Good News for XP Users...

[patio]

MS extends Malware updates for XP...

[Geek-9pm]

The move, Microsoft said, is designed
to help businesses complete XP migrations

Wunderbar! 

[camerongray]

Dah!  They really just need to let XP die! 

[patio]

I doubt that would be your thought's if you had 15,000 workstations in your Co. to maintain...

[BC_Programmer]

I doubt that would be your thought's if you had 15,000 workstations in your Co. to maintain...

Any intelligent IT staff would have at least started the move years ago, especially since the lifecycle has been well known for years.

~2006 (when Vista released): We'll keep supporting XP as a primary product until 2009.

~2009: We'll keep supporting XP until 2014, with our extended support lifecycle.

~2013: We'll keep supporting XP until 2014.

XP support is still gone on April 8th, and this changes nothing- XP support is STILL gone in April. They've changed nothing, and only clarified to the ignorant that their AV programs that run on that system will still receive updates.

For enterprise customers, this applies to System Center Endpoint Protection, Forefront Client Security, Forefront Endpoint Protection and Windows Intune running on Windows XP. For consumers, this applies to Microsoft Security Essentials.

Eg: if a company isn't using their AV solutions, this changes nothing. Because:

after April 8, 2014, Windows XP users will no longer receive new security updates, non-security hotfixes, free or paid assisted support options, or online technical content updates from Microsoft.

This changes none of that- that will still occur. The confusion now is because reporters have no journalistic integrity and are reporting that Microsoft has extended XP support, which has not occurred.

I like the comments though, They go on as if XP's support being dropped came out of nowhere and didn't follow a plan set out in stone to begin with:

It is truly appreciated to see Microsoft willing to suffer opportunity cost in order to stand by a product many devoted customers have dedicated their IT infrastructures around.

devoted customers are not smart customers, because a smart customer would actually research the products they were using, and they would be aware of their support cutoffs, rather than running around with their heads up their asses like the incompetent twits that they are trying to blame their inability to heed the warnings that have been entirely evident for at least 8 years on Microsoft.

Really their only "beef" is now they actually have to perform the actions in their Job description rather than sit on their *censored* playing FreeCell all day- the fact that some of them even say Microsoft is "rushing them" is downright hilarious. It's been encouraged that people move from XP since Vista's release, the fact that people can't see XP for the dilapitated and dated piece of garbage that it is for modern computing purposes is their problem.

Windows XP is now older than high-schoolers.

Using XP today is exactly the same as using Windows 2.1x in 2001.

And Solid? Reliable? Are these people talking about the same Windows XP? Because the only words I can think of when thinking of XP in the context of a modern computing environment are "swiss" and "cheese".

[Calum]

Using XP today is exactly the same as using Windows 2.1x in 2001.

I've used similar analogies over the last 4 years, to no avail.
I agree with you and cameron, XP needs to die, businesses citing "application compatibility issues" and "bespoke in house software" should've been looking at that years ago, not bleating about them now when it's very nearly too late.

[BC_Programmer]

businesses citing "application compatibility issues" and "bespoke in house software" should've been looking at that years ago, not bleating about them now when it's very nearly too late.

Exactly, they are basically saying, "but they only gave us 6+ years of warning!"

The in-house software thing always gets me, too. Because the only reason for a piece of software to run on XP but not later versions is if it was badly programmed or written with too many assumptions. This is common because the companies using inhouse software are really not always aware how critical their inhouse software they use for their business truly is, they'll go for the cheapest, lowest cost alternative.

A competent and responsible IT department should have been testing their existing software framework with the newer Operating Systems as they were released, even if there were no plans to migrate because a competent and responsible IT department is aware of the fact that the only constant in this universe is change. Then they would be equipped to know exactly what needs to be fixed or changed for them to move to a new platform.

But what we get instead are alleged IT professionals who have ignored every single warning and procrastinated what should be their job until the last minute qq-ing about how they are 'forced' to do these things that are supposed to be part of their job upkeep.

The "best" analogy I've heard is people comparing XP to a "classic car". Which I Don't think works. If you drive a classic car you are a steel behemoth among plastic and fibreglass boxes. If you use XP you are a dented tin can putting along a highway trying to avoid the massive treads and shells of the malware author tanks.

Another one (actually googling this and reading comments is hilarious) reads "Security? Just don't get infected"

haha.. Because security doesn't help you not get infected or anything. "Don't worry about catching the flu, just don't get infected!".

I also cannot help but notice the ignorance that some people seem to have, from the "Pro XP" side. First there are people professing how great XP is and suggesting people use a known infected pirated copy... I also like the ones who have been living in a cave for something like 10 years who still think Bill Gates is connected in any major way to Microsoft's inner workings. Though, given they are using XP, they have certainly excluded themselves from 10 years of software reality.

[soybean]

I'm inclined to think Microsoft's extension of malware protection updates is simply unnecessary even to users still clinging to Windows XP because many of the anti-virus and anti-malware software makers will probably continue to support Win XP for awhile after April 2014.  I just took a look at avast Endpoint Protection for small business and at Malwarebytes Small Business Edition and they both are still supporting Windows back to XP Service Pack 2.  Of course, these versions of their software are paid versions.