“Microsoft set out to adopt a formal and rigid support lifecycle in 2002, back at a time when most analysts were expecting to see Windows Vista within a couple of years. My own point of view was that this lifecycle business had a lot to do with Microsoft’s then-new volume licensing scheme, which among other things is oriented towards selling software subscriptions. If you’re buying a subscription for software, you can see how lifecycle plans become important. However, delays in Windows Vista coupled with a questionable approach to ‘consumer’ products means that 2007 will carry a few surprises unless policy changes are made at Redmond.”
Absolutely extraordinary. Here is the truly extraordinary line in the story:
“For Windows XP Home Edition, there will be no security updates after 12/31/06”.
Guess this leaves a year to move people to Mac or Linux.
Or Windows Vista.
Less than a year to switch to Vista, if Vista is released this year
EDIT: Another option would be to migrate to XP Pro (which seems to have it’s lifespan extended) or Win2K3 Server (the latter one has some drawbacks for desktop use though – at least for ordinary users).
Edited 2006-01-04 13:57
There should have been only 1 “fully-equipped” XP version to begin with.
Agreed.
“For Windows XP Home Edition, there will be no security updates after 12/31/06”.
This probably won’t happen, and even if it does, two things to consider:
1. That’s 5 1/2 years of product support – how much does the competition offer in this regard for a consumer OS?
2. If you follow common-sense security practices (such as run a firewall, don’t use Internet Explorer except where absolutely necessary, etc.), you don’t really need the myrad of Windows patches anyway. Even fot his latest WMF exploit, a fix is already available without Microsoft’s help
> 1. That’s 5 1/2 years of product support – how much does the competition offer in this regard for a consumer OS?
Or spun alternatively – “does any of the competition wait 5.5 years between major releases of a consumer OS?”. I strongly suspect that the Win XP Home support deadline will be extended (BTW, what “support” does MS give for XP Home anyway? And is it is free or cheap?) – didn’t they extend it for WIndows 98 SE for example?
I’m still hoping that when Vista finally rolls around, some big OEM will bravely decide to give customers a choice (e.g. Vista or no OS, with no OS/software for the latter of course) – it’s ridiculous that consumer PCs from big OEMs *still* have to come with Windows!
> What “support” does MS give for XP Home anyway?
Well, you could read instead of asking question: security patches, quite an important part considering the number of flaw found.
Security patch are free.
Also why do you think an OEM will provide OS choice for Vista when they don’t do it for XP?
It’s whishful thinking.
You’ll be pleased to know then that Vista will come in 9 flavours.
http://winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_editions.asp
You’ll be pleased to know then that Vista will come in 9 flavours.
Wow. Talk about not learning from your mistakes…
Nice, if you look at that page carefully you will see that if you want “vista” features, you will have to pay extra to get a better “edition”.
So, they are going to force you to upgrade by not updating old versions, and if you go for the “basic” version because you do not want to spend a lot, you’ll have to shelve $$$ for exactly the same you have now, as you’ll be denied most new features. Business as usual @ redmond…
Whoa, Microsoft would probably love for everyone to replace their Windows XP Home with Win 2k3 server, but I doubt most people that use home would consider using a server OS as their desktop.
Actually they ought to – if they can handle the drawbacks. Not all applications work on Win2K3 Server. And it’s expensive if you cannot get it through the MSDN AA.
if you have enought money for W2k3 ok.
but if you are thinking to change for pirate version grong.
PD:escusme my english
I don’t see anyone talking about using piracy software.
You have to pay for Windows 2003 Server. Using piracy software is illegal as well as a potential security threat. Those two elements ought to make people think twice (I know they don’t, but they ought to at the very least).
Personally I could get it for free legally through MSDN AA. But not all are that lucky – if it’s luck to be using Windows. I don’t think so
I seriously doubt this will happen. Microsoft is not going to eliminate support for its current consumer based OS only a few months after the release of it’s next consumer based OS.
Amazing to think that two bytes (and £100) makes the difference between support being dropped very premature and not (XP PRO)
It’s amazing the world puts up with it at all :/
Would changing those two bits then extend the lifespan of Windows XP home by making it pro, or can Windows Update tell the difference?
