Windows XP to be phased out by year's end despite customer demand

Angus Kidman
12 April 2007, 12:08 AM


Computer makers have been told they'll no longer be able to get Windows XP OEM by the end of this year, despite consumer resistance to Vista and its compatibility problems.


Computer makers have been told they'll no longer be able to get Windows XP OEM by the end of this year, despite consumer resistance to Vista and its compatibility problems.

By early 2008, Microsoft's contracts with computer makers will require companies to only sell Vista-loaded machines. "The OEM version of XP Professional goes next January," said Frank Luburic, senior ThinkPad product manager for Lenovo. "At that point, they'll have no choice."

Despite Microsoft's relentless promotion of Vista, manufacturers are still seeing plenty of demand from customers for systems preloaded with XP, especially in the finicky SOHO market.

In a recent post on its Direct2Dell blog, Dell reaffirmed to concerned customers that it wasn't about to force small business users -- who typically purchase PCs piecemeal, rather than in large enterprise-style orders -- to shift to Vista, which has experienced a less-than-stellar reaction from many buyers because of driver issues and moderately beefy hardware requirements.

"Dell recognizes the needs of small business customers and understands that more time is needed to transition to a new operating system," the post read in part. "The plan is to continue offering Windows XP on select Dimension and Inspiron systems until later this [northern] summer."

"From a local perspective, the post was a reminder more than an announcement," Dell ANZ corporate communications manager Paul McKeon told APC.

"This was something we'd always planned during the transition phase since businesses will have different time frames to adopt the new OS. If you're a consumer, you're unlikely to be managing more than say 2.4 OS images at home, so it's less of an issue"

There's general agreement amongst PC resellers that Vista has provided a minor boost to PC sales, but hasn't produced blockbuster numbers. A similar story applies in the retail space. Figures from marketing consultancy GfK suggest that after an initial sales surge, around 1500 copies of Vista are now being sold through Australian retailers each week, according to a recent report in the AFR.

While Dell's post suggested it wouldn't be promoting Vista systems to the home market, manufacturers still have the option of selling XP-based systems for consumers this year.


Post your comment



First 50 Comments

View All Comments (233) RSS feed Email alert

raindog:

Good One Microsoft, ignore the wishes and needs of the marketplace entirely, perhaps Vista should be renamed as Windows Edsel, the product they thought we should have.

Dell has acted on customer demand and the cowboys from Microsoft go all out to close down those same options of consumer choice. Couldn't be a better time for the rumoured Dell + Open Source OS to gain momentum.





29 February 2008, 8:30 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Bradavon:

The marketplace very much wanted 98 still when XP came out but no one would want it now.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

dealwithit:

Except, genius, that XP was FASTER than 98 and demonstrated IMPROVEMENTS. Vista is SLOWER, clunkier, and offer the user NO practical benefit. NONE. But, it DOES look nice. THAT'S certainly a reason to downgrade, huh?

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Space:

Not true m8.
WindowsXP was never faster than Windows 89. In fact it used a lot more CPU power in idle leaving less for power hungry apps like 3D rendering and photo processing.

Two things were faster: search was faster ( who cares, power users do know where they store data, so they to not need search ) and system swap worked faster ( again redundant feature, every1 knows that RAM is 10-50 times faster than fastest hard drive or hard drive system, so smart user would use more ram to get jobe done in less time ) Note Windows 98 was limited to 384MB of RAM, the rest it did show as installed but Windows 98 did not use anything over 384MB. I say SABOTAGE.

Windows XP uses makeup on GUI and lacks agillity on simple GUI operations like window and menu operations. Makeup feature can be turned off to speed up GUI but does not free CPU.

Windows XP did improve multimedia, but did abandone several superior hardware relate d features that were unique to the win32 platform at the time.

Windows XP security was a bitch, windows 98 was lot more tweakable.

If any1 thinks that windows XP is faster I am ready to demonstrate 5 minute installation of windows 98 and 15 more minutes for complete drivers, multimedia and interet connection on simple 1GHz Athlon with 256MB of ram and simple 20GB hard drive.

Now let's talk about windows Vista...

How many minutes ( or hours ) you need to complete installation with multimedia, security and softwere that YOU USE ?

Does the Vista allows YOU to do more in less time like windows XP did when You upgraded from Windows 98 ?

Did You try to upgrade Windows XP machine to Vista and use seirous expensive software thet runs on specific audio and video proccesing hardware ?


