News - Microsoft drops support for Windows XP SP2

[HEXUS]

13 July is the last day you?ll get support for XP SP2 and Windows 2000, with Vista RTM support ending sooner.

Read more.

[jim]

In case you're wondering why running an OS that Microsoft no longer offers support for, the announcement offered the following warning

Eh?

Anyway, the only thing that surprises me is that it's been supported as long as it has. I personally think they should've stopped supporting XP SP2 about 1 month after SP3 came out, but I guess some corporate clients fear every kind of update going.

[Singh400]

Cor only seems like yesterday I was on Xp & Vista. Does seem a bit sooner, even though it really isn't.

I shall miss you XP!

[0iD]

I still have an XP lappy & refuse to fork out for Win7 to put on it when XP just works with less memory demands.

Even tho I've had win7 working ok with low mem systems. Time for Linux perhaps...

[AGTDenton]

I want to know when MS will stop activating XP by phone or online. That is the day I will poop my pants.

[cordas]

Eh?

Anyway, the only thing that surprises me is that it's been supported as long as it has. I personally think they should've stopped supporting XP SP2 about 1 month after SP3 came out, but I guess some corporate clients fear every kind of update going.

It has to do with hardware requirements (specifically RAM), I know companies that are still using XP (SP0) because their machines run 'fast' with 128mb of ram, try that with SP3 and most people won't even get logged into their workstations before its home time.

[3dcandy]

I can understand dropping support for a really old OS, but why are people getting upset? Hardware prices are so low how can anyone still expect 128mb to be enough? Corporations have no excuses as productivity will increase if the systems are faster, it's just a cost that they should factor in these days....I mean you can get a system for less than £50 that will be 2ghz, 512 mb ram etc. Factor in another £20 and you could have 1gig ram+

[badass]

It has to do with hardware requirements (specifically RAM), I know companies that are still using XP (SP0) because their machines run 'fast' with 128mb of ram, try that with SP3 and most people won't even get logged into their workstations before its home time.

Any company doing that deserves to go bust. Preferably due to data loss through a malware infection.

[cordas]

No argument from me about that... I have quoted them prices for upgrading most of their machines (some are still Pentium 2s) and I would welcome the work.

However the company has the attitude that as long as they do the job why spend money to replace them, and I must admit that from their point of view I can understand why they ain't splashing the cash, the PCs do the jobs they want them to do increasing the RAM wouldn't do anything to increase productivity as they run the companies software just fine, they are on an internal LAN with no outside access so they don't need to worry about malware, and they have a program in place for replacing machines that break.

[3dcandy]

No argument from me about that... I have quoted them prices for upgrading most of their machines (some are still Pentium 2s) and I would welcome the work.

However the company has the attitude that as long as they do the job why spend money to replace them, and I must admit that from their point of view I can understand why they ain't splashing the cash, the PCs do the jobs they want them to do increasing the RAM wouldn't do anything to increase productivity as they run the companies software just fine, they are on an internal LAN with no outside access so they don't need to worry about malware, and they have a program in place for replacing machines that break.

Just shows how some companies attitudes aren't very forward thinking. I used to work for a large supermarket chain beginning with "M", and there IT setup is a good 10 years out of date. Problem is that it does affect productivity because people know the setup is rubbish and have little faith in the companies ability to move forward, or even with the times. Yes it might run their software fine, but even so, when a five year old laptop that can be picked up for £50 is faster, it is bound to have a detrimental effect on workers moral.

[golwg]

How many people use XP SP2 anyway?

[oolon]

I still have an XP lappy & refuse to fork out for Win7 to put on it when XP just works with less memory demands.

Even tho I've had win7 working ok with low mem systems. Time for Linux perhaps...

XP isn't going away just yet, just SP2 and fixes based on that service pack, install SP3 and you can carry on. Linux however is a good call at anytime!

[golwg]

Linux is not for everyone though. I can't get on with it at all!

[oolon]

Linux is not for everyone though. I can't get on with it at all!

Then you have not be properly introduced to it. I set up 12 (another 8 to got) linux boxes at work, should have heard the complaints that they should be getting windows and microsoft etc.. Blah... but its all Ldaped, kerberos authenicated, all the systems have shared home directories etc, no data stored on client machines, build don't via the network/kickstart, so a machine can just be replace. All of the compaints have just melted away, and now I am asked ... can more we do with the machine..* and they get it! If they were on windows we probably would not be able to afford the additional software.

I am not saying everyone can just jump into administering a linux distro, however for an end user who does not know how to look after a machine is great. 64bit, flash works, iplayer works, java works, firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, audacity... Great.

* and yes they are those low cost acer atom 230 machines someone else mentioned.

[cordas]

Just shows how some companies attitudes aren't very forward thinking. I used to work for a large supermarket chain beginning with "M", and there IT setup is a good 10 years out of date. Problem is that it does affect productivity because people know the setup is rubbish and have little faith in the companies ability to move forward, or even with the times. Yes it might run their software fine, but even so, when a five year old laptop that can be picked up for £50 is faster, it is bound to have a detrimental effect on workers moral.

I don't know, I suspect most of the workers there are just glad to have jobs and that those jobs seem relatively secure at the moment (fingers crossed). All the points you raise are valid as far as they go, but to replace about 30 machines with 5 year old anythings (even if 10x more powerful) would cost far more than £50 per machine, and would still leave them 5 years behind the times in obsolete hell when it came to repairs, leaving them in no better or more productive state than they are now with a big hole in the bottom line. The company has a policy of replacing old with new when things break beyond repair, but they also cannibalise and maintain to cut down on unnecessary spending.

As I said I wish they would replace all their machines with new (and I know they could benefit from doing so) as I know who they would come to and ask for advice, and I could do with the work. However its very easy to get caught up in the 'new is better' mindset that actually has little do with the needs of the company, if what they have does the job well then why spend thousands/10s of thousands to do the same job.

[oolon]

I have been replacing serial terminals (with software flow control) and SGI machines, which the previous IT people had not touched in years.