Comments As many have noticed, the Lightroom 4 public beta we released last week does not support Windows XP. This decision did not come lightly and was based on a number of factors. With each version of Lightroom, our goal is always to provide a consistently excellent customer experience. Developing and testing across Operating System versions and platforms to ensure that we’re achieving this goal is a significant effort that takes time and resources. XP is substantially different from Windows Vista and Windows 7, and requires a independent testing matrix, which increases the complexity of our development efforts. Every cycle we need to make difficult resource tradeoff decisions and operating system support competes heavily with new features and performance enhancements planned for each version. The decision this cycle was to end XP support for Lightroom going forward.
NOTE: On the Mac platform we needed to make a similar decision to end support for systems that are not 64-bit capable.
As a very new user of LR 3, I’m very disappointed that XP support will end for LR 4. My upgrade plans for a new computer were at least 9 months away and the new Develop features in 4 are very appealing. I wil have to delay my upgrade to LR 4 and given my upgrade timeline, I will probaly pass of LR 4 and wait for LR 5 or explore other sofware for my post processing needs. It’s unfortunate as I was becomeing quite proficient with LR 3.
Not a happy and satisfied customer,
Morley Goddard
I planed to buy LR3 and found that LR4 is coming. In case I will buy LR3 right now, shall I pay upgrade fee when LR4 sales will start?
When LR4 will be announced?
Absolutely the right decision – and about time. XP is an old dinosaur that should have been killed off years ago. Kudos for standing up to these stupid XP fanatics who claim that Windows XP is better than more recent Windows versions. I wish more software makers would do so. I don’t see any problem – part of owning a computer is keeping it up to date. If you don’t, you won’t be able to run the latest software. Simple enough, I should think.
It is a disheartening that language is used calling XP users stupid. I have no respect for an individual that would use a description like that. It shows a level of arrogance, and lack of empathy for the reality of life. I am user of Windows XP Professional x64 Edition which is an edition of Windows Server 2003 and it is very different than XP.
Windows XP is a product that is well over 10 _years_ old. Windows XP 64 is essentially the same age, given its underpinnings and was used as a placeholder to get Microsoft a consumer-level 64bit OS when it had none, before Windows 7 was ready.
Both are very short of viable life span, even according to Microsoft.
your vision of XP x64 is very stupid: as said, XP x64 is not based on XP but Windows server 2003 64. It’s the more stable and efficient version of windows. Vista and it’s last service pack (called windows 7) are very buggy and slow. They use far more resources for the same functionnalities.
So Adobe you are saving fiew money by dropping xp support but your image will suffer a lot: for mac why use Adobe if they have the same support politics than Apple (only support the latest OS version)?? And for Windows or other OS, hopefully we have more and more alternatives: RawTherapy is becoming closer to lightroom release after release
After the end of flash support, you are turning bad…
XP is 11 years old, but the real problem is Microsoft support for this system.
According to MS Extended Support for will end 08/04/2014.
Here the link to official site :
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-gb&C2=1173
Regards to XP and W7 users.
Agree. I would rather see LR4 with more features than worrying about WinXP.
I think many photographers understand the need to keep current, especially in the digital world. The left behinds are not going to be happy, particularly the ones who have budget issues. There may be a significant number of Lr users who will skip this upgrade to wait for the time when they can afford to jump to a new operating system. On the other hand, the new release may just prove to be the reason they decide to make a system upgrade.
I am sure you folks had quite the debate!
Best justifiable reason for doing a cut-off would be if there were features in the new version that would not work with the older operating systems.
Well, then I have to decide whether to buy a new computer with win 7, or stay with LR3. With the current economy the chioce for me is quite clear – no new LR until the old computer is phased out…
in most cases you don´t need a new PC you need a new OPERATING SYSTEM.
i have win7 running even on my FTP server.. and that is a slow INTEL ATOM 330 with 1 GB RAM.
that is not a system i would do photoshop or lightroom work on.. but win7 is running on it 7/24.. stable.. no crash since 2009.
so if XP is running fine for you with LIGHTROOM 3.. then there is a 90% chance that win7 will run fine on that system too.