29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Qban:

Windows 98 had NO security. Anyone who implies that it did has no clue what they are talking about. The transition from Windows 98 was to Millenium or Windows 2000, not XP. Vista reminds me a lot of Millenium. It is a rush to market of a product that is obviously not ready. That is absolutely clear at this point. The only beneifits that Vista has claimed to have that anyone should really be concerned with is security and the new TCP/IP stack. The new security is a joke when any user can elevate their priveledges to Administrator without a password and the stack is buggy. I don't know one IT professional who has gone to Vista that has not been utterly frustrated. I manage 100+ PC's at my business. We have 3 Vista boxes. They perform terribly. There is absolutely no way I will install that under-achieving bloatware on any more machines until at least SP1 and that is only if Microsoft can fix the countless issues we see on a day to day basis with these current machines. If you want to know the truth, ask someone who is responsible for keeping a company running smoothly. Anyone who thinks that going Vista right now makes any business sense is quite frankly not very inteligent or has obviously just bought in to the Microsoft advertising hype without doing their homework.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Alicia C Simpson:

If you want to do something good for your company put Linux on every box. Xandros is a good choice right out of the box, it includes Crossover so you can continue to run Microsoft Office, Adobe Pagemaker, Adobe Photoshop and hundreds of other Windows applications natively under Linux.

You can even go with Ubuntu and only buy Crossover from Codeweavers for those who really NEED to run Windows applications.

Any Linux distro will work very well on a computer designed to run Windows 2000!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous123:

dream on, why would anyone replace a buggy OS with bad driver support with a hard to support OS with terrible driver support.
Nope as bad as MS is they rule the business market for a reason.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dipstick:

In the real world, driver support at the moment for linux is better than vista (i.e. Nvidia, Creative and other "big" brands), and certainly, when new drivers need to be created, it happens far quicker than on Windows.

Once I heard about the DRM and licencing requirements (since when do you buy something and not own it?), I slowly switched my home computers/laptops over to ubuntu, after trying out a few distros.

My computer illiterate wife's Compaq laptop works brilliantly (and she hasn't ground it down to a halt with spyware), I have a computer made from various brands all absolutely wonderful, and finally the cobbled-together 1.3ghz celeron that I put together from the leftovers of the last few years works brilliantly. I couldn't ask for more.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

halfFAST:

"Once I heard about the DRM and licencing requirements (since when do you buy something and not own it?), I slowly switched my home computers/laptops over to ubuntu, after trying out a few distros."

Umm... typically with all software you are simply buying a license to use someone else's product. You don't hardly ever own anything more than the right to use the program according to the terms given to you by the creator. Ever taken the time to consider what exactly the LICENSE AGREEMENT, that most of us just habitually accept, on just about every single piece of software we install actually is?

Even with open source software, you don't "own" the software. It is typically released with a much, much less restrictive license, but technically you still only have a right to use it to the extent granted to you in the EULA.

And the primary reason why Microsoft continues to do so well is because of its widespread familiarity with how to operate it(Vista may very well kill this benefit with how it rearranged everything though). In other words, you can call just about any support center and expect to be able to have someone help you through most any day-to-day task on a Windows XP machine. Linux is still a long way away from this and requires either a more technical user, or a more specialized support resource. And yes, as of now anyways, that is a clear advantage to using Windows XP over any other OS.

29 February 2008, 8:41 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

G_man:

you sir are an idiot millenium was nothing more than a tweaked 98 se and you must not be very good at managing systems sounds to me like you have just jumped on the microsoft bashing band wagon i'll bet you said exactly the same about xp. I manage 200 systems with vista ultimate installed and everyone runs like a dream. I hate microsoft and their BS but vista actually works and works VERY WELL ! if you use it properly

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

rita:

I have a brand new dell machine with Vista on it connected to a linksys router with a machine with xp on it. on the vista machine i am having trouble connecting and staying connected to the internet. i have worked with dell unresolved and microsoft support for vista windows no resolve. do you have any suggestions they haven't come up with?

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

big Joe:

Um, everything works flawlessly huh? Try using ANY bluetooth device with Vista and perform a suspend or hibernate. I guarantee you NONE of the bluetooth devices will function when you restore from the suspend/hibernate state.

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

FG:

der der der der you sir are a absolute retard and a serious liar , 200 vista machines , you must have the taste of BS in your mouth , your so full of shit your hair is prolly brown . keep your mouth on billies willie and out of post .

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jonno112 (New user):

Well i run Xp over 900 and there is no problem with it, can you tell me an advantage of swapping over to vista. Cause there was a good reason for jumping of 98 and that was the implementation of a single point for security.

16 April 2008, 4:54 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jonno112 (New user):

Well i run Xp over 900 and there is no problem with it, can you tell me an advantage of swapping over to vista. Cause there was a good reason for jumping of 98 and that was the implementation of a single point for security.