I believe it can by the product key. However, he makes a valid point that supporting XP Home is essentially free if you’re already supporting XP Pro. You need one more test machine.
I imagine they’ll give a one year stay of execution closer to the line after they’ve scared a few people into considering an immediate upgrade to Vista upon release.
This wouldn’t be such a big deal if it weren’t for the general lack of security of the system (make whatever excuse you want for it, it’s not a safe system to operate for a year without updates).
Last I saw – Vista had some pretty hefty requirements – how would it run on a (insert unkind word) $300 dell, eMachine, other PC computer that runs XP Home now? – People will be surprised when they buy Vista and are surprised by the speed (slowness)
People will think – why should I buy XP Pro? To the end user those two versions seem identical!
So what will happen?
WIll they switch to linux? Some people who are inclined to switch now, might get that little extra push – the majority I don’t think will.
Will they switch to mac? – Well – with Intel Macs coming out in June (and the mini being slated as one of the first models to come out) – people *might* switch – after all they already havea monitor, KB/Mouse, and running their windows software might be an option in the near future with little/no performance hit – but again there will only be a small amount of switchers to the mac – just as in the linux case.
So what will happen?
people will leave their machines as they currently are until they crap out and have to buy another one. There might be a user support community to produce security patches – just like the XP patch that was recently released – not by MS mind you.
Last I saw – Vista had some pretty hefty requirements – how would it run on a (insert unkind word) $300 dell, eMachine, other PC computer that runs XP Home now? – People will be surprised when they buy Vista and are surprised by the speed (slowness)
All nonsense and bogus. Read this story and its comments, it includes a video which proves that Vista runs fine on even 4yr old hardware.
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=13113
There you go.
All nonsense and bogus. Read this story and its comments, it includes a video which proves that Vista runs fine on even 4yr old hardware.
I’m sure Vista does run fine, but it didn’t answer my question of whether it will run Vista and all the applications and games people run in order for it to be a usable desktop. As soon as people start doing that on its release its requirements will go into the stratosphere, as all versions of Windows have done in the past.
It’s not Windows that’s the problem, it’s crappy hardware.
My mom has an HP MCE system. P4 2.6ghz, 512mb of RAM, etc… But it runs VERY slowly, drops the WiFi connection, memory card reader is flaky, the system will somtimes just cut completely off (at which point I have to unplug the power form the PSU and wait for the power to drain from the system, then plug it back in for it to turn back on). Why is this?
Well, the motherboard has glitches, and for sure the power supply is complete crap, and I’m sure the RAM and HDD are the cheapest POSes off the shelf.
So, as long as people continue to by emachines, HP, Dell, etc… they are going to have crappy computers and they are going to have a bad computing experience.
FWIW there is a missionary ogranization up here that buy’s Dells, and they’ve built up a fairly solid network around all their machines and Novell Netware. Obviously as a missionary organization they are strapped for cash, so while they might not be buying the lowest end machines from Dell, they are still constrained to the low end of the price range (probably about CAD $500 – 600 per machine). They have gotten reliable behaviour out of the machines, so much so that they’ve bought some to bring into their own homes and even there the machines perform well. I don’t know what your bad experience with Dell was, because obviously I’m not seeing it with these machines used by the missionary organization.
It’s now been a little over a year since they bought their new Dell boxes, and so far the machines are still performing as is expected of them. They do have a good sysadmin out at the organization, but not in their homes (so they do get trouble with malware). I’ve really seen nothing wrong with their Dell machines except that since they can’t buy them locally here they have to send them out to get them fixed if hardware fails under warranty which hasn’t happened yet). I know YMMV, and maybe these guy’s just got lucky, but problems like you describe don’t seem characteristic of the Dell machines I’ve seen.
The funny part is: It’s the software which is faulty.
My system is a cheap partly homebuilt system. And it works fine – not the least flaky.
Configuration of the system is more often than not the primary problem – rather than the hardware being the problem.
Windows is the problem – unless for a Windows zealot like you.
And mind you: If the system is flaky because of Linux (or because the hardware doesn’t work too well with linux), the solution is to fix the faults through software.