This is the right decision to make!
Give us GPU acceleration!
XP is a dinosaur and this is far from an unexpected decision. Adobe have made a wise and well justified decision, XP has been dying for years now and to be honest if you want to be using the latest and greatest software you will need to accept that system requirements do move on. I expect it won’t be long before it’s Win X64 only as well.
Well done Adobe!
we will move to more supported software, lightroom is not alone hopefully and dropping support of the most used OS even today is foollish
differences between XP and 7 from a developer point of view is very slow so it is very stupid to stop supporting an OS to save so few money,
We can wonder if Adobe is not going Chapter 11 soon, knowing it’s enf of Flash/Flex support for mobiles (and everybody understood it as the end of flash soon)
It’s okay, guys. Those of us who weren’t on the “gotta spend thousands for the lastest upgrades we don’t need to do our jobs” path aren’t profitable anyway, and no creative worth his / her salt in today’s world is unaware that it’s a screw or be screwed world. Loyalty is for dogs.
And there are any number of alternatives for most of us, substantially all far less overpriced.
Been nice knowing you.
well if you have an very old XP system that is not capable of running LR4.. how you do your work with high res files is a miracle to me anyway….
so i guess M$ paint would be fine for you?
i meant: not capable of running WIN7…. of course.
XP 64 is supporting 128 GB RAM so is able to deal with the bigger files on a par with 7, but in a far more efficient way
yeah sure i have a bridge to sell to you….in brooklyn.
@Morley
As Tom Hogarty stated, Windows XP support needs more time and effort for development, testing, and support. This eventually leads to a delay of the product release, increased pricing, less quality, and perhaps less new stuff in the next release.
Should all the people, who have no problem upgrading to Win 7 depend on your private “upgrade plans”? Your XP folks should rather wake up and get realistic. Adobe won’t be the only one, which will drop XP support very soon.
good move!
XP is outdated and time moves on.
i think there are also some people in caves who would like to ses support for windows 98.
no honest…. it´s 2012 and win7 is CLEARLY the better OS.
Morley Goddard, not Adobes fault that you’re unhappy and unsatisfied. In the end the costs for developing and testing for dinosaur-operating-systems are paid by us. So i totally agree stop doing so for an totally outdated os like windows xp. 10 years is really enough now!
The problem is that staying with XP is not a sigle point decision for everyone. When you have scanners, printers and calibration tools that don’t have updated drivers the move to a newer OS it can be very very expensive and disruptive. If otherwise you are happy with your work environment this is not just a simple upgrade.
i have a 6 year old epson scanner that has no 64 bit driver for win7 64 bit.
but that does not stop me from using win7.
i can use vuescan to operate that scanner.
printer.. must be a strange large format printer… otherwise there should be drivers.
and even if it would not work at all i would rather spend money for a new scanner / printer then sticking to XP.
especially for photoshop and lighroom a PC should have much RAM.
8-16 GB ram are a relief when working with todays high res files.
and RAM; is cheap… but you need a 64 BIT OS to use 8 or 16 GB RAM.
i have some old SCI hardware too that i bought while windows 95 was up to date.
but i dont expect that companys support these old hardware anymore.
if companys produce no 64 bit driver (or no win7 driver at all) for hardware that is only 3-4 years old that´s bad… i agree. but you can´t blame software companys for the bad driver support of some companys.
don´t buy from these companys again!