16 April 2008, 4:58 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jonno112 (New user):

Well i run Xp over 900 and there is no problem with it, can you tell me an advantage of swapping over to vista. Cause there was a good reason for jumping of 98 and that was the implementation of a single point for security.

16 April 2008, 4:58 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McMek:

You cannot compare the XP with Vista, becouse when XP came around there were no shortage of drivers, becouse the drivers were the same with Win2000 and NT-s before that. The time when XP appeared, win200 drivers worked perfectly, antivirus softwares worked also, there wasn't anything to worry about. Back then, it was possible to buy hardware and make any program and game run faster in XP then in 98. Now, even if you manage to have 4GB of RAM and mainstrean graphic even then XP is faster. So, I say Vista is too heave for this hardware, maybe in a year or so but not now. And please when you make comparisons 98, XP and XP, Vista, have in mind that 98 wasn't so stable in every machine. I can say that for 60% of hardware you'd have to reinstall 98 in every three month. XP is different. you cannot say that Vista more stable than XP

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

DanMan32:

I think you forget the issues that existed when XP came out. Many peripherals were not yet compatible with XP due to driver issues. XP was a cross between 98 (based on the GUI) and W2K (based on the kernel). Not all W2K drivers worked on XP, and not all 98 drivers worked on XP. Sometimes one or the other would work for a temporary solution, but not always.

I suspect Vista will go through the same growing pains XP did. It will take a year for the mess to clear up. Even after 3 months of Vista being released to retail, many apps and drivers don't work on it. Which if you ask me, is the fault of the 3rd party developers.

Heck, even some webpages won't work on Vista, since they don't work properly on IE7.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

oldrigger:

Windows XP I don't believe was any fater than 98. What I did notice is I haven't seen anywhere near as many illegal function errors as I saw with 98.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous64:

"WindowsXP was never faster than Windows 89. In fact it used a lot more CPU power in idle leaving less for power hungry apps like 3D rendering and photo processing."

You don't understand what an idle process is, do you?

It is a faux-process that represents the processor being idle: it isn't using anything.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

smalltalk:

Can you provide a reference to the claims that XP was faster than 98?

Didn't think so. If you were around when XP launched you will remember that a big complaint was that XP was slower on the same systems as 98 in nearly every benchmark. The reason was that XP used the NT kernel which did more hardware abstraction (remember HAL?) and the extra abstraction required more resources.

XP Appears faster than 98 because XP tended to be installed on newer faster systems than 98 had been. But when measured on the same hardware XP was almost always slower.

In a year Vista will appear to be faster than XP because the new systems it is installed on will all be faster than the old XP systems people ran XP on.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Marty:

I suppose Vista will be faster after you upgrade to a server for the average home user. So what is the cost to the average user? Oh my, I have to be a corporation to justify the cost of a computer to do my taxes with Vista!!!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

PJ:

Any hardcore desktop geek loved 98se. Yes IT needed to be updated to keep up with media and graphics...etc. BUT ONLY UPGRADED, not replaced by some "heavy on the-let your PC do it for you crap"! I can't stand my computer telling me what to do! I have spent so much time uninstalling and turning off things that I am NOT HAPPY!
And this $%&*%$ security thing. Geez, they make your computers so that they protect you from you now! So those of us that READ, have to put up with security to protect us from going or doing something on our computer that might be concidered unsafe by those who have one finger stuck in their ear saying duh!!!! Come on now! All you need to do is PREVENT bad guys from messing up your computer. So, install a preboot scanner/fixer. Use a self controlled Firewall, and a pop up blocker. Now control yourself from clicking links you know you shouldn't...lol Don't open email from unsolisited senders. And stay away from porn and other breeding grounds for malware! (No pun intended, but still kinda funny). BUT NOOOOO ! I had to leave behind my 98se...waaaaa, to get this Vista crap. I have to have a bigger hard drive just to hold all this stuff I don't want or need. The thought of what the heck are "no nothings" going to do with this overwhelming behemoth gives me the idea to go into business helping them. I think I'll get rich! ROFLMAO

I so miss my web desktop. It was something I looked forward to everytime I booted up. I would play for hours, getting it just so, using wallpapers and ani gifs and wavs. I miss having absolute control over my PC. If it weren't for forums and tech news sites helping to figure out some of this mess, this new PC would be out the window...lol
And why the heck, did they change the wording and designation of things. I had a real bad headache after trying to find everything on here. Well, my vote on Vista is both thumbs down!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

G-Man:

Just enable the built in admin account thats hidden in vista and you will have as much contorol as u did in 98 se and i promise u it will run twice as fast and U !!! not vista will be in CONTROL !!!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Curtai:

just wondering how you do what your talking about enabling the admin account in vista...