My mom has an HP MCE system. P4 2.6ghz, 512mb of RAM, etc… But it runs VERY slowly, drops the WiFi connection, memory card reader is flaky, the system will somtimes just cut completely off (at which point I have to unplug the power form the PSU and wait for the power to drain from the system, then plug it back in for it to turn back on). Why is this?
Perphas drivers for this Windows MCE are faulty. I used a Puppy Live CD and Berry OS, no issues at all.
All nonsense and bogus. Read this story and its comments, it includes a video which proves that Vista runs fine on even 4yr old hardware.
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=13113
A lot of the hardware sold with XP-home today have less powerful specs. Especially with respect to memory. You still see cheap laptops with 256M RAM and upgrading them is often relatively expensive.
My guess is that they will end up with pirated XP pro or Linux at end the of this year depending on how much effort Microsoft spends to prevent pirated MS software from getting updates.
As opposed to MS-Windows products, Gnome or KDE seam to be leaner and meaner for each new release and will run even on old 256M RAM software. By then, Gnome will be two generations more mature than today, and probably provide a quite polished user experience and provide a viable alternative to Microsoft products.
This will be fun to watch.
“A lot of the hardware sold with XP-home today have less powerful specs. Especially with respect to memory. You still see cheap laptops with 256M RAM and upgrading them is often relatively expensive.”
I second that, I worked all summer to get a Laptop and the most I could afford after that only had 256 Mb of ram because over here the things are still expensive. I would have gotten a ram upgrade, but I’ve since lost my job and decided not to get another one until I finished school.
My laptop doesn’t run XP as fast as I’d like, nevermind Vista. maybe my desktop machine with more ram spoiled me, but XP just doesn’t run nicely with only 256 Mb of ram. When XP reaches the end of it’s lifecycle I’m going to give Linux another try on the laptop to see if the hardware support has improved enough to cover the last few unsupported pieces of hardware the machine has. I’m already very comfortable with Linux and know for a fact that my laptop will run GNU/Linux + KDE at least as fast as XP, so no need for me to get Vista.
Yeah, people will see that Vista won’t run on their P3/256 MB system, and they’ll … install Linux? Go figure.
Have you *seen* how Ubuntu runs on a P3-800/256 MB of RAM? Virtually unusable after you start two applications + GNOME.
First off I have to ask how’d the #### you get away with picking a name like that? More, why would you want a user name like that? Chances are your point gets lost whenever you post because people either ignore you, or the mod you down constantly as inflamatory or harrassment based on your user name! By all means having a -.32 rating is hardly something to be proud of. Now that I’ve gotten that out of the way…
Yeah, people will see that Vista won’t run on their P3/256 MB system, and they’ll … install Linux? Go figure.
Well maybe not. But its certainly to be hoped for that they may come across a copy of Zeta (BeOS) or maybe Haiku (BeOS) will be ready by that point–or even that maybe they might see a copy of SkyOS somewhere and fall in love with it. Or certainly more in with your idea of a better operating System, maybe we’ll all be lucky and the ReactOS guys will have managed to release a 1.0 version of their Windows NT.x clone? The point is it may not be Linux that gets installed but chances are that they’ll look into something else to run their applications.
And who knows, its certainly likely that with enough free cds getting pushed around by the Ubuntu guys that someone might actually install Linux and like it the next time Windows gets caught with its pants down. Look at AOL before the crap factor completely outweighed the benefits factor. For a time there, AOL was the internet. Who is to say that Ubuntu can’t do the same thing for Linux if they manage to continue building a quality operating system and maintain their promises of not charging people?
Have you *seen* how Ubuntu runs on a P3-800/256 MB of RAM?
Err yeah…I used to drive my Ubuntu on one a while back, shortly after they first came out; I rmember running my browser in virtual desktop one, while listen to my TV card play MTV in a fullscreen window on virtual desktop two and checking back and forth with some WinE P2P application running in virtual desktop three…but we won’t talk about that ;P and virtual desktop four was reserved for xmms…
No problems–why?
Virtually unusable after you start two applications + GNOME.
?? I have no idea why you would say this! Is your hardware supported by Linux? As with Windows you need to check the hardware compatibility of anything you plan to use with Linux. If your hardware isn’t fully supported by the OS then ofcourse you can expect some problems. I still have my old WinNT 4.0 box and its lovely manual describing the HWC list of machines known to support the system.
