Windows Xp nears End Of Life (THANK GOD!) Zero Day Forever April 8 2014

[NJRoadfan]

First patch tuesday after XP's death, with just one update for internet explorer late last month xp has not had any of the critical updates 7/vista/2003/8 recieved

POSReady 2009 received some patches and they have already been modified to install on XP.

[ZLoth]

Just in case you missed all of the previous memos, no more security updates for XP.

[NJRoadfan]

Just in case you missed all of the previous memos, no more security updates for XP.

Technically, but if you know where to look, there are May Patch Tuesday updates for XP floating around.

[JREwing78]

Just in case you missed all of the previous memos, no more security updates for XP.

Technically, but if you know where to look, there are May Patch Tuesday updates for XP floating around.

That's an awful lot of time and energy to keep slapping a creaky old operating system back together.

[vdeane]

Presumably that's why the new updates are now enterprise-only and cost a lot of money.

[JREwing78]

Presumably that's why the new updates are now enterprise-only and cost a lot of money.

Exactly! I was referring to the end user's time and energy in finding and installing the correct update files without paying Microsoft to do it, but you make a good point. It takes a lot of time and energy to keep Windows safe and secure, and at some point Microsoft needs to get paid for it.

[Scott5114]

One could argue that the initial license fee is them getting paid for delivering a safe and secure OS right out of the gate, and if they would have fulfilled it then there wouldn't be a problem...

[Thing 342]

Presumably that's why the new updates are now enterprise-only and cost a lot of money.

Exactly! I was referring to the end user's time and energy in finding and installing the correct update files without paying Microsoft to do it, but you make a good point. It takes a lot of time and energy to keep Windows safe and secure, and at some point Microsoft needs to get paid for it.

Considering how many security holes there are in the Windows OS, and how many companies do a better job of fixing these holes without charging for updates, I seriously think that this is just a cash grab.

[realjd]

Presumably that's why the new updates are now enterprise-only and cost a lot of money.

Exactly! I was referring to the end user's time and energy in finding and installing the correct update files without paying Microsoft to do it, but you make a good point. It takes a lot of time and energy to keep Windows safe and secure, and at some point Microsoft needs to get paid for it.

Considering how many security holes there are in the Windows OS, and how many companies do a better job of fixing these holes without charging for updates, I seriously think that this is just a cash grab.

Microsoft isn't a non-profit.

[Thing 342]

Presumably that's why the new updates are now enterprise-only and cost a lot of money.

Exactly! I was referring to the end user's time and energy in finding and installing the correct update files without paying Microsoft to do it, but you make a good point. It takes a lot of time and energy to keep Windows safe and secure, and at some point Microsoft needs to get paid for it.

Considering how many security holes there are in the Windows OS, and how many companies do a better job of fixing these holes without charging for updates, I seriously think that this is just a cash grab.

Microsoft isn't a non-profit.

Apple charged $30, then nothing for updates to their comparable OS. Much less than Microsoft's $99+ for upgrades.

[realjd]

Presumably that's why the new updates are now enterprise-only and cost a lot of money.

Exactly! I was referring to the end user's time and energy in finding and installing the correct update files without paying Microsoft to do it, but you make a good point. It takes a lot of time and energy to keep Windows safe and secure, and at some point Microsoft needs to get paid for it.

Considering how many security holes there are in the Windows OS, and how many companies do a better job of fixing these holes without charging for updates, I seriously think that this is just a cash grab.

Microsoft isn't a non-profit.

Apple charged $30, then nothing for updates to their comparable OS. Much less than Microsoft's $99+ for upgrades.

Apple also restricts new versions of the operating system from running on older hardware forcing you to keep buying computers every few years if you want to keep current. And they tend to stop security updates for old OS X versions 3 or 4 years after they are released. Microsoft gave XP a good 13 year run before they stopped updates.

Apple's $30 updates also came out yearly, as opposed to Microsoft's updates which come out every 4 years or so.

What's the business case for Microsoft continuing to support XP for free?

[bugo]

Microsoft isn't a non-profit.

Neither is GM, but it didn't stop them from recalling a bunch of cars recently.

[bugo]

What's the business case for Microsoft continuing to support XP for free?

Everything isn't about money.

This is going to blow up in Microsoft's face (I'm surprised it hasn't already.)  It's going end up costing them billions in bad publicity and negative media attention.  I am just going to sit back and laugh when it happens.

[ZLoth]

This is going to blow up in Microsoft's face (I'm surprised it hasn't already.)  It's going end up costing them billions in bad publicity and negative media attention.  I am just going to sit back and laugh when it happens.

