Windows XP PCs No Longer Receiving Updates

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Dear Windows XP Users,

I know we've said this before, but this time we are serious. No really. No more support, no more patches, no more zero day exploit fixes. Well, maybe that last fix. But that will definitely be the last one.

- Microsoft

With today’s Update Tuesday, if you are still on Windows XP you will not receive any security or non-security updates through Windows Update or Microsoft Update. Because support has ended for Windows XP, we are no longer releasing updates to the general public for Windows XP going forward. If you continue to use Windows XP without support, your computer will still likely work but will become vulnerable to security risks and over time its performance will be affected.
Click to expand...
 
I think Microsoft is kinda regretting not patching Windows XP. People have started to think of radical alternatives, which don't include Microsoft Windows.
 
You're kidding, right?

"People have started to think of radical alternatives"
What? Like using a current operating system?!?!? Next thing you know people will be abandoning their flip phones and driving fuel injected cars!!!! The world is going to hell, fellas!

"we recently bought a retail PC that needed XP so we're SOL"
Did you find a seven year old PC hiding in the back of a shelf at Walmart or something? How do you justify saying that a new retail PC needs windows XP?
 
They should have waited until they have a viable replacement at retail outlets.

NOT when every pc at walmart has the modern gui. Those really alienate xp users.
 
one swell foop said:
You're kidding, right?

"People have started to think of radical alternatives"
What? Like using a current operating system?!?!? Next thing you know people will be abandoning their flip phones and driving fuel injected cars!!!! The world is going to hell, fellas!
Click to expand...

People who still use Windows XP are either not caring or don't want to pay for Windows 7/8. Eventually Linux might be a good alternative. I expect Microsoft to eventually give away Windows 8 for desktop users. They may have to.
 
Ashbringer said:
I think Microsoft is kinda regretting not patching Windows XP. People have started to think of radical alternatives, which don't include Microsoft Windows.
Click to expand...

No, they haven't thought of alternatives at all. Joe Average and Granny and Grandpa all went out and bought new computers or are sitting there still totally in the blind that their system is riddled with malware.
 
The issue in Internet Explorer that was ultimately fixed affected all versions of IE because the issue existed in the core code of the software, unless I am mistaken. With that in mind, it made sense to make the patch available to XP users since it wasn't really a patch for XP, but a patch for ALL VERSIONS of IE, since the same core code has been used probably since version 6. That doesn't seem like backtracking or double-talk to me. It sounds more like people that don't know or understand technology misinterpreting things.
 
Ashbringer said:
I think Microsoft is kinda regretting not patching Windows XP. People have started to think of radical alternatives, which don't include Microsoft Windows.
Click to expand...

and nothing of value was lost (those users). they'll either come around or take their niche needs somewhere else (good luck). or they're all from 3rd world countries / grandparents etc who just don't know better.
 
Is Microsoft saying they will no longer create patches or are they pulling the plug on the entire Windows Update service for XP. As in cannot download preexisting patches?
 
NeghVar said:
Is Microsoft saying they will no longer create patches or are they pulling the plug on the entire Windows Update service for XP. As in cannot download preexisting patches?
Click to expand...

No more updates will be made. old ones are still available. You can still find patches for old Windows 95 issues. on microsoft's site if you know how to look for them.
 
Ryokurin said:
No more updates will be made. old ones are still available. You can still find patches for old Windows 95 issues. on microsoft's site if you know how to look for them.
Click to expand...

My understanding is they will still make updates and sell them per computer cost. The cost for each update will likely exceed the cost of replacing the OS. I'm not sure of the process in which to do so. But pretty sure that businesses that use LOB applications that can't move to a new platform can still pay for the patches. They just aren't free through windows update.

I may be wrong on this, don't know anyone that does this, just remember reading something about it a while back.
 
I can see the average XP user not wanting to go through the hassle of upgrading to Win8 on their aging PC because they fear change is totally going to install and use Linux...totally.
 
XP users fall into two categories:

1) Smart people who know what they are doing, and can continue to use XP safely, OR migrate to something that requires a little elbow grease like linux, and customize it to work exactly like they want
2) idiots who don't even know what XP is, don't realize their computer is already filled with viruses and malware, and who cares what they do. Buy a mac, win8, or an ipad because all you do is facebook and email.