I love how everyone just assumes that all hardware is created equal under Windows and acts as if it had always been this way. Give the alternative OSes some time before you decide that they are all ‘poo’ and keep in mind how long it took to get Windows to the point where it is today. Also remember that with most alternative OSes all hardware support is hacked in by the OSes developers unlike Microsoft which has a large OEM base and benefits by it twice–once when the hardware is available with support for Windows and then again when Microsoft can blame any software issues on ‘cheap OEM hardware.’
I generally find that I get better support for my hardware out of the box for most things under Linux and other Alternative Operating Systems. With windows its usually install drivers and hope that nothing breaks when the next service pack comes around.
–bornagainpenguin
And start Windows 2000 on the same machine, and load two applications. Oh nooo…. it’s unusable. The same is true for all major OS’es at the moment.
With linux, one at least has a much better option to modify the system to your liking. If you rip out enough functionality Gnome2.x can run fine in 64 MB ram – but of course: You’ll be lacking a lot.
Sometimes, you’re behaving like a moron, which is sad because it overshadows the good posts, you have occasionally. Don’t acting like a child, and please grow up (and the same goes for all the other lousy fanboys around here).
…their geek friend install a FCKGW for them?
If XP Home stops being supported (no security updates) and the average Joe Computer User finds out that there is another Windows XP identical to his but one that is still supported how much guilt do you honestly think they’re going to feel asking the local computer geek to install it for them? What’s worse for Micrisft here (not that *we* care but still…) is the fact that these people won’t be feeling any guilt whatsoever in installing a VLK XP Pro over their Home installation–they’ll feel as if *they* were the ones being ripped off!
What I like though is the elephant in the room here–the specter of what happens come the end of official support and someone does a fresh install of their Windows XP Home…the big question is: After the end of ‘Official Support’ will Microsoft allow anyone to activate their Windows?
Or will theyyou get a message box error pop up advising you ‘that this copy of Windows is no longer legal for use; please contact your local Microsoft retailer for a current release’?
Microsoft have got to find some way of switching people to Vista, push people in the back or force. I’m glad I don’t have to put up with this crap using Linux so I guess people like being Microsoft’s slave.
I think that attitude is changeing. Ten to fifteen years ago, people looked forward to new software versions. New version usually offered something new that they couldn’t do before that would make life and business significantly easier or more profitable.
Today, new software versions usually contains new and simpler ways of doing the same old stuff. The problem is that you, as a user allready have spent time on learning the old awkward way of doing it, and by the time a new version emerges, have started to feel comfortable with it. If you upgrade, you will have to spend time and perhaps money relearn again.
Naturally, the new stuff will help new users but to the majority of users it is often more trouble than it’s worth.
Edited 2006-01-04 17:09
Installing a new OS takes a fair bit of time, and then you have to restore all your usefull tools and creature comforts. Until I started making backup images to restore, Windows installations for me would take days simply because of all I’d have to reinstall.
No OS that I know of to date has come up with a perfectly smooth and seamless upgrade solution, when I upgraded a Windows 98 box to XP the installed software was no longer in the add/remove software dialog, and there were other such problems. When I upgraded my dad’s Mandrake 9.0 box to 9.1 it actually went fairly smoothly, a few packages were left out and some obsolete ones were left behind, but I managed to mooth that out. There were other problems, but dad never noticed. Either way it was still time consuming because upgrading either didn’t work (Windows 98 to XP), or needed hours of maintenance and still left problems behind (Mandrake 9.0 to 9.1).
If a company wants people to upgrade their operating system, no matter the time intervals, they should make it as easy as installing a service pack. It should require minimal maintanance afterwards.
No OS that I know of to date has come up with a perfectly smooth and seamless upgrade solution
Linux has been doing this for years. I do not know how much you have tried Linux in the past, but I will give you an example;
1 hard drive, say 120GB partioned thus….
100mb /boot
10GB /
109GB /home
now, you install a linux, say, debian version 2 on the / partition and you use this for lets say 4 years.
All your files will be in your /home/{username} directory.
Now, Debian 3.1 comes out and you want to upgrade. You simply, edit the /etc/sources.list to point to the 3.1 servers and type the command “apt-get dist-upgrade” and when it is finished, you will have a spanking new Debian 3.1 system, with all your personal files/desktops/settings intact.
