Windows XP SP1 Support Ends Tuesday 372
tophee writes "ZDNet reports that support for Windows XP SP1 and SP1a will be ending this coming Tuesday. From the article: 'Microsoft will end support for Windows XP Service Pack 1 and SP1a on Tuesday, leaving people no option but to upgrade to Service Pack 2 if they wish to continue to receive crucial components, including security software.' Colin Barker of ZDNet notes, 'There's little reason for anyone to still be running SP1; SP2 contained a range of improvements to XP's security.'"
They forgot the scare quotes (Score:5, Funny)
The problem (Score:5, Interesting)
They should be forced to strictly separate the two.
Re: (Score:2)
Jeez, critics these days!
Re:The problem (Score:5, Informative)
With Microsoft it can!
And a "feature" can be a bug. One reason the holdouts have avoided SP2 is that Microsoft intentionally degraded the networking with SP2 [microsoft.com]. Yes it's fixable, but not perfectly, and I'm not sure I care to bother with it.
This is one of the long-planned milestones on my migration to another OS (references to which have become a cliché in this connection).
Many of the fixes aren't even needed for a lean-and-mean XP configuration, so the time to an "upgrade or exposure" choice may be longer than this month.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Name a feature addition in SP2 that's a showstopper for you. For all time I used SP2, I never found a problem with it, and I use and test a lot of software almost every day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
* The limit of 30 half-open TCP connections means that using it for some networking applications is infeasible.
* The fact that it needs 1590MB of disk space on top of your XP SP1 installation in order to install means that it actually can't be installed on a machine with the original recommended minimum hard disk size for XP (1.5Gb = 1536MB total).
But carry on living in your fantasy world where everyone else has the exact same requirements and usag
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
KB837783: Hard disk space requirements for Windows XP SP2 [microsoft.com]:
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's funny. Over here I had the opposite experience: external USB hard drive was dead slow (USB 1.0 backcompact mode) in XP without service packs. I'm talking like, 1.5 MB average bandwidth per second. Then I just install SP2 and BAM: 20MB/sec.
So what was screwed up in USB support, specifically?
Re:The problem (Score:4, Insightful)
And what exactly did you need to do with raw sockets that you couldn't do with AF_INET? Is there something so special about your application's packets that you have to hand-craft the TCP/IP headers? Do you intentionally write DDoS attackers?
At least you can port your application to a real OS if you feel the need to byte-edit your network packets. Oh, excuse me. I must have forgotten that even Linux doesn't support AF_RAW, because there's still no legitimate use for an end user to have access to raw sockets. Even so, you still have an option: you can write your own protocol (which is exactly what raw sockets was letting you informally do in the first place.)
Sorry, but with the number of Windows zombies out there that are screwing up the net, I'd rather have to make one person like you work to regain these "features" than to have them exist for millions of idiots who won't ever need them.
Or could it be that you just saw in a KB article that Microsoft "took something away", never mind that it actually helps improve network security, and you never did anything with raw sockets anyway?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The problem (Score:5, Informative)
I didn't want to move to Firefox 1.5. It worked slower and ate far mre RAM on my machines.
But alas, few exploits later, I updated.
Because Firefox 1.0 support ended the moment 1.5 was out. Let's see for how long Firefox 1.5 will be supported when the official 2.0 release is out.
Let me guess: 0 days.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
WGA (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That wouldn't have made any sense anyway since SP2 came out months before WGA, how else would have everyone else have gotten SP2 first?
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Windows98 (Score:5, Funny)
Was it a better
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Was it a better
In fact yes, for the time it was a very good OS. It still working great on a number of second hand machines I've equipped for children learning centers.
You'll be surprised how fine it works on a 24MB system where modern versions of KDE or Gnome would choke and die an ugly death.
Of course, Internet shortened the relevenacy and life of products very fast (at the speed of a zero day exploit, one might say), so don't expect Mic
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why would you compare a (almost) decade-old version of Windows with a recent release of GNOME/KDE?
On older hardware just try, Openbox/Fluxbox, XFce (3.x), Afterstep, etc. It'll run faster than Windows 98 could hope to, all while being far more stable, responsive, and actually getting security updates and supporting most modern hardware, not just old hardware.
gotta add something before it gets out of control (Score:4, Insightful)
Makes sense (Score:5, Interesting)
I think things like WGA are being forced on people whatever version they're running so that's no reason not to upgrade.
When the upgrade is included in the initial purchase cost then this is fine. If they dropped support for XP altogether then that would have been bad but just think of SP2 as an update.