Doesn’t matter I will switch from Lightroom to Capture One, Bibble Pro or DXO. All of these still support Windows XP. Adobe’s loss. Windows 7 was not my idea.
i guess you never needed the database function in LR then… or you just telling something because you think somebody cares what you will do
Mark,
bag argumentation. Im a system administrator and there are drivers for older hardware, even if only generic. but if your printer is ten years old, of course, you might run into problems.
thats all but excuses. serious business people have serious hardware upgrade plans and save money for that. if they don’t recognize IT as a vital part of their businesses, then they are ignorant. and why do they compain anyway? someone who is running a 12 year old O/S want to have the newest lightroom software? From the point of a system administrator for small to large companies THIS IS NO EXCUSE
some people can not afford a car… but that does not mean we all have to ride horses.
if your happy with XP and need nothing better you accustomed to suffering and sure don´t need LR 4.
sorry but i can´t hear this stuff anymore.. XP XP XP… it´s old, it´s unsecure, ist does not support the latest hardware like win7.
photogs pay 2000 euro for a 5D MK2 + 300 euro for LR but the PC system can´t be upgraded in 10 years….
i think you don’t have any knowledge in operating systems. XP is still a very powerful OS. Today advancements are not in the core OS… For exemple, Linux or MacOS are evolving very slowly since 2003, and are better OS than Windows (XP or 7). Microsoft did changes in windows kernel with vista but it’s advantages are not for user, but for maintenance costs by Ms
and i think you have no clue. that is why you still use an outdated OS.
my advice to all who are complaining…. get a job , get some money and buy a decent OS..
one with a better kernel and driver structure then XP.. one that makes better use of multicore systems and SSD drives.
drop XP and drop 32 BIT support.
64 bit is the future.
the only people who want 32 bit are not those who buy the applications.
you can´t tell me that someone who shells out 1200 euro for photoshop has not enough money to buy a 64 bit windowes and 8 GB ram.
my polarizer i bought yesterday costs more then win7 + 8 GB ram.
do you know XP x64? It is able to use 128 GB of RAM…
how many drivers are there for xp64 bit?
don´t be stupid xp64 is a niche system… and it´s not even a good one.
do you think adobe will waste resources on a few guys who like to live in that past and use xp64?
maybe they should make a OS/2 version too?
I’m not happy about the decision, but I understand the rationale. Given that Windows 8 will go into broader public beta in February, I have been considering moving from XP to that (fully aware of the limitations of a beta operating system). Has anyone tried the LR4 beta on an early version of Windows 8?
Does Adobe’s new policy about upgrading apply to LR? If so, and you skip this update, you will have to pay full price for LR5.
I agree with Mark. For me, it would mean an upgrade to Windows 7, an upgrade to LR4. Then I have to check on the 30 or so other programs I have to see if they would need to be upgraded, plus finding printer and scanner software updates if possible. It is potentially an expensive and daunting idea.
With the economy where it is, I have other priorities for my money, like groceries and gas for heating my house.
I think to call XP users stupid, antiquated or any of the other derogatory comments so far here shows the writer’s ignorance and their lack of tolerance for their fellow man’s choices. I moved to Windows 7 shortly after it came out and it is such a better product than Vista ever was people should really make that move. The learning curve is very short and you will love 7 in no time. I respect Adobe’s right to make the decision that they did and fully understand why they did so, just as I respect someone’s decision having stayed with XP up to now. It means nothing to me if my neighbor stays with the older software so why should I write something nasty about him. It tells me a lot about the kind of person someone is that does that. LR3 does not cease to work the day they release 4 so there is an option for those that want to continue to use XP while they get themselves an upgrade path to Win7. Some may elect to simply upgrade their OS while others may elect for a whole new machine. To many people in today’s economy this can prove to be a hardship but we cannot expect software developers to continue to support multiple versions forever. There is a real cost to Adobe and I am sure they didn’t come to this decision lightly. There have been a couple of comments from some that said they will leave LR over this decision. I call BS on that, are they really going to abandon their current installation of LR3 over this, I doubt it. If they do, so be it. That is a personal decision that each user is going to make based on their own criteria. I’m certainly not going write anything bad about them. Posting in anonymity certainly makes people a lot braver not mention less intelligent at times. My big question for Adobe would be “Is this going to apply to CS6 when it comes out”. Then we will hear all these comments again.
Of course, development efforts should maximize the design vision for the LR4 product! Nonetheless, for Adobe to arrogantly assert that their development resources would be mistakenly allocated by servicing the largest installed base OS is absurd!