Now, to do the same with Mandrake/RedHat/Suse etc, insert boot media, reboot PC, follow install procedure, at the partitioning stage DO NOT repartition /home. After installation is complete, you have a spanking new andrake/RedHat/Suse etc, with all your personal files/desktops/settings intact.
the moral of the story ?
you CAN update an OS and keep things the way they were….. as long as you keep /home on a separate partition… or better yet, on a separate drive.
Here endeth the lesson, sorry if it was patronising
“Here endeth the lesson, sorry if it was patronising”
I appreciate that, I might have misunderstood without it.
However, I would like to point out that installing while still preserving the /home partition isn’t possible in all Distributions, and even if you do that you still loose all the applications you had before, which means if they aren’t in a software repo to begin with you have to find it packaged or build it yourself all over again.
On your grounds it could be said that Linux can be upgraded fairly smoothly, and I’d agree with that to some extent since that is how I got my dad to let me updated his Mandrake 9.1 to Mandriva 2006.0; However, when I was finished I had to reinstall software the hard way for him due to a lack of those packages in the available Mandriva repos.
No, the fact is ALL linux distros let you keep /home intact if you started of with /home on a separate partition or a separate drive.
Also, there is a long winded way of installing all software into directories under your /home directory. This means the packages will still be there ready to run after an upgrade, but it also means other users cannot delete your programs.
Now, your example of going from Mandrake 9.1 to Mandriva 2006, you said you had to reinstall packages afterwards ?
A distro upgrade only updates the installed packages, unless you tell the install to wipe filesystems first. If you had left / intact, you could have upgraded and all the software would have remained.
“No, the fact is ALL linux distros let you keep /home intact if you started of with /home on a separate partition or a separate drive.”
That’s true to a point.
You can preserve the /home partition in the sense that you can keep all the distributions I’ve tried from erasing or overwriting it, but not all distributions allow you to manually partition and set mount points. In those distributions the partition would be left intact, but your old home folder wouldn’t be in /home any more until you fixed it manually either by copying the folder back over, making symbolic links or simply adjusting the mount points, and then you may need to have the permissions fixed by running chmod recursively on each home folder.
I know this because for over five years I’ve been trying different Linux distributions, sometimes only hours appart depending on how well they worked. I’ve got lots of experience with different installation programs used for these distributions and I’ve rarely held back from experimenting with them to see what they could and could not do.
agreed.
Yoper and mepis are two distros that use /home under the main / and ignore your own /home. you do indeed need to edit /etc/fstab afterwards…. but then, your settings will be available to you once again…
but it is a moot point.
it is still far easier to upgrade linux than any version of windows.
Any distribution _can_ preserve your home. Some just make it more difficult than others. Most make it quite easy, but I imagine there’s the off “newbie friendly” job that makes it impossible without knowledge of the system (something that would aide you in using a better distribution anyway).
But if you go the Debian way you’ll notice that reinstalls aren’t even needed. This isn’t always perfect either; but Debian’s is pretty amazingly close.
This from an Arch user who always has some silly thing he has to do every 4 months to keep his system booting after that big update. But hey, this isn’t a distro for the timid. It’s for those who do (not can, do) read directions.
I don’t really believe this is going to happen. I’m seeing Microsoft adding at least another year of support for XP home.
They will feel the menace of KDE 4. They are feeling the menace of Mac OS. They are feeling the menace of piracy. This means that they’ll think carefully before moving with that plan.
On the other hand, they know that most of Windows XP users are non-technical because they were lured into buying a PC with Windows pre-installed, they don’t know what is a firewall, they don’t know what is a patch and they think blinded that IE can’t be replaced.
This seems like another way of reducing costs. By not supporting users who ignore security. Of course if they think they will sell more Vista licenses without a PC attached they certainly are dumb.
They are feeling the menace of piracy.
Piracy is actually good in one way, bad in another way for Microsoft.
At one side, it’s bad because they lose income, but on the other hand it’s good because it increases their installed base.
But it’s still illegal.
The problem is that kind of user may not be aware of security concerns, but they are aware of their system becoming gradually unusable and ridden with pop-ups and crap.
