XP has one year official support left

Capt'n Midnight

yes you can buy support. have you seen the price :eek:


:pac:


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/08/windows_xp_one_year_left/

One year from today, on 8 April 2014, Microsoft will stop fixing broken code and no longer release security patches for free for an operating system that is still used by a staggering 40 per cent of PCs.

From that date on, you’ll either have to face hackers and malware writers on your own or you’ll be hiding behind the skirts of some premium-level paid Microsoft support instead. Gartner reckons Microsoft will charge you $200,000 if you have a Software Assurance contract and $500,000 without a SA agreement.

transylman

Says a lot about how great your products are when you have to force people to buy it by ending support on older version. Result will be Steve Balmer proclaiming the success of the metro os when there is an uptick in sales at the end of the year.

Rambo

Also on same day for Microsoft office 2003 end of life


http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/endofsupport.aspx

Capt'n Midnight

transylman wrote: »

Says a lot about how great your products are when you have to force people to buy it by ending support on older version. Result will be Steve Balmer proclaiming the success of the metro os when there is an uptick in sales at the end of the year.

The vast majority of windows users don't buy separate windows licenses, corporate licenses have downgrade rights so not an issue for them.

AnCatDubh

In fairness, it's had a good innings really (Dec 2001, general availability). Still the choice by many.

yoyo

In fairness though how many people/companies are still using 12 year old versions of Linux distros/Mac OS etc.? Unless for very specific platforms, ATMs etc. I doubt there would be many. XP has had a good run and now it's time to move on. Windows 7/8 actually both run very well even on older hardware, and it is not that expensive to upgrade, although for many a new computer is probably the route that will be taken :pac: .

Nick

Torqay

yoyo wrote: »

Windows 7/8 actually both run very well even on older hardware, and it is not that expensive to upgrade, although for many a new computer is probably the route that will be taken :pac: .

Well, for large companies with hundreds or even thousands of computers, extended support for 200-500k is still a lot cheaper than a complete new infrastructure which can easily amount to a few millions

Capt'n Midnight

yoyo wrote: »

In fairness though how many people/companies are still using 12 year old versions of Linux distros/Mac OS etc.?

Don't forget the upgrade costs of Linux / Mac OS are much lower than a windows upgrade.

And don't forget that upgrading an OEM copy of windows mean you loose the license when the hardware dies.

And apart from ubuntu most of the Linux upgrades don't mean relearning the UI so the re-training costs aren't as bad.


So upgrading windows just isn't worth it when you have a solution that is good enough.

That said Microsoft Windows XP Professional for Embedded Systems is available through Microsoft Authorized Embedded Distributors until 2016

yoyo

Torqay wrote: »

Well, for large companies with hundreds or even thousands of computers, extended support for 200-500k is still a lot cheaper than a complete new infrastructure which can easily amount to a few millions

Many of the companies will have machines capable of upgrading to a new OS though, and paying 200-500K for just another year or 2 of support may not be as cheap as just biting the bullet and upgrading all the machines in the long run. I very much doubt the XP users are running Pentium III/Celeron things with 256MB RAM on board, if not Windows 7 will run fine on them. Like the way many companies are not using 2000 anymore or even 98! Time moves on..

Nick

Torqay

Even if the hardware is capable to run Windows 8, productivity delay and disruptions and/or employee training programs can cost a lot more, depending on the size of the company. Even volume licensing doesn't come cheap if you have to upgrade thousand computers.

djsim101

I still use and will continue to use XP for quite some time. (Have it dual booting with Win 7). I find xp really reliable and never had much issues. Prop my favourite Windows OS of all time.

yoyo

Torqay wrote: »

Even if the hardware is capable to run Windows 8, productivity delay and disruptions and/or employee training programs can cost a lot more, depending on the size of the company. Even volume licensing doesn't come cheap if you have to upgrade thousand computers.

While that is true and all paying another 500k for probably only a year's more support for XP is probably not the best solution when the bullet can be bitten and all the computers upgraded. Of course it is a big job, but the companies will have to do it at some point anyways.
Sure why did companies not stick to Windows 2000, Windows 98 and upgrade to XP around '02/'03/'04 (estimated years although I think it was around then XP stabilized and started getting deployed). Also with XP support dropping, new hardware will usually stop getting XP drivers..