This end of XP support thing is really not as big of a deal as everyone makes it out to be. MS has more than met their end of the bargain with supporting XP - they can and should stop supporting it whenever they want.
 
Ashbringer said:
I think Microsoft is kinda regretting not patching Windows XP. People have started to think of radical alternatives, which don't include Microsoft Windows.
Click to expand...

Ashbringer said:
People who still use Windows XP are either not caring or don't want to pay for Windows 7/8. Eventually Linux might be a good alternative. I expect Microsoft to eventually give away Windows 8 for desktop users. They may have to.
Click to expand...

So on one hand people are looking at radical alternatives but on the other don't care or want to pat for Windows 7/8. Not sure why in these discussions people think only of upgrades considering that by far and away the #1 way Windows is distributed is on new hardware and the bulk of these devices historically never get an upgrade to a new version of Windows. Even if Windows were free, do you really think all of those XP boxes would have become 7 or 8 machines? Of course not, and I would imagine that count of XP machines out there today wouldn't change much because of a free Windows upgrade.

But you do have a point. Microsoft is giving away Windows to OEMs for smaller tablets now, along with Windows Phone. And I can see that policy needing to also cover larger cheaper devices to compete with Chromebooks. So Windows pricing is becoming more progressive, upgrades from prior versions might become free as that's not a big part of Windows sales and with the Windows Store there are ways to monetize free Windows.
 
Kongar said:
XP users fall into two categories:

1) Smart people who know what they are doing, and can continue to use XP safely, OR migrate to something that requires a little elbow grease like linux, and customize it to work exactly like they want
2) idiots who don't even know what XP is, don't realize their computer is already filled with viruses and malware, and who cares what they do. Buy a mac, win8, or an ipad because all you do is facebook and email.

This end of XP support thing is really not as big of a deal as everyone makes it out to be. MS has more than met their end of the bargain with supporting XP - they can and should stop supporting it whenever they want.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much it.

I built a new-spec XP box for a company a little over a year ago. They have an old CAD machine; the software will not run on any OS newer than XP. I recently advised them to simply unplug it from the Internet (it connects to the machine via serial cable).

But I still do fixes or "consulting" for home XP users. This is almost always, "go get a cheap desktop or laptop." Doing a fresh OS install on a PC that old is just a waste of time. And no, these folks are not going to learn Linux just because it's free.

The real area of worry is embedded systems like ATMs and POS devices...and guess what, MS is continuing to offer updates to their embedded version until at least 2018.
 
heatlesssun said:
Even if Windows were free, do you really think all of those XP boxes would have become 7 or 8 machines? Of course not, and I would imagine that count of XP machines out there today wouldn't change much because of a free Windows upgrade.
Click to expand...
Some of it is because Windows 7/8 is not compatible with your software or hardware, and some of it is for why do something that isn't needed? The whole why fix what isn't broken.

People here think lots of grandma and grandpa's are still using XP, but it's like those machines broke down long ago and have been replaced. With XP we're talking businesses, China, or people who can't afford it.
But you do have a point. Microsoft is giving away Windows to OEMs for smaller tablets now, along with Windows Phone. And I can see that policy needing to also cover larger cheaper devices to compete with Chromebooks. So Windows pricing is becoming more progressive, upgrades from prior versions might become free as that's not a big part of Windows sales and with the Windows Store there are ways to monetize free Windows.
Click to expand...
It's funny because the tablet Windows 8 is well received. It's the desktop market that hates it, and what's killing it. The only reason Microsoft is giving OEM free Windows 8 is because Android is free. Meanwhile the desktop market is grinding it's teeth, waiting for Windows 9.

Give it away for free. Everyone else does it, so why shouldn't Microsoft? I use Linux daily on my laptop, but it's because I don't really play games on it. I did play Portal 2 through Linux steam, and screwed around with Wine, but I can't do that with Dark Souls II. My laptop meets the minimum system requirements, but Wine eats away 50% of the systems performance, making it unplayable.

Microsoft, beware of Valve. Their intervention with Linux has driven it harder lately to become a decent OS.
 
one swell foop said:
You're kidding, right?

"People have started to think of radical alternatives"
What? Like using a current operating system?!?!? Next thing you know people will be abandoning their flip phones and driving fuel injected cars!!!! The world is going to hell, fellas!

