dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
2109

antdude
Matrix Ant
Premium Member
join:2001-03-25
US

2 recommendations

antdude

Premium Member

Microsoft antimalware support for Windows XP extended.

»blogs.technet.com/b/mmpc ··· -xp.aspx

Sheesh! Just let it go!

Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium Member
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN

3 recommendations

Blackbird

Premium Member

They did something similar back when XP was replacing Win98. The Win98 security updating kept being extended, on an on (which was good for me since I was still running 98 on some systems through that period). I even recall one update for one of the major file-type exploits (.wmf ?) that was MS back-ported to 98 a year after all else had completely ended. I think it all has to do with the magnitude of corporate pressure, and from whom... if the complaints constitute a clear and present danger to future potential business or orders of sufficient size, they will have an effect.

Link Logger
MVM
join:2001-03-29
Calgary, AB

2 recommendations

Link Logger to antdude

MVM

to antdude
Apparently we need to find a fat woman who can sing that we can dress up in a Windows XP t-shirt so she can finally put an end to this XP adventure.

Blake

beck
MVM
join:2002-01-29
On The Road

1 recommendation

beck to antdude

MVM

to antdude
Thing is, there are lots of people still using XP. And the can't/won't/can't afford to upgrade or get a new PC. Better to keep them updating the antimalware and get rid of the bad stuff. They probably don't update their antivirus either.

Many people don't know how to do anything other than email and facebook. Really.
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

BlitzenZeus

Premium Member

Now those people can buy tablets, and smartphones where they're never given an administrator account unless somebody else hacks, excuse me... jailbreaks their device for them.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to antdude

Premium Member

to antdude
This comes a day or so after the leaks that Windows 9 will come out in 2015.

They are hoping that XP users who don't want to use Windows 8, will be willing to go to Windows 9.

Maybe if we are good boys and girls they will even put in a little bit of an upgrade path,

siljaline
I'm lovin' that double wide
Premium Member
join:2002-10-12
Montreal, QC

1 edit

2 recommendations

siljaline to antdude

Premium Member

to antdude
The MS Lifecycle fact sheet spells it all out.
»windows.microsoft.com/en ··· ifecycle
XP users have to get used to the fact that MS support is shortly coming to an end.
Not that I dislike XP - it's an aged O/S and that's fact.

See also: Mary-Jo has close unbiased ties directly to MS.
Windows XP end of support in April: Three more questions answered
»www.zdnet.com/windows-xp ··· 0025151/

Danonyme
@b2b2c.ca

1 recommendation

Danonyme to beck

Anon

to beck
That OS is 13 years old. A computer that old will be too slow to be usable on anything internet related. If it's recent enough to be able to do Facebook and Skype stuff, then it will be able to run 7 (or a recent Ubuntu)

Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON

7 recommendations

Ian1

Premium Member

said by Danonyme :

That OS is 13 years old. A computer that old will be too slow to be usable on anything internet related. If it's recent enough to be able to do Facebook and Skype stuff, then it will be able to run 7 (or a recent Ubuntu)

You're preaching to the choir here on a tech site. I know a woman who uses a refurbed P4 with XP to use e-mail, Facebook and Farmville. That's literally all she uses it for. Don't think she paid more than $80 for it. Really think she ought to buy a Windows 7 license at a higher cost than the entire computer with OS? I don't want to teach her how to use Ubuntu, nor would I be thrilled about being tasked with installing it. But if you want to volunteer, I can IM the address.

People need to just accept the fact that Windows XP is going to be around for a while yet.

Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium Member
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN

4 recommendations

Blackbird to Danonyme

Premium Member

to Danonyme
said by Danonyme :

That OS is 13 years old. A computer that old will be too slow to be usable on anything internet related. If it's recent enough to be able to do Facebook and Skype stuff, then it will be able to run 7 (or a recent Ubuntu)

While you make a valid observation noting that hardware and software both reflect the technological level and limitations of the era in which they were made, I feel you overgeneralized it. As in any arena, "usable" varies with the user and the situation. Your focus is likely directed upon a non-technical person's usage of high-demand, video/graphics-rich websites which employ the latest, greatest manifestations of webcode methods, for which your statement would ring true. But saying that a 13-year old computer and XP would "be too slow to be usable on anything internet related" is a rather giant overstatement... there is a vast amount of Internet life and usage beyond the likes of Facebook, Skype, and the other "buzz" sites.