Anyway I hate MS versioning schemes, why service pack why not call it a point release? They also love weird names for their beta software I remember the IE7 beta 2 preview refresh (which was the second pre-release before beta 2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the average user won't know what you mean by "point release", but (presumably) has an idea of what "service pack" means - they're used to having their car serviced, for a start, making sure that it keeps running properly and doesn't break down.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because point releases is what Microsoft makes their OS money from, charging hundreds of dollars to upgrade Windows 4.0 to Windows 4.1 (95 to 98) or NT 5.0 to NT 5.1 (2000 to XP). One could make the case that Microsoft uses their odd naming scheme (such as "Vista" for "NT 5.3") mostly to disguise the fact that they're charging more and more money for less and less meaningful version updates.
Oh get off it (Score:3, Informative)
I know that many MS haters would like to bel
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Like most people I don't give a crap about the new directx version. Directx hasn't mattered since DX6 u
Re: (Score:2)
One could make the case that Microsoft uses their odd naming scheme (such as "Vista" for "NT 5.3") mostly to disguise the fact that they're charging more and more money for less and less meaningful version updates.
Vista is most certainly NT 6.0. The changes *easily* justify a major version bump.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And don't forget they charged again for 98SE. But consider how 3 years worth of bug fixes, enhancements and addons nowadays only rates a "Service Pack 2" for XP rather than a new point version. Granted, "5.2" was already taken by then, but why not 5.11?
"5 years in the case of nt 5.0 to 5.1?"
No, it was only twenty months between Windows 2000 and Windows XP, less th
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Insightful)
OS X 10.3, aka Panther, shipped in October 2003. 10.4, aka Tiger, shipped in April 2005. 10.5, aka Leopard, is due in spring of 2007.
they name each one after a wild feline of some sort, "to disguise the fact that they're charging every year for minor updates".
Leaving aside the question of whether the point releases (of Windows or OS X) have been minor, let's see... apple menu, About This Mac... "Mac OS X Version 10.4.8." That sure is one crafty disguise!
Even if you had a point, "but those guys do it too!" is not a valid response. [cuyamaca.edu]
Dialup (Score:4, Insightful)
They forget of course that not everyone in the world has broadband access. Those on dial-up cannot update to SP2 easily. Here, regional WA, has patchy broadband at the best of times, let alone those who use the internet "just for emails" and don't want to spend a lot to do it.
Re:Dialup (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dialup (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?F
Actually, if your friends are running Windows, they _are_ suffering.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
It's about time Microsoft released a fresh update package i.e. Windows XP SP3 (or is that Vista?)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Dialup (Score:5, Insightful)
Broadband in Holland (Score:2)
I live in Holland and have a pretty large choice of ADSL providers, or I can get broadband from the cable company. In a pinch, use one of the 3 or 4 open wireless in the neighborhood.
If by "Holland" you actually mean "the Netherlands" then perhaps you are right and he only has one option, if he's in Gelderland or Friesland or some other barely civilized area.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That impression that hovers over you is correct: Order Windows XP Service Pack 2 on CD [microsoft.com]
That order page was very easy to find from the MS's Windows XP page. Yes, a shipping and handling charge is added. They also encourage users to share the SP2 CD with friends and family.
Little Reason? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Little Reason? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Little Reason? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Little Reason? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is like complaining when you bought a car with free oil changes for 10 years, that you need to get the oil changed, then NOT taking it in to get changed, then complaining because it broke down!
In summary, if you're using Windows XP, and not running SP2 by now, AND you are complaining about Windows problems, you are an idiot.
SP2 broke my XP box (Score:2, Interesting)
That computer now has Vista on it, so I guess Microsoft won after all.
Raw sockets (Score:2, Informative)
Corporate environment (Score:2)
Anyone have an idea why this might be the case, or is our IT dept doing more arse-talking than usual?
Anyway, I just can't wait to find out how badly this is going to fuck our network. Everything else does...
Just ONE supported version (Score:2)
Have the latest - or have no support...
They are really desperate to make people stop using their old products.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you call MS with a problem with Windows 2000 you're out of luck, unless you have a good credit card.
Ending support? (Score:2, Funny)
They'll prise Win2K from my cold dead hands. (Score:5, Informative)
I shove a decent firewall on the thing, ditch IE and install my apps of choice and I'm away.
The only thing missing is Cleartype fonts.
Best version of Windows ever.
Re:And once again... (Score:5, Funny)
Lots of people still use W98... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, lots of people are still using W98, so their obsolecence program is not necessarily working all that well in personal user space. I'm sure that in corporate space (where they make their money) it works a treat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lots of people still use W98... (Score:5, Interesting)
4 years for some companies is about the time they start the *rollout*.