As Adobe’s recent upgrade Policy proclamation and Netflix’s painful and embarrassing lesson demonstrates, companies need to embrace their existing customer base. Adobe needs to accommodate their existing XP user base with LR4. At least, for LR 3.6′s legacy features — as they will be reworked in LR4′s UI, and a bit more. Certainly not all the newer LR4 features will be accessible.
Adobe may be on the precipice of experiencing a departing migration of sizable portion. Once existing Lightroom users discover other emerging and competitive satisfactory products they may leave and be unlikely to return.
people who WORK with LR have systems that are able to run win7.
i cannot imagine running LR on a system that is not capable of runing win7.
are you mascochists??
and spare me that driver nonsens…. it´s all excuses from people who live in the past.
Damn it! I was very excited to see the new upgrades in LR4!! I’ll admit XP is outdated, but my XP machine runs fine. No real reason to upgrade until now. I love Lightroom and will continue to use it. My dilemma now is, new Windows based machine or a Mac and when? Wait ‘til the full version of LR4 is released or buy now and download the beta version? Decisions, decisions decisions?
I have XP and it works. Getting a new operating system is not an option because the hardware that can handle XP can not handle Windows 7 or what ever comes down the pike. Add that to the need for drivers etc. and upgrading is not going to happen untill hardware dies.
I am quite disappointed with this decision given the widespread use of XP. We continue to use it as our main OS at the University of Toronto Libraries where I work because it is such a stable system.
I will not be upgrading to LR4 or other variations of same. Again this is a disappointment to me and I am sure to many, many others. I will therefore manage with what I currently have which has served me well.
Windows XP is 10 years old !!! that is prehistoric in technology terms and would be the equivalent of still using a 1 megapixel DSLR for work today.
Yeah its a bit rubbish that windows have been making crappy operating systems since XP, but even microsoft are phasing out support for XP which should say boatloads !!
Adobe have done the right thing here, photography is a fast moving field within technology and adobe have to put up with all the moaners eveytime the remove something that is old.
Read a book called “who moved my cheese” all these people who moan about stuff like this just love to moan about something !! and will get pissed at every change.
XP is eleven years old, people. Move on.
Go and get a Win7 machine. And then if you need your XP (for apps and whatnot), you can easily run it in a virtual machine. With the right tools, you can image your existing XP system intact and have it run as it used to inside a VM. Incompatibility with older hardware will likely be an issue, due to lack of drivers.
There does seem to be a bit of a disconnect if we’re demanding the latest and greatest tools from Adobe but unwilling to upgrade the base of the system that will run it.
I work in an organization where Windows 7 is actually reviving and speeding up not so old machines which were forced to run Windows XP for software compatibility reasons. Now a mass upgrade is on and the users are happier their machines are faster cause Windows 7 is actually taking advantage of all the hardware in the box.
I say, XP was a good OS but at this point, it is past it’s prime and not made for the hardware of today. I have been on Windows 7 for more than a year now on my LR machine at home. I say it was the right move. Had to happen sometime.
It’s a right decision – next one is let it be only x64 versions. I can imaging no situation to stay on XP now. If you so much need any old hardware, just buy another one PC and use both of them – one for old software and another for LR4.
If it’s just a financial reason, you should know LR4 likes more RAM then LR3. And multithreading is not good in XP, not at all.
Microsoft’s official end of life for XP, Service Pack 3 is April 8, 2014, which means that after that date, Microsoft won’t be releasing updates for it, so XP will become more vulnerable to malware. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lifecycle
So sooner, or later it’s going to be time to leave XP. As the old adage goes, upgrade when you need it.
It’s probably not a good idea to be the first person to hop onto Windows 8, which will probably be released by the end of the year, but what’s been released so far, and the public beta is next month, it might really be worth waiting for. There’s a new file system (which you’ll never see) that makes your data 1000% safer and highly unlikely that you’ll lose data, even if one of your disks crash. Amongst the many things that it does (which you will see) is automatically replicates your data to another location (onsite or offsite). It’s called Storage Spaces. http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/05/microsoft-details-windows-8s-new-storage-spaces-feature/
Also, Windows 8 requires touch screens (even for the desktop), so it’ll seem primitive in a few years to be working without a touch screen. Can you imagine going back to a smart phone w/o a touchscreen?