29 February 2008, 8:44 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Alexander Fuchs:

There are many memory/cpu intensive apps that run faster on NT/2000/XP than under 98.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous64:

Windows XP was 15% faster on the same hardware than 98. This was published on the MSDN website.

Vista on the same hardware as XP with all animations on runs at about the same speed as XP with all animations off (my subjective experience upgrading with a clean install of Vista on what was once my XP machine). I am, franky, pleasantly surprised by this unexpected outcome (and yes, I have aero).

I am seeing no problems at all, despite having a wide range of software, except that Creative are a bit slow to get their drivers uptodate for Audigy2ZS cards.

In the latter case, the built-in driver with Vista works fine, the Creative drivers have a lot of core features disabled, and there is no THX console yet, which is bad if you want surround sound (it adjusts the phase timing and levels of the individual speakers). This is very sad considering Vista has been 6 years coming with several years in beta, and XP is about to be phased out in 2 months or so.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

geeky_1:

I installed windows XP the day it came out. I never had the problems going from 98 to xp that I'm having going from xp to vista. I notice that when I was beta testing vista I kept blaming things on the fact that it was the beta version. Well guess what Its out of beta and it still sucks. xp like 2000 will run on about anything you throw at it where as vista wont even work with some of microsofts hardware I have been fighting with. I know when I buy / build a new system I will be on ebay trying to find a copy of xp pro.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

dekess:

Your forgot to mention the abysmal 2000 and millennium editions that failed miserably before they hit on XP. Microsoft has a history of cramming inferior products down the publics throat

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Potoroo:

RE: dekess

"Your forgot to mention the abysmal 2000 and millennium editions that failed miserably before they hit on XP. Microsoft has a history of cramming inferior products down the publics throat"

Whilst WinMe deservedly bears the title of the worst Windows ever, Win2000 (aka NT5) was a distinct improvement over NT4. Far from being inferior, it was the version where MS largely solved the instability problems that had plagued the NT line until then. Many businesses are happily running Win2k to this day.


29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

kiwiclay:

Microsoft has an operating history of inferior products right to their founding days,
TRS-DOS had to be the buggiest program I ever used, I lost count of the number of fellow students floppy disks that I had to patch to save critical data, and the original PC-DOS had many of the same flaws.
The problem has been is no company seems prepared to attempt to produce a better PC operating system with the same level of commercial support, Tho I will agree LINUX is getting closer to this point.


29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Wes:

Also the change from 98 to XP did not the hardware demands that we have with the change from XP to Vista.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

TomCat:

I agree, raindog. Could 2008 be "The Year of the Penguin"?

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

cmeeks:

The flightless bird has landed so to speak. As Microsoft's idea of what a OS should be moves further from that of the public especially small business Linux gains market share.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymouse:

could this be just the ticket ?
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Absinthyium:

Definitely, I'm waiting on ReactOS as well. However if you take in consideration just how long the project has been running now, the fact that they've been stuck in the final stretch of auditing the os' code for a few months at least, and that they still seem to be nowhere near a beta version... well, we've got quite a wait. I'll just stick to XP and reading the latest Linux manual til then. ('cause when it's ready, xp is history on any system I have!)

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

afterdarkxxx:

"Please bear in mind that ReactOS 0.3.1 is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature complete and is not recommended for everyday use."

Go developer, stay away power user

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Zexy:

re:
could this be just the ticket ?
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

ReactOS is still in Alpha....doubtful it will be ready for mass market anytime soon. I do applaude their efforts though. I'll be stopping by their site from time to time to see how the progress goes. For now though I will just move to Ubuntu. Outside of a few big aps/games, I can get whatever else I need or something comparable to what I was using on Winbloze.
.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

FooCumber:

No, it will not be the "Year of the Penguin". Even if microsoft blows everything, the transition will be slow. Not only so people will move to OS X before they move to linux. Wishes are nice, too bad they rarely happen.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Balboos:

This was my first (mental) comment when I saw the title of the article. MS is every more eager to live up to that old saw:

"We're Micrsoft. We don't give a damn. We don't have to."

Having played with Ubuntu in the run-from-CD mode, I can conclude that most business/office users could get buy on it rather well (if not substantially better than) they do with Windows of any vintage.


