Microsoft Worried About PCs Still Using Windows XP

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
so M$ (marketing Team) thinks that companies that has custom proprietary software threaded for XP that works flawlessly for the company will just ditch the old OS just like that? i don't think so.
 


I would give you some punctuation to use.
 


That's all well and good until the network goes down and then you lose all your production.
 


Or, you know, use a virtual machine like the rest of the world does. We have systems dependent on Access 2003 and IE6, we just run vApps for them.
 


A server/network is much less likely to fail than a desktop PC is (disclaimer: I'm assuming you have a competent server and networks team who have built in proper redundancy).

 


I'm no fool, but that said, I'm certain companies would have a far easier go of defending themselves from a lawsuit on the basis that they were running up to date software and took all plausible precautions. Whereas running XP would show a clear negligence of security and therefore make it not only an easy target to sue, but deserving as well.

As for these lock applications, it's unfortunate, but you either have to move or pressure the company to make an update. Again, I imagine the lawsuits for not doing so will quickly prove this a more economical solution..

I'm not sympathetic to people who refuse to upgrade - businesses make these investments fully aware of the fact they will eventually have to move forward and XP was no different.

Isn't that practically the precise reason MS made the Windows XP mode for Professional editions of windows? Admittedly, I have never seen it used in practice so I don't know just how it impacts compatibility, but considering, I would think it works quite well.

At the very least I'm sure IT can find a way to segregate user data from the coming cesspit of malware.
 


This, absolutely, Microsoft widely advertises the amount and length of time they will provide support to their OSes. 10 years, typically, but Microsoft have, for free, extended this 3 times for XP. No-one can claim that they were taken by surprise by this, if you can't get your shit together when you have had 13 years to prepare for it, I despair!

13 years, I think this is worth repeating. Companies have been aware that this is going to happen for THIRTEEN YEARS!

 
izmanq , November 13, 2013 5:18 AM
Yes, XP users, time to move to Linux 😀

And find out that most things they like doing they can no longer do. Stop trying to make Linux on the desktop happen. It's not going to.

13
Absentsa , November 13, 2013 4:56 AM
How difficult can it be for a company the size of MS to keep XP security up to date? If they were really 'worried' they would simply keep supporting it. This is bully tactics thinly veiled as consumer concern. I don't remember buying XP with an expiry date on the package. Should be a legal requirement if they do this consistently (Which they do). Load of bull if you ask me.

Why should they? Plenty of precedent from before them as to why they shouldn't have to. If you had your way, that should mean that any work that YOU do for anyone should be guaranteed by YOU for the rest of your life, and if something has an issue, YOU have to come fix it for free.
 


And you can build redundancies into your internal network.

What if a workstation fails? What if the power goes out? What if an asteroid lands on the plant?
 


I just don't get why people are always on about Linux on desktop - do they not understand that if it was worth having it would be far more common?

I tried loading Mint for a while, and it was workable, but there's just so much that is still lacking on Linux.

@The "why not support XP" guy: Because, it gets harder and harder and more expensive to do so the older XP gets. More malware and exploits become known. Would you expect a laptop company to service your laptop indefinitely into the future? I don't think so.

Just because they have the capability, they should not be expected to do so.
 
Eventually, the hardware will give out. Eventually the support for the proprietary software ends. Microsoft draws the line in the sand. Once the line is there, it gives the software vendor's marketing/retention teams a portal to up-sell or renew a license on the next Operating system. I administer a small business network and this is the boat we are in.
 

If a company's leak causes significant damages, they will have to compensate regardless of how up-to-date and top-notch their precautions may have been and having a computer running XP is not necessarily negligent if the computers in questions are for most intents and purposes operating stand-alone such as industrial applications where computers that control processes are often networked over RS485 or other uncommon networks by traditional desktop standards over which malware would extremely unlikely to successfully propagate since that would require malware written with intimate knowledge of the control software running on the industrial PC at the other end of the RS485 link.

Another example of equipment running XP that is unlikely to ever get upgrades nor likely to get chucked by their owners any time soon either: Agilent has made entire laboratory equipment lines based on Windows XP. Companies are not going to throw away their $500 000 spectrum analyzers, $25 000 oscilloscopes and logic analyzers just because Windows XP is no longer supported if the equipment still meets the company's testing, troubleshooting and validation/certification requirements.

So, while a lawsuit may argue that data was put at risk due to (some) systems running outdated OSes, they would first need to prove that those systems were actually involved in the data breach and then prove that it would not have happened if the system had been upgraded before the fact could have any effect on compensation. If whatever allowed the data breach to occur would have gone through even with Windows 8.1, then the whole argument falls flat on its face.