"we recently bought a retail PC that needed XP so we're SOL"
Did you find a seven year old PC hiding in the back of a shelf at Walmart or something? How do you justify saying that a new retail PC needs windows XP?
Click to expand...

Yes....Very yes! Also, "I think Microsoft is kinda regretting not patching Windows XP."?! Microsoft is not going to regret getting rid of extremely old technology. I find it funny that people are so afraid of change that they throw out garbage claims like this. It's time to upgrade buddy.
 
Linux will never be an alternative to Windows. It is easily the most confusing operating system I have ever used and I'm a computer tech. No common user will ever be able to use it. The difficulty starts with Apple (for infant-like tech savvy people) then Windows (for typical users and advanced users) then Linux (For people who want to boycott anything commonly used and think it's cool to use "their own" OS. Also it is a great OS for hacking/Cracking etc.)
 
kattana said:
LOL !!

thank you for my morning belly laugh

:D
Click to expand...

The laugh is on our side though. A user who is afraid of Win8 and uses XP is not a power user -> linux can deliver everything he/she needs for free.
 
tuksonrider said:
I can see the average XP user not wanting to go through the hassle of upgrading to Win8 on their aging PC because they fear change is totally going to install and use Linux...totally.
Click to expand...

Dang, where are the Up Votes on this website? lol
 
Krolik said:
Linux will never be an alternative to Windows. It is easily the most confusing operating system I have ever used and I'm a computer tech. No common user will ever be able to use it. The difficulty starts with Apple (for infant-like tech savvy people) then Windows (for typical users and advanced users) then Linux (For people who want to boycott anything commonly used and think it's cool to use "their own" OS. Also it is a great OS for hacking/Cracking etc.)
Click to expand...

Says someone who probably tried linux last time in 1998. It has evolved a LOT.

Do yourself a favor and burn a live-cd of elementary OS, then tell me if it's confusing. It's about a million times easyer to use than win8.
 
What amuses me are all the whiners who think that Microsoft has somehow betrayed them by not supporting XP until they die. Do they honestly think that MS still supports Win95?
 
B00nie said:
Says someone who probably tried linux last time in 1998. It has evolved a LOT.

Do yourself a favor and burn a live-cd of elementary OS, then tell me if it's confusing. It's about a million times easyer to use than win8.
Click to expand...

I have to use it every 1 - 2 weeks at my job. We have tried several different flavors. Currently on Xubuntu. I have never seen a version I liked that was not confusing. I could probably give it more effort but I still wouldn't use it as I would never be able to run most programs on it because the majority of programs don't support linux. I understand there are alternatives and programs that allow you to virtualize or run it in compatibility but for a common user, these methods are impossible. You must understand that the common user (grandma) honestly believes that computers are nothing short of magic.
 
Knight_of_BAAWA said:
What amuses me are all the whiners who think that Microsoft has somehow betrayed them by not supporting XP until they die. Do they honestly think that MS still supports Win95?
Click to expand...

Actual quote from my mother-in-law...

"What? We *just* bought that PC 8 years ago!"

True story.
 
Does this just mean no new updates for XP, as has already been the case?

Or does this mean you will no longer be able to download the older, already released Windows Updates?

Like if you did a new install of XP on a computer for whatever reason, would you still be able to at least download updates that were released up to April 2014?
 
Knight_of_BAAWA said:
What amuses me are all the whiners who think that Microsoft has somehow betrayed them by not supporting XP until they die. Do they honestly think that MS still supports Win95?
Click to expand...

Exactly, I don't hear people crying because 95/98 are no longer supported. Why do they cry so much about XP? Windows 7 is still available and is an incredible OS (if they don't want to take the time to re-learn an OS like Win 8).
 
A lot of users on Windows XP are not the type to "upgrade". They upgrade when their PC breaks down and costs too much to repair. They upgrade by buying a new PC. Some people have multiple PC's (desktop and or multiple laptops). The newer ones run what came with it (7 or 8). The older ones may still have XP. Why? Because it still runs and works. No reason to fix something that isn't broken (in their eyes).
 
Krolik said:
Exactly, I don't hear people crying because 95/98 are no longer supported. Why do they cry so much about XP? Windows 7 is still available and is an incredible OS (if they don't want to take the time to re-learn an OS like Win 8).
Click to expand...

