The end of Windows XP

[tw]

Originally Posted by Molasar

same in the report that gets sent to Autodesk automatically, and is sometimes preceded by a warning "autocad is running out of system memory, do you want to cancel the current command?"

That crash would be a software bug. Program that needs more memory simply gave a warning message; should not terminate.

In an crash, the entire OS must be rebooted. Pre-emptive multi-tasking means program software errors do not crash the machine; only terminate a defective task. We are working with different definitions of the word 'crash'.

Why were Windows 95/98/ME so bad? Defective programs could crash the OS. These were only cooperative multi-tasking OSes. Reliable OS means a program does not crash the OS.

Back to the topic. Later OSes need more memory and other hardware features. Upgrading an OS on limited hardware from the XP period is not recommended. Better is to also upgrade hardware.

The XP system is an ideal candidate for other functions such as a repository for data backup or a database for a security system. Or an income source on E-bay.

[Elspode]

I have a nearly ten year old XP based computer that I use as a dedicated video server. It is networked with all our laptops, and we stream Netflix via a hardwire ATT connection to it, and play downloaded movies on it. It also uploads my weather station data 24/7 (http://www.wunderground.com/weathers...p?ID=KMORAYTO4).

I've been hearing XP death knells for a long time, and in fact, I haven't seen an XP update on it for a few months now. But, until something takes it down in pain and flames, it does fine.

[Elspode]

Update to my last post. My XP machine is now downloading new updates from MS, so...XP not dead yet. Perhaps MS knows that most of what they've done since then is ripoff crap?