Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- From: "David Ridgway" <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:19:04 +0900
Ah, but you don't *have* to upgrade the OS every time a new one comes out. That choice is really dictated by whether you want to support your customers decision to upgrade. I know some companies are still on Win2K, and quite happy to be there.
Yeah, but when Microsoft refuse to sell the old OS (June of this year I think for XP), and your customer buys a new PC with the 'latest and greatest' installed, because they can't buy XP any more, what then? Eventually, you *are* forced to upgrade.
From memory they tried to stop selling XP last year, but due to pressurefrom suppliers, cancelled those plans, so its life was already extended.
I still don't see why you are forced to upgrade - if you want to stay on your current OS, there is nothing stopping you from doing that. You don't have to buy a PC with an OS unless you buy a brand name. Unless you have an OEM copy of the OS, there is nothing preventing you from installing the old OS on your new PC.
Support/updates are another issue of course - but then again, you won't get updates for old Linux distros either, and Apple supporting an older OS? Forget about it.
.
- References:
- Keeping developers on their toes
- From: Kostya
- Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- From: WillR
- Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- From: Kostya
- Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- From: David Ridgway
- Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- From: Dave White
- Keeping developers on their toes
- Prev by Date: Re: After recent experience with Vista and moving to Ubuntu
- Next by Date: Re: Garbage collection - performance test
- Previous by thread: Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- Next by thread: Re: Keeping developers on their toes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|