Those "using the Internet" heavily with XP for things other than a diet of the "heavy" sites you probably have in mind, will argue long and hard with you that their usage will remain fine for what they do, for years to come. I went through the identical thing for years after Win98 support ended... I used that OS quite successfully online with several 1997-2000-era systems until late 2010. And it will be the same drill on my XP systems as it's support winds down.

Just because Microsoft rings an announcement bell ending XP support does not mean everything XP-related suddenly slows down or stops working (unless, of course, MS starts also messing with the OS activation pings). Current users of XP on older hardware are already aware of Internet issues they will face because the "heavy," performance-demanding sites already are just that. So XP users already either avoid or tolerate, and that will only continue in coming years. The impact on XP users will not come overnight, it will constitute a gradually-growing litany of site-viewing difficulties and inability to update the apps (including eventually the anti-malware) on the computer that may take years to become intolerable for a given user and how he uses the Internet. And for users in the 3rd World (there are many), it may take even far longer... many of them are indeed still using Win98 online daily.

therube
join:2004-11-11
Randallstown, MD

1 recommendation

therube to antdude

Member

to antdude
quote:
> Sheesh! Just let it go!

You're right, MS should let Microsoft antimalware go!

I long ago disabled...

OK, just what is this "Microsoft antimalware" ?
Is this the monthly Malicious Software Removal Tool ?

If "Microsoft antimalware" is "Windows Defender" (guessing now that it is not), it is Windows Defender that I long ago disabled. I do download & run the monthly MSRT.

As far as XP still being a viable OS, in my book, it certainly is, not hampered in any manner.

Softpedia, By Bogdan Popa: Best Way to Make Windows 9 a Hit: Relaunch Windows XP with Modern Features

beck
MVM
join:2002-01-29
On The Road

beck to Danonyme

MVM

to Danonyme
said by Danonyme :

That OS is 13 years old. A computer that old will be too slow to be usable on anything internet related. If it's recent enough to be able to do Facebook and Skype stuff, then it will be able to run 7 (or a recent Ubuntu)

Not. My system doesn't qualify to run win8. I'm on win7 tho, not XP. People were able to buy new PCs like a year ago with XP on them. So, it's not like all the XP machines are running on 386 CPUs.

Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON

Ian1

Premium Member

Aren't the requirements to run 8 pretty much identical to run 7?

Mike
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA

Mike

Mod

and 8 runs better
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

BlitzenZeus to Ian1

Premium Member

to Ian1
Well they dropped support for really old processors in Win 8, it pretty much effected single core processors only. If you had a really old system with one of these processors Win 7 was the last os you could run if you had the driver support. Were talking systems that shipped with xp at the best.

Besides that I had Vista on the same system as Win 8, and they both ran about the same. There was no real noticeable performance difference between them except for fast startup which was also in Win 7, and that didn't make programs run any better.

Once you put a bag over it's butter face she's not that bad, the body is good, but it's not like you want to make a commitment to it. Seriously though metro in 8.0 was horrible, in 8.1 was better as you could hide most of it without 3rd party software. They finally fixed some basic things that needed to be fixed as they rushed the implementation of metro in the first place. Basic things like actual multitasking of applications, working on more than monitor at a time, and going directly to the desktop/all programs screen so you never had to see the metro start menu again. It was like they were trying to turn your pc into a defunct tablet. I also tend to hate fullscreen applications when it's not necessary as I have large monitors. For single core tablets, and phones fine, however it's not preferred for real computers. I don't even run my browser maximized.

beck
MVM
join:2002-01-29
On The Road

beck to Ian1

MVM

to Ian1
said by Ian1:

Aren't the requirements to run 8 pretty much identical to run 7?

I guess not. I have a core2 duo @ 2.53GHz. It zings. But when it ran the win8 qualifier before you could buy the download, it said it didn't qualify for Win8. I guess that doesn't mean it won't work, but I wasn't going to cough up money to MS just because they didn't have enough. It was only 2 years old then too.

I have a windows experience of 6.2 which is the CPU/RAM limitation. I have ATI graphics @ 6.7 and SSD @ 6.9.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

10 recommendations

PX Eliezer1 to Danonyme

Premium Member

to Danonyme
said by Danonyme :

That OS is 13 years old. A computer that old will be too slow to be usable on anything internet related. If it's recent enough to be able to do Facebook and Skype stuff, then it will be able to run 7 (or a recent Ubuntu)

I'm on an XP machine right now.

1.80 GHz and 1.0 GB RAM.

Does what I need it to do: Internet and word processing.

And we are on the internet all day for business.