29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

technet oldschool:

I am a Window user, and have been so for a long time, However, after using Vista now for about a month, the penguin is looing very tempting. What a slow POJ.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

FrostBird:

Several years ago, Linux would have been a bad bussiness advice, usually after considering the cost of training the users.
But with sofware like OpenOffice.org and the gui for distros like Ubuntu, the things that usually hold Linux are the work for/inexperience of sysadmins (mostly small companies) or cost for reworking own software (large companies).
I wonder for how many bosses these last two will no longer be an issue after learning the cost for training/rewriting neccesary for this radically new system.
Ofcourse, it's only to be decided after the write-off of the current systems. In a couple of years perhaps. And then we will have to see the battle between SP1 and the new child of Ubuntu.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

adam:

Go Linux!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

starcrusade:

If you read the whole article it says that Dell will continue to provide models with Windows XP into this summer. Funny how you laude Dell when they are stopping sales months before Microsoft is telling them they won't be providing XP anymore.

Also Vista OEM licenses are downgradeable which means that if you get a pc with Vista Business (or ultimate) on it you can go ahead and re-install it with XP Pro and it is fully legal. I might add that these rights go all the way down to Windows NT 3.5.1.

Last I checked I can't go out and buy a 1993 Ford F-150 straight from the factory, this is no different, Microsoft is just keeping their factory lines as clean as possible, it saves them money this way.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Ed T:

While you are correct that you can downgrade to xp, you MUST format the drive, then use a reinstallation cd, and you also may need to make a bios change on SATA drives. Then also, you will need to get the XP drivers for your pc or laptop, which are NOT on the drivers cd's anymore that come with your system, they only give you Vista drivers now, doesn't that suck!!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Chrisk:

Always use reference drivers if possible. Vendors in general make few or no changes, never update and add complexity to their drivers. I never bother with vendor drivers unless the chipset for the device is actually manufactured by the vender (a lot of sony products).

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

XP'ated:

With much trepidation, I followed the instructions for the Toshiba Vista-to-XP "downgrade" for my Satellite Pro Laptop. Disks were supplied with the laptop (thankfully). It worked! The laptop works, fantastically well. It had so much extra performance just to try to make Vista look good. Now with XP it flies. Gone are the slow boots and shut downs. Back is clean simple XP. All functionality is maintained. The only thing missing from the XP version was a completely crazy software duplication of the the function buttons that cluttered the upper display (Toshiba, why on earth?) in VISTA.

I am a keen application sofware user but not what you would call a geek. I think that an operating system should be like an engine management system in a car. Invisible. Unconditionally reliable. VISTA took over the foreground and drove me nuts. I just wanted to use my programs to do some work.

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

raindog:

I don't remember seeing the [northern] reference to summer when I first read this article, (I could be wrong) however the later sentences suggest XP availability this calendar year which would be well into APC summertime.

Funny you compare Microsoft with Ford US who are somehow having trouble turning a buck after totally ignoring the wants and needs of their market-place. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

USA wants rear drive sedans and yet Ford wont sell a decent 4 Door RWD, go figure! Toyota here in Aus have tried to crack the large sedan market for a decade but keep thrusting up FWDs that no one wants, go figure! Looks like Microsoft is hell bent on emulating the US auto makers.

Ford Aus is no stranger to having rude Americans thrust their will onto the local marketplace and every-time they have done this, sales have dropped. Every time consumer choice returns sales improve.

To put your Microsoft/Ford model into a more Vista like analogy, imagine if you went to buy your 07 F-150 and were told it has been replaced by the overblown F-650 complete with a F-650 price tag, fuel economy, truck performance etc. Are you going to remain brand loyal or are the competitors suddenly looking a lot more attractive. In those terms a run-out model 06 F-150 would be looking pretty darn attractive. XP is that 06 model!

Consumers dont give two shakes about clean factory lines, they want value for money!!

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

fyrfytrhodge:

"Rude Amnericans?" typical quip from a jealous Aussie. I noticed you metioned three companies (Microsoft, Ford, Toyota)all of which you apparently rely on "down under" for goods and services, but none of which is Australian. Get a real economy that actually produces something, then you can bitch and moan. Until then, "beggars can't be choosers."

29 February 2008, 8:40 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

guvna:

Dude, typical dumb, uninformed American attitude.

Jealous? you are joking right?

Hey, is Russia a state of the USA? Your president is an imbecile, he doesnt even know left from right. And you brainiacs actually voted for him!!

Mate that brain cell of yours must be real lonely up there without any others to keep it company.

Next time you want to display your idiocy to the world do it on a Seppo site.

By the way we call you guys Seppos as you are like septic tanks. Full of sh...

29 February 2008, 8:48 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

View all comments (233)  

anonymous user Anonymous user