Nick

AllGunsBlazing

I installed Ubuntu on my hard drive alongside xp in an attempt to wean myself off of microsoft a few months ago. Ubuntu can be a bit daunting by comparison but I won't be moving over to another version of windows. The cost is just silly imo.

thebman

Why would you stay on XP?

Windows 7 is fantastic.

Overheal

Because people despise change.

Capt'n Midnight

Overheal wrote: »

Because people despise change.

I'm not a big fan of If it works it's obsolete.

Mature technologies are those where there are diminishing returns.
Stuff like electricity generation using steam turbines.





Wordstar on a 4.77MHz 8088 is still fast enough for typing letters and stuff that doesn't use fancy fonts.

I'd actually prefer that if it meant I could get my hands on one of those old IBM clickety keyboards.

You can do the prettying up in a WYSIWYG after the data entry.


There is a lot to be said for the devil you know. Far too much stuff requires massive complexity to achieve small returns. The US space program is a classic example of this. Billions have been spent on more efficient launchers, completely missing the point that the expensive stuff isn't the fuel or the tankage, it's the complexity used to gain those efficiencies. Mass carried into orbit should be pared down but optimising stage one just isn't worth it anymore you'd be better off if you made it heavier if there was any chance it would make it more reliable.



And like I keep pointing out if the Americans want to go to space they've to hitch a ride on a modified 1950's soviet ICBM. Though in fairness they are now testing out a version of Soyuz that uses the NK-33 which is a 1960's engine.



If you are browsing the web then you need a browser that will keep up with the latest html5 flash video format widget that lets you play angry birds in 3D with your bosses face on the pigs.

If you aren't browsing the interweb then XP, especially the later machines is fine. Just control physical access, inc USB ports. One tip is to use IPX/SPX network protocol instead of TCP/IP.

However, it has go to the stage where you need to worry about your hard drive dying of old age, and where the cheapest way of upgrading your system is to ask around if anyone is throwing one out or will sell it you for a song.



Having an attack of the dumb right now
Does anyone remember which of the VM's / tools you use to take a snapshot of an existing XP install so you can run it in a window on a newer machine later on ?

Overheal

I find it harder and harder to relate Cap, every time I see someone walk in with an AGP card or a SCSI Drive complaining to me why I don't carry products that support them anymore.

Don't get me wrong Im not a bleeding edge type but mainstream advances are where you get the best returns. resuscitating a 10 year old OS just seems very inefficient at this point. I see where you're running it in a closed system, but those are rarer and rarer cases.

Torqay

Overheal wrote: »

resuscitating a 10 year old OS just seems very inefficient at this point.

I think, a little FYI is in order: although it has been almost 12 years since its release to the public, XP has seen a few major overhauls, the most recent one as late as 2008, so it's rather 5 years old. However, pointing at a the age of an OS doesn't say much about its efficiency. Heck, OS/2 although long dead it keeps walking and after more than 25 years it is still under active development by IBM (under the name eComStation).

We're still dealing with a Windows 95 computer in a production environment in this forum (though I believe it has recently been upgraded to NT). A crass exception for sure but there are still plenty Windows 2000 computers out there (only in 2007 the Royal Navy began fitting their vessels with Windows 2000 for Warships and one would think they know a thing or two about efficiency), IIRC, the Win2K figures are not too far off the Linux mark.

Of course it would be a nice prospect if those billions of XP computers would just dematerialize next year, imagine the immediate increase of bandwidth on the interwebs. But I'm afraid it's not going to happen.

Windows Embedded (based on XP) is being used on a few hundred thousand devices and it will be around and supported at least until 2019. I wouldn't be too surprised if some enthusiasts are going to make security patches for Embedded available for XP if applicable.

Yes, XP will go away eventually but not quite yet (or in April 2014).

Capt'n Midnight

Overheal wrote: »

I find it harder and harder to relate Cap, every time I see someone walk in with an AGP card or a SCSI Drive complaining to me why I don't carry products that support them anymore.

There is a huge difference there. Old hardware just isn't worth it. Between failing capacitors and HDD's that could give up the ghost any moment.

And performance similar to a mobile phone that costs a fraction of the electricity the old box uses each year.