The ONLY reason that newer machines need to be "faster" is because the OS are that much more bloated. I hate to tell you that, but it is true.

It is as much a scam and swindle on the public, as is planned obsolescence.

In fact, this IS planned obsolescence.

If Microsoft had branched out more, Microsoft could have been like APPLE in terms of iTunes, iPhones and other fun hardware, Microsoft could have been like GOOGLE in terms of search and all sorts of other services, Microsoft could have been like Amazon in terms of commerce.

But----NOOOOOOOOOO!

Microsoft decided to make a new OS every 18 months (THEIR version of Moore's Law), each OS more bloated than the last, hence the need for faster and faster hardware too.

By doing so, Microsoft got rich, but it also STAYED NARROW and missed the opportunities that were pursued by Apple, Google, Amazon, etc.

Microsoft has to constantly make new OS and business software, because (aside from Xbox) that's all that they have.

Microsoft Office has more sequels than "Fast and Furious" and "Planet of the Apes" combined, and each new version is more of a PITA than the last.
scross
join:2002-09-13
USA

2 recommendations

scross

Member

Finally ... somebody else who gets it!

BTW, folks, at the same time Microsoft was going around claiming that it WASN'T a monopoly, internally there were discussions going on about how its single biggest competitor (at the time, anyway) was ITSELF - people not upgrading to their latest-and-greatest, but sticking with what they had. Which, for the purposes of this discussion, would be WinXP. And now that people are just freaking sick and tired of the upgrade cycle, and the endless patches, and the never-ending malware threats, instead of upgrading to the latest Microsoft OS and dealing with the headaches of doing that (plus the "old" problems will just become "new" problems all over again, because such is the nature of Microsoft), more people will instead probably do the smart thing and take that opportunity to migrate away from it.
DarkSithPro (banned)
join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ

2 recommendations

DarkSithPro (banned) to antdude

Member

to antdude
I don't see a problem with using a 12 year old OS, except for security reasons when dealing with customers. Using an insecure/outdated platform to do business is not fair to your customers after support ends. All it takes is a newly discovered hole and your computer and clients are compromised.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

4 recommendations

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

said by DarkSithPro:

I don't see a problem with using a 12 year old OS, except for security reasons when dealing with customers. Using an insecure/outdated platform to do business is not fair to your customers after support ends. All it takes is a newly discovered hole and your computer and clients are compromised.

But the end of support is not due to a law of nature, but rather is part of the conspiracy of planned obsolescence.

The newer OS are not inherently better---in fact we all know some of the "new" systems were worse than their predecessors---they are simply more bloated.

If you say "but they can't support new ones and old ones at the same time" my response would be that there was no need to make the new one at all.

It certainly wasn't needed to accommodate cellphones---Google and Apple have done fine with that without needing Windows at all.

But Microsoft wants Windows to be in everything from PC's to refrigerators to rectal thermometers, so they just can't bear to leave it be.
DarkSithPro (banned)
join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ

DarkSithPro (banned)

Member

I duuno about you but getting rid of the 4gb barrier and adding ASLR is a huge leap in usability and security. 64 bit is worth it alone. Also new hardware components, printers and other peripherals coming out will not support legacy OS, so when your hardware starts to go you're going to need to upgrade the OS eventually. Weather it be Windows, or Linux. So why not make it easier on yourself now and get a copy of 7, or 8?

Dustyn
Premium Member
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN

1 recommendation

Dustyn to antdude

Premium Member

to antdude
Is Microsoft sending a conflicting message here?
Let's extend antimalware support... but no critical security patches within that extension. Seems rather stupid IMOP.
DarkSithPro (banned)
join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ

1 recommendation

DarkSithPro (banned) to antdude

Member

to antdude
For anyone still using XP right now and plan on keeping the computer for any length of time while reading this thread, I highly suggest you atleast get yourself this: »www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 32116986 before they stop selling them. It's the closest thing to XP familiarity and you'll continue to receive support for years to come and any new peripheral you get will be supported. A hundred bucks for piece of mind is a small price to pay.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

1 recommendation

PX Eliezer1 to DarkSithPro

Premium Member

to DarkSithPro
I would be happy to get a copy of 7 but where?

The only ones that I see are labelled OEM and as such cannot be installed by regular folks---reserved for system builders.

In fact I have a Win7 OEM sitting on my table. I did not realize originally how much of a hassle it is.