If take a sample of random customers the majority of Windows users are on Windows 2000 (6 years old!).. a sizable chunk of 2003 now as people begin to roll it out, very little XP (that was skipped for the most part).
We still have NT4 customers.
4 years is nothing.
(You get the same with other OSs - nobody is running Solaris 10 yet (only 1 query about it in the last year), lots of Solaris 8 and Solaris 9.. Even other stuff.. Oracle 8 is predominant even though Oracle themselves don't support it any more).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course...gov't agencies and other large entities will get whatever support they pay for...which means they can get SP1 support if SP2 screws up their software.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Except for those people who bought and paid for SP1 and do not have a good fast internet connection to download the hundgreds of MBs of patches released to bring SP1 up to the current 'standard'.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that many/most home users will never have downloaded a service pack and won't even know what one is. eg. my mother is on XP. She has dialup, and logs for an hour in maybe once a month if then... her XP has never even been patched let alone been on long enough for a service pack.
OTOH for her the lack of support isn't something she'd know or care about. If XP break
Re: (Score:2)
Yeesh, just upgrade already, and quit your bitching!
How Debian (and derivatives) do it right (Score:2, Insightful)
A lot. Twice. MS makes a profit on Windows, somewhere about 70%-80% profit in fact. Then you pay again when you have to re-tool your whole shop for the differences found in XP SP2. That is, if you are still running out-dated architectures like MS Windows. Many of us don't pay a thing.
So, dude, just lay off with the faboi stuff and get over it: XP SP2 breaks a lot of software that worked under XP SP1 -- even today, in October of 2006.
I realize some of the MS fabois ju
If it ain't broke, don't fix it (Score:3, Interesting)
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Sure those articles are from two years ago. So, what? The apps are already bought and paid for. They're older than two years. They didn't change. They don't need to change. Why should businesses and everyone else keep chasing MS' moving goals posts?
I'm glad you pointed out that Linux distros are a secure option and now easy to use. However, you miss the point that these organiszations and businesses are locked into NT 5 and 5.1 (pre SP2). If they can't make the trans
Re:And once again... (you can say that again!) (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Heh (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I choose linux.
Re: (Score:2)
I choose Windows.
(Also, seriously, a printer? How can 2000/XP possibly not have a compatible driver for a printer?)
Re: (Score:2)
(note: I know why things are the way they are but it's probably best you find out for yourself)
There's a good reason your hardware didn't work together under Linux and it will have more to do with the above case than is immediately obvious.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The joy of Linux is that two hardware pieces, both from 2005, can have mutually exclusive kernel requirements. And God help you if you want to change your video/network card after initial configuration...drivers for one might require you to upgrade and the other may well fa
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Heh (Score:5, Informative)
The latest 2.4 version of the Linux kernel is: 2.4.33.3 2006-08-31 20:20 UTC
The latest prepatch for the 2.4 Linux kernel tree is: 2.4.34-pre4 2006-10-02 20:45 UTC
Seems pretty recent to me.
http://www.kernel.org/ [kernel.org]
--
BMO
Re:Heh (Score:4, Interesting)
That depends on what the original poster means by Linux. Linux is, and has always been a kernel. If the OP meant distribution and support from a retail vendor, I know Novell still supports SLES 8 and SuSE 8 which were 2.4 based. Redhat still supports their enterprise 2.4 based releases. So, in other words, if you're still on 2.4, you can _still get support_. If you're on a free distribution, you support yourself anyway, which is no big deal.
2.4 is just a kernel. All the rest are applications and they can be mixed and matched at will. Windows people simply can't wrap their brains around that concept, but that doesn't surprise me in the least, because of the way Microsoft ties what should be userland to kernel space.
So I don't know what the big deal is. You windows fanboys amaze me, spouting the FUD "hey, maybe 2.4 isn't as supported as Windows is supported." Bullshit. If I wanted to, I could go grab one of the 1.1 kernels and build something around it. You can't even _buy_ Windows 95, but if I have an application that requires a kernel as small as 1.1.13 was, I can _still use it_.
Doing that is almost the equivalent of going back to DOS (but without the bogosity), but hey, you can't even _buy_ a retail box of MS-DOS these days, can you?
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with MS Service Packs releases is the fact that sometimes the SP causes more issues so care and testing needs to be carried out. Don't think this does not appl
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/windowsxp_sp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you want an ISO, they provide these too but unfortunately not for everyone, but to members of some of their partner programs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
More like an ivory tower...
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Thanks for the notice guys (Score:4, Insightful)
You're right, one week is totally ridiculous and unnacceptable.
Of course, ehm... they announced this a long time ago -- January, to be precise.
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean19 [microsoft.com]
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/support/endofsup