As someone who likes old computer hardware/software, I found this bit of his article insulting:
It has a few ageing users who are not interested in buying new PCs and may not even know that XP support has been discontinued. It still has a following among the ignorant and/or recalcitrant, who either don't know or won't admit that Windows 7 is far superior."

Hey, I'm typoing this on a Win7 machine; I happen to love Win7. But, there are things it doesn't run or doesn't run easily.
I have a couple old machines running XP, and I recently re-setup my old K6-300 DOS computer running WFW 3.11 because I want to experience running some old apps and playing some old games as they were back when the world was a better place.


One commenter, to another commenter, displayed a juvenile attitude I find far too previlent in modern society:

"Sounds like...
You should blame Lenovo, not MS.

But we all get it - you don't like new things that bring progress. You're one of those guys who prefers to live in the past."

So change is good, so long as it is change?
Note he said, 'bring progress'. That's one of those red-flag phrases, where I immediately check the premise. Progress implies a direction... progress towards... what?

"One man's LOCK-DOWN is another man's SECURITY.
Out of the box, Windows XP is exceedingly insecure. You have to add all these third-party security products to get any kind of security at all. "

As I said in my reply to that comment:
"Absolutely! It's why I first became interested in computers. Why should anyone else have control over MY computer exceeding the control *I* have over my computer?"

Gates announced decades ago his goal to turn computers into dumb internet terminals, with content controlled at the producer end (like TV) rather than at the consumer end (like computers). Eventually they'll be able to control what content is available, this way.

Oh, but we'll all be 'secure'.