Windows Update didn't exist for Windows95 so the majority of it's users operating in a fairly unpatched state was essentially the norm. For the average user, there was no support for them to drop.

The span of time between when Windows 98 was released and when Windows XP replaced it was only 3 years. About half way through that, Windows2000 also came out, which many switched to despite it not necessarily having been targeted toward consumers.

In comparison, Windows XP was Microsoft's main OS for 5 years before Vista came out, and given the negative opinions about Vista, continued to be people's go-to OS for several years more.

So are you really still confused about why an OS that was most people's main OS for 6-8 years has a larger block of legacy users vs an OS that was only the go-to OS for 1.5-3 years?
 
GotNoRice said:
Windows Update didn't exist for Windows95 so the majority of it's users operating in a fairly unpatched state was essentially the norm. For the average user, there was no support for them to drop.

The span of time between when Windows 98 was released and when Windows XP replaced it was only 3 years. About half way through that, Windows2000 also came out, which many switched to despite it not necessarily having been targeted toward consumers.

In comparison, Windows XP was Microsoft's main OS for 5 years before Vista came out, and given the negative opinions about Vista, continued to be people's go-to OS for several years more.

So are you really still confused about why an OS that was most people's main OS for 6-8 years has a larger block of legacy users vs an OS that was only the go-to OS for 1.5-3 years?
Click to expand...

I didn't think of it that way, makes sense. Which would also explain the extreme that people will go to just to avoid having to leave Windows 7 as Windows 7 is an incredible OS with few problems. But what most people don't realize is that a company has to innovate and try new things. Unless you are Apple and have somehow gotten people to believe that every year's model is so much better than the last year's model because "now we have patented the color white" lol (Not a direct quote obviously)
 
Ashbringer said:
Some of it is because Windows 7/8 is not compatible with your software or hardware, and some of it is for why do something that isn't needed? The whole why fix what isn't broken.
Click to expand...

Which goes to the point that most PCs never get upgraded to a new OS. That's always been the case.

Ashbringer said:
People here think lots of grandma and grandpa's are still using XP, but it's like those machines broke down long ago and have been replaced. With XP we're talking businesses, China, or people who can't afford it.
Click to expand...

Worldwide businesses seem to be dropping XP much faster than the consumer market: http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-xp-for-enterprise-market-share-drops-below-10-percent.

Ashbringer said:
It's funny because the tablet Windows 8 is well received. It's the desktop market that hates it, and what's killing it. The only reason Microsoft is giving OEM free Windows 8 is because Android is free. Meanwhile the desktop market is grinding it's teeth, waiting for Windows 9.
Click to expand...

Yes, obviously the traditional desktop UI or lack thereof has been the biggest issue in Windows 8.x. Yes, Windows on tablets is free for smaller devices because of free Android. But I don't think the desktop market is grinding its teeth as much as it was when 8 was released in October 2012. Windows 8.x saw a nice spike in April with much of that being attributed to XP retiring no doubt. We'll see what the 8.1 update with the new Start Menu looks like. That should solve 90% of the complaints around 8. I understand first impressions are lasting impressions but at the same time if the only big criticism left is
"this should have been done sooner" that's not a here and now issue. And it's generally about what have you done for me lately, not what should have happened two years ago.

Ashbringer said:
Give it away for free. Everyone else does it, so why shouldn't Microsoft? I use Linux daily on my laptop, but it's because I don't really play games on it. I did play Portal 2 through Linux steam, and screwed around with Wine, but I can't do that with Dark Souls II. My laptop meets the minimum system requirements, but Wine eats away 50% of the systems performance, making it unplayable.

Microsoft, beware of Valve. Their intervention with Linux has driven it harder lately to become a decent OS.
Click to expand...

Microsoft's main revenue stream is software sales. They'd like to open up other ways to do make money from apps and subscriptions which a lot of people here don't like. But if you can't monetize it, giving it away isn't good business.
 
Krolik said:
Linux will never be an alternative to Windows. It is easily the most confusing operating system I have ever used and I'm a computer tech. No common user will ever be able to use it. The difficulty starts with Apple (for infant-like tech savvy people) then Windows (for typical users and advanced users) then Linux (For people who want to boycott anything commonly used and think it's cool to use "their own" OS. Also it is a great OS for hacking/Cracking etc.)
Click to expand...