And when their machine gets ununsable because of this, they go to the closest knowledgable person they know and ask them to fix their machine.
So in the end, they will be aware by proxy that support no longer exists, but they still will know about it, even though they will likely interpret the whole thing as “my computer is too old”.
I’d say this was very accurate based on current trends, but I’d go a bit further beyond just the support of Home Edition. Home users are just expected to throw away their PCs and get new ones anyway.
Even for Professional, many businesses have only just upgraded to XP, and that has come as a result of the best part of ten years of NT 4 usage where support has eventually become an issue. If it wasn’t then many would probably still be on NT4, regardless of any new features. Those using 2000 have been even less keen to upgrade for obvious reasons. They were the first people to buy into the hype of things like Active Directory at the time.
I really don’t think that many people, including Microsoft, realise just how many organisations do not want to pay for volume license agreements, let along subscriptions. Under the surface there is widespread resentment and a feeling that now they have upgraded to XP, and possibly 2003 from NT, they will never want to spend that kind of money for nothing ever again. In terms of business use, Vista is extremely dead in the water, and Microsoft’s turnover of versions of Windows and other software is well, well out of step with the versions organisations out there are actually using. Their only real hope for it is home users.
It raises some pretty interesting questions about the viability of Microsoft’s main revenue generators (Windows an Office) over the next ten years in particular. Microsoft want to be like Google and open source software and get changes and improvements to their customers faster, but the fact that they have versions of Windows and Office every few years (even quite a few years in the case of Vista) is the actual problem! The only way you can turn things around faster is if you lower the barriers to entry and make it available at a much lower cost, or even better, free, and provide a seamless upgrade path no matter how old the version that people are using that does not involve rip and replace.
Many people will say easy, Microsoft will make money from Xbox, Live, media etc. and expand into new markets. Unfortunately, Microsoft’s core revenue generators are Windows and Office, and if Microsoft is to survive as they are (yes, I did use that word) they are non-negotiable. Every part of Microsoft’s business, including the Xbox and other peripheral software like SQL Server and Visual Studio, either depend on Windows and Office for financial (the Xbox is a business disaster) or technical (SQL Server, Visual Studio run on Windows) support. If they were to lose one of the pillars of Windows or Office then the house would fall to pieces. Remove Windows and you have a flat plot of land, and I simply can’t see Microsoft psychologically being able to survive that as IBM did in the past.
Anyone who can take an alternative desktop and base applications, be it Linux or something else, make it good enough, make it extremely low cost or free (with a seamless upgrade path that makes people confident about their software) and make it economically viable with a realistic business model is going to win BIG over the next ten years. Organisations will look into it and start using it quicker than a greyhound with dynamite up its backside, and the economic benefits will be so huge no amount of political manoeuvring will stop it.
Microsoft can hum and har about how innovative their software is and all the new features in Vista, but as far as most organisations are concerned standard software is only innovative when it gets cheaper.
Anyone who can take an alternative desktop and base applications, be it Linux or something else, make it good enough
I should of course point out that no one has got a snowball in hell’s chance of doing this as things stand, and people will continue to pay for Windows and Office for the forseable future.
The Microsoft spokesdroid said there would be no security updates after the end of 2006. But the Service Pack roadmap says service pack 3 for XP Home will arrive in the second half of 2007. Doesn’t this count as a potential security update ?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
Browser: ELinks (0.4.2; cygwin; 700)
errrr….right.
Because we all remember how well the Service Pack 5 for Windows 2000 worked out in the end…oh wait! ;P
…and then when they DID release their ‘alternative’ a security rollup–we remember how well supported and tested THAT was, right? Oh wait again… @_@;
Personally I’m going to be rather wary of any forthcoming SP3 (if it exists) or any ‘features upgrades’ from Vista, because I’ll want to see exactly what attempts at lockin or artifically created ‘need’ to upgrade to Vista will be induced. >_<
—bornagainpenguin
I happen to work at a financial institution that still runs NT4 on all of the workstations in it’s branches. We are in the process of migrating to XP which is scheduled to be finished by the end of 2006 – when they are talking about dropping support for it officially. And, as far as I know, we still to this day have some sort of extended support that we purchased from MS for NT4 even though that ended offically a long time ago. Large companies, MS’s bread and butter, move slowly and take a long time with their technology changes and refreshes. They expect things to be supported for a long, long time to accomodate them with the amounts they pay MS for their workstation, server and office licences.