As always, everything is a question of resources. If you have XP now and want Lightroom 4 now, then upgrade to Windows 7. If you can hold off a year to upgrade to Windows 8…hmmm….is it worth waiting for?
Personally, I wish Adobe would make a serious upgrade to Lightroom. Lightrom 4.0 is still basically the same product as 1.0. At the time it came out it was nice to have a jack of many trades, but master of none. Photoshop itself, as well as the Nik products (or image manipulation), Camera Bits with it’s much better catalog product that being released, and tagging capability, and a few others come to mind run circles around Lightroom at this point in time.
I use Lightroom to its fullest, and wish Adobe would think about the leap it can make with Version 5. Lightroom 4 is underwhelming.
Has Service Pack 2 come out for Windows 7? If it has I have missed it. Our upgrade policy, on operating systems, is to wait until MS have issued SP2. On past performance the product is then stable enough for our business (forget about Vista). The next hardware upgrade cycle will then include that Operating system. The costs of upgrading to a new operating system are not just the cost of the operating system. The testing and upgrading of old peripherals, old business software (some will need to be rewritten) etc is time consuming and costly. We don’t upgrade just because MS or Adobe say so. We do it when it makes business sense to do so.
I agree that Adobe have to move on and have no problem with them not supporting XP although I am a bit surprised they have done it at this point in time (I would have expected LR5) . If LR4 falls within our operating system upgrade cycle then we will upgrade. If not we will either look for alternatives or wait for LR5
Microsoft’s official end of life for XP, Service Pack 3 is April 8, 2014, which means that after that date, Microsoft won’t be releasing updates for it, so XP will become more vulnerable to malware. http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lifecycle
So sooner, or later it’s going to be time to leave XP. As the old adage goes, upgrade when you need it.
It’s probably not a good idea to be the first person to hop onto Windows 8, which will probably be released by the end of the year, but what’s been released so far, and the public beta is next month, it might really be worth waiting for. There’s a new file system (which you’ll never see) that makes your data 1000% safer and highly unlikely that you’ll lose data, even if one of your disks crash. Amongst the many things that it does (which you will see) is automatically replicates your data to another location (onsite or offsite). It’s called Storage Spaces. http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/05/microsoft-details-windows-8s-new-storage-spaces-feature/
Also, Windows 8 requires touch screens (even for the desktop), so it’ll seem primitive in a few years to be working without a touch screen. Can you imagine going back to a smart phone w/o a touchscreen?
As always, everything is a question of resources. If you have XP now and want Lightroom 4 now, then upgrade to Windows 7. If you can hold off a year to upgrade to Windows 8…hmmm….is it worth waiting for?
I am very disappointed that Adobe didn’t provide much notice on the lack of support for XP systems, whether 64 or 32 bit. I and many other retirees who are photography enthusiasts that have been very loyal to Photoshop and Lightroom over the years will not be able to afford to purchase new systems. I realize that we could all try to upgrade our operating systems (which may or may not work), but this seems a bit over the top, at least for me. Wish Adobe would re-envision all of this, but I guess I will just have to refrain from upgrading until my system goes belly up. Sad for all us long-time, non-professional users of Adobe products.
what system do you have?
you work with a system that is not able to run win7 64 bit?
i doubt that you will be happy using LR3 then!!
what is it a pentium 90 with 521 mb ram??? LOL
It’s time to go towards. 64bit is better than 32bit. XP was good. It have been the best for long time. It’s gone.
It’s time for 7.
Let us work without thinking about CPU, memory and another shit.
Just photo. In any case.
I purchased Lightroom 3 eight weeks ago to complement my Photoshop CS4 which I run on Win XP.
I think it is wrong of Adobe to sell software that is to be superceeded in the very near future without making purchaers of their intentions.
Will tech support still be available for XP/LR3 instalations?