoughts and our little secrets.
Until the turn of the millennium "newer is better" used to be a matter of course, no doubt, upgrade and it will work better. And old habits die hard.
But in the following that old-fashioned motto has been gradually replaced by the various "newer is greedier", "newer is nosier", "newer is trickier", in any combination thereof: in the course of those decades we all saw the performances growing logarithmically, the complexity growing exponentially, the privacy dropping to very near zero. Perhaps Microsoft got it started but it spread like wildfire.
Now the current trend seems to be to put a leash on all the users, to make them pay by the month for software and services that cannot be purchased anymore, to squeeze out of them any bit of even vaguely marketable personal information - with or without warning.
The new generations may have no objection to having a webcam installed in their bathroom, but we from the old school keep valuing our own privacy and our liberty to choose with whom we want to share our thoughts and our little secrets.