Now, I could understand that they felt they needed to support NT4 in that way but they did not feel the need to support Windows 98 in a similar way. Those were two very different codebases and so the division between the professional and the consumer products was clear and the costs to support the two would have been greater. However, for MS to take what is, for all intents and purposes, the same code base and make a distinction between the two for ongoing security updates is lunacy – especially in this world and internet these days where a few infected zombie machines cause problems for us all and make MS look bad all around.
I would be very surprised if they did this – I can see them dropping phone support and the like but if they stop the more critical security updates to Home and not XP, even though there is such little difference between them, then they have dropped down quite a few pegs in both my technological and buisiness sense estimations…
It appears that this lifecycle applies to XP Professional as well:
http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?p1=3223
(check out the table at the bottom of the page)
Extended support is not slated to end for XP Pro until 2011 according to your link.
Mainstream support is ending, meaning no new OS features.
Seriously anyone expecting new features in an OS that shipped in 2001 without getting an upgrade (al’a vista) is smoking crack.
//But it runs VERY slowly, drops the WiFi connection, memory card reader is flaky, the system will somtimes just cut completely off (at which point I have to unplug the power form the PSU and wait for the power to drain from the system, then plug it back in for it to turn back on). Why is this?//
Perhaps your mom uses Internet Explorer, and her OS is riddled with virii and spyware?
A fresh reinstall seems to be in order. Then, Firefox, AVG, and ZoneAlarm (an old version, from http://www.oldversion.com )
//Perhaps your mom uses Internet Explorer, and her OS is riddled with virii and spyware?//
Darn it, the worst thing MS has ever done is create an OS friendly to so many viruses that people invent a new word for them! Virii is NOT a word!
Edited 2006-01-04 16:11
Which older versions of Zone alarm do you recommend and why?
Colour me curious.
–bornagainpenguin
I just bought a HP laptop with win xp home.
And after 1 year winxp-home will not receive security updates? This is just wrong.
Its a good thing i have MSDN-AA and i can get every microsoft OS for non comercial use
There is a difference, competition!, what competition?, if your talking about SuSE then they do support older versions for a number of years. However the OS is free and much less of a security risk.
I seem to recall August being the month Vista is released so, if true, that leaves September, October, November, and December for getting security updates. Can you imagine the anger of people that buy their XP Home the day before Vista is available and a few months later their OS is no longer supported? This is why I believe Microsoft will continue to supply security updates for at least a year after Vista is on the shelf and pre-installed on computers. This announcement is just a way to get more money from users by getting them to buy XP Pro (money for nothing) or Vista (another copy in use). Either way, Microsoft wins (OS is purchased) and the customer loses ($300+ for updates or OS not wanted/needed along with potential problems).
There will be no significant movement to Linux or Mac due to this. XP Home is on consumer computers, the people who own XP Home are not the type to install new OS’s. Switching to Mac also involves new hardware, if these people feel a need for new hardware they will upgrade to Vista.
MS will be forced (by public oppinion) to extend support, there are already precedents for this.
I agree that it would be nice for people to switch to an alternative OS, but believing that it will happen is pure fantasy.
MS continues to dominate due to its business model, not because it is superior. Macs will continue to be niche products until Apple changes its business model. Linux will continue to be a niche product (on the desktop) until some OEMs get on board. No amount of MS arrogance and f***ups will change this.
“So, as long as people continue to by emachines, HP, Dell, etc… they are going to have crappy computers and they are going to have a bad computing experience.”
So you’re suggesting everybody should build their own machines?
If every zealot had their way, everybody would build their own machines, everybody would use linux, all companies would use open source, never be a monopoly at anything and contibute millions of dollars to open source projects, because they’re nice.
….And what exactly do you have against being nice?
—bornagainpenguin
Now, that would be cool to see. However, I don’t think my mother would be capable of building one herself … I just can’t see that :p
….And what exactly do you have against being nice?
It’s un-American ! Today niceness, tomorrow communism !!!
Browser: ELinks (0.4.2; cygwin; 700)