OSNews

Good point though.

When Windows XP reaches end of life, ReactOS 1.0 Final will be released.

As much hope as I have for ReactOs ..lets hope it doesn't become the emperor's new clothes.

Did you see the Duke Nukem Forever trailer that was released last month?

Actually, ReactOS is pretty much dead. Most of the core devs have left, and the ones that remain know very little about system level programming and even less about win32 internals.

ORLY?

When did this happen and why hasn't there been an article about it on OSNews?

--bornagainpenguin

Good question... I've had plans on buying a spare copy of XP Pro (Full version) sometime in the future, so I'll have it and not have to worry about this damn upgrade version and my old Win9x disc for "verification." The biggest thing holding me back is... how future-ready will XP be? PCs seem to be switching to SATA, which WinXP doesn't support without a boot disk, and there's no way in hell I want a floppy drive to be in my future machines. Even with SP3, it still seems that XP won't support SATA. With Microsoft already eager to drop support of this operating in favor of trying to force its pathetic successor onto us, who knows how support will be in the future.

I figure disabling support for WGA at the end of XP's life is a possibility, leaving unactivated systems, and seems to be something Microsoft would do, but hopefully they don't. I haven't really thought of this before. What Microsoft needs to do is just release an updated XP, including drivers, software updates, and whatever else it takes to bring it up to date, and maybe clean up some of their bloat while their at it (removing/disabling pointless services right from the start would be a good idea...). Of course, hell will freeze over before Microsoft actually *improves* (read: reverts back to an older version) their product.

Edited 2007-12-29 23:29

Then you're missing out, man. Because there's nothing like being told you must have a floppy drive in today's day and age. Pure bliss. XP makes me feel really special like that.

Same here. Makes you wonder.............

Nothing to wonder about at all. Different versions of XP have different drivers slipstreamed into the installation.

Install a new copy of XP that came with your new HP which has SATA and windows won't ask for a driver diskette because the SATA drivers are already on the CD.

Anyone can create an XP disc with any service pack + all updates using nlite and your existing XP CD.

Simple as pie really

I think he is talking about RAID. On older pcs with the promise controllers, they required you to use s floppy to install the drivers before the xp install could recognize your harddrive. Newer machine usually use s different chipset, either from Intel, or Nvidia, these don't require the drivers to be loaded. I had the same issue on my machine, I had an MSI mobo with a promise controller and a via controller. The via chipset worked right off the bat, the promise one required a third party floppy to install on any drive attached to that controller. Ofcourse at the time I was installing XP SP1 then upgrading to SP2. SP2 discs usually have the proper drivers already included on th disc since it became common to install on a SATA drive at that point.

Then your SATA drives are running in IDE compatibility mode (ie. reduced performance, not all SATA-features). If you set your drives to AHCI you'll need to install drivers from a floppy when booting the setup CD, or slipstream them. (Though not all motherboard support AHCI, some only offers IDE compatibility mode)

>> Then your SATA drives are running in IDE compatibility mode (ie. reduced performance, not all SATA-features). If you set your drives to AHCI you'll need to install drivers from a floppy when booting the setup CD, or slipstream them. (Though not all motherboard support AHCI, some only offers IDE compatibility mode)

Yes, also applies to XP 64 bit (SP2)

AHCI is not detected. only ATA mode.

Certain motherboards emulate a standard IDE controller for the SATA, giving the OS a free-ride.

Mine is one of those.

Extended on-board ( but not on-chip) controllers usually require a floppy for the installation to recognize the destination drive.

Then, all too often, Windows XP will misconfigure the setup and assign a non-C letter to the boot drive, causing havoc with ill-written software ( with hard-coded paths ).

--The loon

It is SATAII that requires drivers. But you can disable this in you bios and install XP & drivers then enable it again.

umm. SATA drivers are a different story. If you are using an augmented motherboard (i.e. has an extra chip for SATA connections), which are older, you need to insert a floppy since BIOS cannot directly map your disks but this external chip does (because the external chip has its own BIOS) so windows can access to chip via drivers and detect your disks.

But, if your motherboard has a SATA controller embedded in to southbridge (nForce4, P965 and newer), your BIOS will see and map your disks directly so windows installer.