I doubt it. Microsoft announced the end of support for several years. To quote something from early last month:

Nobody said that Windows XP will quit working after April 8th. It will continue to boot up. However, for us regular people, it will no longer get regular updates. And, be aware that Microsoft announced end of support for XP back in 2007 and that support was originally going to end in 2010 before it got pushed back to 2014. In addition, end of sale for Windows XP was 2008/2009. That was a lot of warning.

And, yes, they found a new exploit in Internet Exploder 8 (all platforms) that will not be fixed in XP. And, the company that I work for has announced that we will no longer support Windows XP beginning January, 2015.

Of course, it would not surprise me in a few years if companies insist on users accessing software via a web browser rendering a OS mostly a moot point.

[Dr Frankenstein]

What's the business case for Microsoft continuing to support XP for free?

Everything isn't about money.

This is going to blow up in Microsoft's face (I'm surprised it hasn't already.)  It's going end up costing them billions in bad publicity and negative media attention.  I am just going to sit back and laugh when it happens.

They've been doing this "end of support" thing for decades. I don't see why their image would change with Windows XP. Plus, they extended the support for Windows XP way beyond the initially-planned date. They've been announcing and otherwise talking about it for, oh, five years now? Even Windows 3.1x was supported long enough for them to make a patch that added support for the Euro symbol, as well as Y2K fixes. But support ended in 2001, as planned.

We're not talking about Apple, who discontinues major OS versions after about five years and hardcodes a soft-check of the hardware in them because they don't want their fancy UI animations to run choppily on slightly old hardware. (Windows, on the other hand, degrades much more gracefully on old hardware and disables eye candy and other things that can't run; it'll only refuse to boot up if the system is missing a basic feature it really needs; Support for non-ACPI systems was dropped in Windows Vista, ten years after it was made a standard feature in every computer).

Patches in software are comparable to patches in signs or pavement: After a certain number of them, it turns to shit. Look at how many patches you have to apply on a fresh install of Windows XP (keep in mind that a Service Pack amounts to several dozens of patches), and how many things you have to install to cope for missing features. It's almost a miracle that the whole thing is holding together (and I've seen it just not hold at all).

It's not just a hassle for Microsoft. It's also a hassle for us developers, especially driver developers, who have to maintain many different versions of their code for different OS versions, including and especially the ancient Windows XP, which probably doesn't provide basic support for Blu-Ray drives or WiFi printers (which means they're on their own for implementing it).

I have to provide separate code paths to account for missing OS features, and dropping XP support is going to lighten that load a lot.

[NJRoadfan]

That's an awful lot of time and energy to keep slapping a creaky old operating system back together.

One registry key enables them in Windows Update.

It's not just a hassle for Microsoft. It's also a hassle for us developers, especially driver developers, who have to maintain many different versions of their code for different OS versions, including and especially the ancient Windows XP, which probably doesn't provide basic support for Blu-Ray drives or WiFi printers (which means they're on their own for implementing it).

If driver developers decided to support their hardware when Vista came out, people wouldn't have kept XP around to keep their 2 year old scanner working. Any Wi-Fi printer that requires "special" treatment is likely garbage anyway. They should all print over the network using port 9100 (HP JetDirect/Appsocket), just like they do when connected via Ethernet. Hardly anyone has a BluRay drive in their PC to begin with. Besides, it should be supported by XP as a generic ATAPI device.

[bugo]

The difference between those discontinued OSs and XP is that XP still has a high market share.  95 and ME didn't when they quit supporting them.

[formulanone]

Microsoft isn't a non-profit.

Neither is GM, but it didn't stop them from recalling a bunch of cars recently.

There's no equivalent of the National Highway Safety Board for desktop software. Nobody's going get hurt, injured, or killed by using old software, and there's even disclaimers in Windows announcing that the basic versions of the OS shouldn't be used for any mission-critical events, such as life-saving equipment, air traffic control, power plants, or defense systems.

[Scott5114]

"Oh God, there's an ICBM headed this way! Shoot it down!"

"I can't, sir! Windows is currently installing an update!"

[NJRoadfan]

"Oh God, there's an ICBM headed this way! Shoot it down!"

"I can't, sir! Windows is currently installing an update!"

[cpzilliacus]

My employer issued me a new computer with Windows 7 on it.  In many ways a big improvement.

But I kept the old computer with XP on it, and I am now glad I did, as an app I only use somewhat infrequently does not run on Win 7, but does work under XP.  The new version of the app is about $1,000.

So for now I am using the XP computer again - to run that old software.

[sammi]

an app I only use somewhat infrequently does not run on Win 7, but does work under XP.

Not even on compatibility mode?

[SteveG1988]

an app I only use somewhat infrequently does not run on Win 7, but does work under XP.

Not even on compatibility mode?

Probably a 16 bit app

[vdeane]

Can you use XP mode?

[cpzilliacus]

Can you use XP mode?

Was not aware that there is an XP mode in Windows 7.