I switched to Linux Mint recently because I wanted to get more comfy with it now that Microsoft is rumbling about subscription-based OS access and seems kinda like it wants to force a connection to some kinda online account like outlook.com which all seems silly. I found Mint to be super easy to get working and LibreOffice is now really, really good about keeping formatting consistent between it and MS Office (one of the biggest reasons why I didn't wanna use it before). I don't wanna accuse you of being dumb or anything, but Linux is really, really far from being confusing so I'm not sure why you had a hard time making sense of it.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I switched to Linux Mint recently because I wanted to get more comfy with it now that Microsoft is rumbling about subscription-based OS access and seems kinda like it wants to force a connection to some kinda online account like outlook.com which all seems silly. I found Mint to be super easy to get working and LibreOffice is now really, really good about keeping formatting consistent between it and MS Office (one of the biggest reasons why I didn't wanna use it before). I don't wanna accuse you of being dumb or anything, but Linux is really, really far from being confusing so I'm not sure why you had a hard time making sense of it.
Click to expand...

Well, Apple and Android have forced people to have an account with them for the past 5 years but no one complains about that. The only reason they try to get you to have an account is so that things can be synced up properly and so that you can use the App Store. If you don't want those features then create a local account.

As for Linux, if I wanted to figure out how to use it I could. The thing is, as I said before, 75% of programs are not written for Linux so it would be way more of a pain then it's worth. Also, as I said before, Grandma doesn't want to learn Win 8 much less Linux and those reasons are why it will never replace windows.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
I switched to Linux Mint recently because I wanted to get more comfy with it now that Microsoft is rumbling about subscription-based OS access and seems kinda like it wants to force a connection to some kinda online account like outlook.com which all seems silly. I found Mint to be super easy to get working and LibreOffice is now really, really good about keeping formatting consistent between it and MS Office (one of the biggest reasons why I didn't wanna use it before). I don't wanna accuse you of being dumb or anything, but Linux is really, really far from being confusing so I'm not sure why you had a hard time making sense of it.
Click to expand...

Can't edit my old post :-( But I was going to add, you don't HAVE to have an outlook account either, you can use any e-mail you want, including gmail, yahoo, AIM etc.
 
My dad brought over his work laptop with XP with a prompt that Security Essentials is disabled and can no longer be updated. I thought a malware disabled it, so I ran RKill and Malwarebyte and both said the computer was clean. So I uninstalled Security Essentials, went to Microsoft's webpage to get a new copy, but was greeted with a page saying Security Essentials is no longer available for XP. This was last weekend. Oh well.

I put free Avast on his computer instead.
 
Krolik said:
Well, Apple and Android have forced people to have an account with them for the past 5 years but no one complains about that. The only reason they try to get you to have an account is so that things can be synced up properly and so that you can use the App Store. If you don't want those features then create a local account.
Click to expand...

I don't use Apple or Android. Android is way, waaaaay too creepy/stalker-ish and I don't need a tablet or cell phone so that pretty much makes it easy to avoid them completely. Apple's stuff is expensive. In my case, just because those those guys require accounts doesn't mean I wanna have to make one or even think it's okay. The requirement from one company doesn't rationalize another company doing the same stupid thing.

As for Linux, if I wanted to figure out how to use it I could. The thing is, as I said before, 75% of programs are not written for Linux so it would be way more of a pain then it's worth. Also, as I said before, Grandma doesn't want to learn Win 8 much less Linux and those reasons are why it will never replace windows.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the percentage of programs not written for Linux is a lot higher than 75%, but what I was trying to get at is that it really isn't hard to learn. In fact, it was an easier transition to learn Cinnamon UI than it was to learn Windows 8. Cinnamon shares a lot in common with XP/Vista/7 as it has a working Start-button-like thingey. :)

Krolik said:
Can't edit my old post :-( But I was going to add, you don't HAVE to have an outlook account either, you can use any e-mail you want, including gmail, yahoo, AIM etc.
Click to expand...

As for not making an account mandatory, I was talking about the future rather than the present day. I'm using Linux now so I don't have to panic-change later when Microsoft starts treating Windows like Office 365 and gets to the point where home users have to make or link an account to their OS. That doesn't happen now, but it's looming in the next few years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top