Edit: Cleared some ambigious parts.

Edited 2008-01-01 08:35

What Microsoft needs to do is just release an updated XP, including drivers, software updates, and whatever else it takes to bring it up to date

Have you tried nLite? http://www.nliteos.com/ I've been using it for years to add all the patches, drivers and software I need to my XP install CD.

What do you mean by "XP doesnt support SATA"? All my computers (excpet iBook) use SATA 2 and they all run XP just fine. Eg. Intel macs, all desktops sold in the past few years etc.

again: non-slipstreamed, OEM versions of XP will *NOT*, I repeat *NOT* work with SATA.

And no, not everyone can create a slipstreamed XP.

It means that it can work, but out of the box: no not always.

Here is the answer:

"and will likely provide an update"

Why can't they say that they will provide an update, or that they will disable WGA on EOL?

Don't get me wrong, I believe that they believe what they say, but the left hand and right hand issue always makes me cautious of really big corps promising that they will eventually do The Right Thing™. If the left hand does not disable activation, what will any of us do besides shaking our heads and "I should have known."?

Also there is no mention of Vista, though that is almost certainly just a mistake of not updating the page.

But really this is just an expression of my aversion to draconian activation schemes that involve phoning home and allow me to use what I've purchased only at the whim of the Corporation, even years later, and with almost no practical options in legal recourse.

This kind of vague promises was one of the major reasons why I switched to Linux.

Another thing, even if Microsoft actually intend to keep their promise, there may be situations that is out of Microsoft's control that prevents them from doing so.

It could be things like international conflicts, or in a long term perspective there might not even be a Microsoft. Such events might be very unlikely. But then, who predicted the Enron scandal, who predicted that Great Britain would be in war with Argentina in modern times, who predicted the fall of Soviet Union. Sometimes, unlikely things actually happens.

This kind of antipiracy protection really isn't fair to the customers that actually pay for their software licence and have the right to use the software. They should really not have to worry about things like this.

Still I suppose these new rules from Microsoft are an improvement to the people that uses the Microsoft platform.

Lets say you upgrade your BIOS as happened to George Ou and XP decides the computer you are using is different to the one you activated it on. This is where the 30 days becomes useful.

It never added to functionality to the Os , didn't stop pirates from breaking through.

Well, the combination of activation + wga kinda makes Windows a pain in the ass to casual copy anymore. I had to hunt down a WGA crack for a friend who legitimately owned a Windows license, but lost the ability to do a system restore off of his hard drive. So I guess in a way, you could also say it encourages people to hunt for cracks, but my dad is never gonna be able to 'loan' a copy of his CD to a friend

"product activation key" is a bit misleading - if you take the word "activation" out of there it makes more sense. Right now you have to enter the XP CD key during setup. With Vista, Microsoft changed it so that you don't have to enter the key until after a month, and now they plan to make XP the same way. This essentially means that Vista has a built-in 30 day trial, although I don't know what the license has to say about that.

This will only apply to XP installs made with a disc that was sold with SP3 or had SP3 slipstreamed in, though.

Thanks...

It should not effect an OEM install on legitimate hardware.

It will................


I also suspect it won't bother anyone who has modifed the DMI area of their bios to OEM activate XP also.

It will................

Software activation is so easily broken I don't know why MS wastes money on it.

You might be surprised how this plays out.

I'll offer a hint: If you activated XP via wpakill or some such shit. Y'all got a problem.

It will................

really? so millions of HP and Dell machines are going to suddenly start prompting for activation?

Sounds like a surefire way to piss of a lot of customers!

It will................

If you've modified the DMI area of your BIOS your machine looks just like an OEM machine to Windows.

If it effects a proper DMI modification it will effect a legitimate OEM install.

You might be surprised how this plays out.

Somehow I doubt it. lol.

I'll offer a hint: If you activated XP via wpakill or some such shit. Y'all got a problem.

I'd expect as much, thats a given with any service pack.

I'm talking about specifically modifying your BIOS to make an OEM copy of XP believe its installed on an OEM machine from Dell, HP etc. etc.

I'll install the beta of the sp just to be sure but I don't think there will be an issue on those machines, not without breaking activation on genuine installs also.