Now, XP is not the only OS that got embedded in devices that are unlikely to ever get an upgrade: there is a slew of embedded and realtime OSes powering countless devices out there... soon enough, even your networked toaster will be running something like vxWorks or Android. How many years are you expecting your toaster manufacturer to support their vxWorks or Android toaster firmware build?
 


Linux works great for the internet, besides users can still use Windows if they want for offline stuff and Linux for the internet. If Xp users don't want to upgrade or buy a new OS they have Linux as an option instead of relying on a 12 year old OS that is no longer being supported. Besides, if everyone did go to Linux it would have better support, new features, ect.. Not right away of course but over time it would get better, besides MS isn't doing much better.
 
hell can frEEZE over before I turn my computer into a lemming, smart-phone look-alike with Windows 8.1. Screw the kewl-kids. They can have it.

Enough's enough. XP wasn't broken. Still works better than vista. Windows 7 is fine, but I have no use for a hundred or more dumb-ass App(ies).

I can't stop the momentum of this Idiocracy. But I sure don't intend to make voluntary financial payments for the :"fun" of joining the "dumbing down of our intellects."

end of rant.
 
hell can frEEZE over before I turn my computer into a lemming, smart-phone look-alike with Windows 8.1. Screw the kewl-kids. They can have it.

Enough's enough. XP wasn't broken. Still works better than vista. Windows 7 is fine, but I have no use for a hundred or more dumb-ass App(ies).

I can't stop the momentum of this Idiocracy. But I sure don't intend to make voluntary financial payments for the :"fun" of joining the "dumbing down of our intellects."

end of rant. if Micro$oft arrogantly (for a change) invades the involuntary annuitants/customers in whose pockets M$'s hands are forever parked, let them turn their source code over to the open-source community for further upgrades and security patches.

Why do a half-dozen self-serving billionaires control our technology? and, digitally speaking, our lives? Two words: Up Theirs.
 


That's their problem. I'm just saying that clear negligence is going to make it harder to argue the point. Maybe American judges aren't as understanding, but Canadian judges exercise a lot of discretion.
 


Oh, stop it with the hateocracy already. Windows 8 is just fine, and this is coming from someone who's been invested in Windows since 98. I do like 7 a bit more, but I think that Windows 8 is the start of something very good.

Technology belongs to billionaires because they pay. I don't see you paying $30.00 an hour to some programming team to make good software for say, Linux. Free software is not on par with the commercial alternatives, and until there's a reason to make it for stuff like Linux, it'll stay that way.
 


Given where computing is largely going, it's hardly a regression. It's a great OS for mobile, and I think it's very good on desktop too. I do wish they made it a bit more consistent or offered the option to turn off the Metro interface (I will hold to my dying breath that Metro apps were a stupid idea). I do like a start menu, but I'm not so against Windows 8s - all I do is what I did on my old start menu anyway, type the name of the program and have it pop up.

Really, all they need is the option. Make it like one of those "enable or disable Windows Features" things. Everybody wants something, but for me Windows 8 does a good enough job of most.

It can always be "better", but we're not the ones making it, it's made for a profit, and therefore certain decisions about direction and financial viability have to be taken into account.
 

But even "clear negligence" is relative. You need the whole context to establish whether or not what you claim to be "clear negligence" actually was negligence at all.

If a company's business revolves around a piece of equipment that no longer has vendor support for some of its components but still gets its job done adequately, the equipment is still being maintained as well as it possibly can be under the circumstances and most judges would likely have a hard time calling that negligence on its own.

How do hackers infect computers on a LAN? Usually by tricking their users into clicking malicious links to install malware. In many embedded and industrial applications, the control UI runs in kiosk mode where the ability to launch anything else is shut off altogether, rendering security patches for non-essential software unnecessary/redundant since they are not accessible for use by the user or attacker in the first place.
 


Oh sorry ... I forgot your opinion is what everyone in the world should follow. It is rarely hate towards M$ and more of justified hate towards W8. You like your windows 8? Good, keep using it and don't go around praising that POS over Windows 7... if it is that good people will use it regardless of what you say.

Besides at a quick glance most of people here are more or lees complaining about W8 being un-ergonomic and total waste of space, providing absolutely nothing superior to W7 while being shoved down throats by M$ than XP not being supported.

If you are such trend-setter and wealthy to tell what people should have at a minimum then buy everyone a computer with at least 1GB memory... and then bitch at them. Or you can get real and realize that some people live from paycheck to paycheck and cannot even afford to replace their computer every 5-8 years.
 

This, exactly. Perhaps this isn't so much common in the US anymore, but in China, India, and the Middle-East, XP piracy ( especially with IE7 that doesn't require a MS Genuine Validation check, ) is still rampant.
 


Part support for vehicles is 10yrs. As far as Win 8 is concerned, M$ can suck it. I don't want that steaming pile, not even for free.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.