| 8:50 am on Apr 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
April 29th,released to MSDN,Windows Update and the Microsoft Download Center may be later
| 9:32 am on Apr 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I heard it's supposed to make XP even faster on Dual Core processors apparently.
| 11:17 am on Apr 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
It will be interesting to see comparisons of identical machines using Win XP SP3 and Win Vista SP1.
Will the imperative to go back to Win XP still be as great?
| 1:18 pm on Apr 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure it took so long because they were busy figuring out how to configure SP3 to render your copy of XP inoperable and thereby force you to go out and buy Vista.
| 3:20 pm on Apr 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|I heard it's supposed to make XP even faster on Dual Core processors apparently. |
I heard that too and I hope its true. I have several dual core machines that really do not run much faster than the other machines. So it was a little dissapointing when I purchased them. Then I heard that SP3 is the key to making them run a lot faster.
Here is hoping.
Can anyone who used the Beta version confirm this rumour?
| 4:21 pm on Apr 23, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I used beta SP3 and it seemed a bit faster on dual core, however I had one component in it suddenly expire - Remote Desktop and this caused serious pain, due to some other reasons I had to reinstall Windows XP SP2, and guess what - doing THAT made things run faster than after SP3. I am not planning to install SP3 now.
| 9:31 pm on Apr 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Am I cynical to wonder if maybe Microsoft has put some sort of kill switch in XP to coax customers to upgrade to Vista?
| 10:20 pm on Apr 24, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure some people in MS would like to kill XP, but if they were to sabotage it, the class action that could result might bankrupt them.
| 2:58 am on Apr 25, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Frankly Microsoft wants total market dominance. They'd rather have you using XP with SP3 then using something they haven't made. So sabotaging their own product makes absolutely no business sense to them. It would mean either people give up on Windows altogether or they revert back to SP2. I look forward to Tuesday's download. :)
| 7:11 am on Apr 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
XP-SP2 is already faster than Vista SP1, so that should tell you something head on.
If XP-SP3 blows chunks? Well, hey, I've lots of XP-SP2 laying about just ready for another run.
And since Vista is already listed as DOA right beside Win-ME, I'm looking to 2010 and Win-7.0.
As an aside, if Microsoft did write in a shut off to XP thru SP3 (which incidently, I find highly unlikely) we would just have to do a bit of a reformat then ... No worries.
Oh, and one more bit about the business end of it;
Microsoft would most likely do well to just be rid of the Internet Explorer. They would be dollars ahead if they just concentrated on the OS, and left the browser building to the experts.
| 9:06 am on Apr 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Microsoft would most likely do well to just be rid of the Internet Explorer. |
I said much the same thing some time ago. It would leave them with two problems - supporting .chm help and ActiveX. However, it is my understanding that Gecko can cope with both one way or another.
As I see it, there is no logical business reason to continue to develop and bundle Internet Explorer - it's just Corporate pride/stubbornness that's keeping it going.
| 6:36 pm on Apr 26, 2008 (gmt 0)|
*** be rid of the Internet Explorer ***
I thought that, back in the days of Windows 3.1 and have seen nothing to change my mind since then.
| 12:24 am on Apr 30, 2008 (gmt 0)|
The following message was cut out to new thread by engine. New thread at: microsoft_windows_os/3639640.htm [webmasterworld.com]
6:19 pm on May 1, 2008 (utc +1)