So again, where [can] I get a legit upgrade of Windows 7 as Microsoft has pulled them all?
PX Eliezer1

2 recommendations

PX Eliezer1 to DarkSithPro

Premium Member

to DarkSithPro
said by DarkSithPro:

For anyone still using XP right now and plan on keeping the computer for any length of time while reading this thread, I highly suggest you atleast get yourself this: »www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 32116986 before they stop selling them. It's the closest thing to XP familiarity and you'll continue to receive support for years to come and any new peripheral you get will be supported. A hundred bucks for piece of mind is a small price to pay.

That's OEM---that is my point. A major PITA to install if you are not a system builder. And the one you showed is 64 bit besides.
DarkSithPro (banned)
join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ

DarkSithPro (banned) to antdude

Member

to antdude
WTF are you guys talking about? The OEM version will install identically to the retail copy, the only difference is it's tied to the motherboard of that specific computer and you have no official MS support, that is it! So if you upgrade the mobo you'll need a new copy.

Watch this for clarification:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· 4jQQo00k

antdude
Matrix Ant
Premium Member
join:2001-03-25
US

antdude

Premium Member

said by DarkSithPro:

WTF are you guys talking about? The OEM version will install identically to the retail copy, the only difference is it's tied to the motherboard of that specific computer and you have no official MS support, that is it! So if you upgrade the mobo you'll need a new copy.

Watch this for clarification:
(youtube clip)

What if we want to change our motherboards often? I do that every other years.
DarkSithPro (banned)
join:2005-02-12
Tempe, AZ

DarkSithPro (banned)

Member

said by antdude:

said by DarkSithPro:

WTF are you guys talking about? The OEM version will install identically to the retail copy, the only difference is it's tied to the motherboard of that specific computer and you have no official MS support, that is it! So if you upgrade the mobo you'll need a new copy.

Watch this for clarification:
(youtube clip)

What if we want to change our motherboards often? I do that every other years.

Well maybe for industry experts like youself the retails are a more viable option. But for these XP guys that are hanging on to their older systems the cheaper OEM option seems to be the right deal. An even better idea is to buy the OEM right now and hold on to the copy until they build their new system and install the OEM copy to the new mobo.
BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium Member
join:2000-01-13

BlitzenZeus

Premium Member

I bought xp pro retail gold(no service packs) years ago through an employee purchase program, and don't regret it. It's moved a few times, and now lives it's final days in a vm. I had already planned on moving off of xp on the original eol date, and did buy Vista as oem which stayed with a newer system at the time. Win 7 was just a minorly improved Vista sp2 to me to I didn't feel the need to buy Win 7. I was basically given Win 8 when somebody else bought a few copies, and then realized they didn't like it after they bought it as if they missed all the media coverage on it. So I threw that on my machine, and I used that so I could also help others who had Win 8. I just use Win 8, and linux these days on my main machine.
scross
join:2002-09-13
USA

scross to antdude

Member

to antdude
I have several active PCs in my household, running a variety of Microsoft operating systems, the oldest of these being an XP box. I actually have OS upgrade disks for that box and several others, but, having seen from my own experience that the newer OS versions aren't really much better than the older ones, and in some cases appear to be worse, I'm in no hurry to "upgrade" now and in fact will probably just stick with whatever shipped on each box originally.

Plus, given that all of these boxes are connected to the internet basically 100% of the time, that they run almost no software natively these days (everything is done via the web), and that Google Chrome has generally become the preferred browser in my household, I fully expect that any new hardware purchased in the foreseeable future might very well be of the ChromeBook/ChromeBox variety. (I understand that these are starting to sell like hotcakes, BTW.) The alternative being the MacBook, since my wife already has one of these and loves it (along with her iPad, and her iPhone), and my daughter has been starting to warm to the idea of having a MacBook, too.

As for myself, I have to keep working to at least some extent with whatever I interact with on the job, which at the moment is Windows, specifically XP. In the past this has been other versions of Windows, too, both older and newer, and also Unix and Linux at times. But the hard-core Windows shop where I've been working lately (and where I'm using XP) THOUGHT, at first, that they would be upgrading everyone to Win8 soon enough, so they bought a few copies to play with. After an initial burst of enthusiasm for it (but only among the Windows techies, and this waned quickly), I believe the plan now is to either sit tight for a while longer to see what becomes of Win8, or to start upgrading to Win7 instead. (The falling sales of Win8 and the increasing sales of Win7 imply that others have done the same and have now made their choice in the matter.) After a review of what the licensing costs for this and their other upgraded Microsoft products are going to be, now there is also talk of looking at alternatives such as Linux and other open source products, which even the Windows techies are getting more enthusiastic about.