Linked by David Adams on Wed 14th Jul 2010 21:28 UTC, submitted by No Body
Thread beginning with comment 433561
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-03-25
One of the main reasons that many companies are failing to upgrade is because support (ie ongoing bug-fixes) is still available for XP.
It's all about risk management: The least risky thing to do is usually to maintain the status-quo.
Installing patches is a risk, but not installing patches is a bigger risk.
Upgrading is a risk, but not having support is a bigger risk.
By keeping support going, Microsoft are pandering to the fears of these businesses and effectively ensuring that they won't be upgrading any time soon.
If the support wasn't available any more they would upgrade, and quickly. So in fact, MS is probably costing itself money by not getting those upgrades, and also costing itself extra money in the extra effort of continuing to provide support for XP.