Slashdot Mirror
Windows XP Service Pack 3 Not Due Until 2007
vitaly.friedman writes "Microsoft has published the due date for Windows XP SP3 (Service Pack 3) on its Windows Lifecycle Web site. The preliminary due date (the latter half of 2007) for the next collection of fixes and patches for Microsoft's desktop operating system is as more than a year later than many company watchers were expecting."
Whitedust posted an interesting commentary on this this other day. I agree with them.
I thought Windows Vista was due this year?
-- Linux user #369862
"2007" is a funny term for "whenever we get around to it"....
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
I read that and I wasnt one bit suprised in the least.
Somethings wrong...
- Sig
I think by then half of their team will be working at google!
FREE - Java, J2EE and Ajax Audiobooks for Software Developers - www.DeveloperAdvantage.com
Microsoft doesn't love releasing service packs for any OS that isn't the latest one.
NT4 service packs ended about the time Win2K came out.
I'm guessing this means Vista will be pushed even further back then Microsoft have been letting on.
I don't get it.
This story reminds me of a co-worker I used to have, who used to spout off completely worthless information. One day he decided to inform everyone that the history of the letter W was not in the dictionary, much to his dismay. Nobody was ever quite sure why he cared, let alone why he felt it necessary to verbalize his observations. I suspect he submitted this story as well.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
This shouldn't surprise anyone. MS wants Vista to be out before any major patch to XP. Its in their best interest as it compels more people to upgrade to Vista. XP will be treated like a red-headed step child so Vista will look more appealing. So long as they issue security patches I'll be happy. It's what I've come to expect.
http://religiousfreaks.com/So their release "date" is 2H 2007? Since when is a 6-month window considered a "date"?
A precedent like that really makes you wonder about the release "dates" they still can't commit to.
no no -- they used a mat. with conclusions printed on it. and then they jumped onto the mat...
Given the number of fixes released annually I assume MS have to wait till 2007 for gigabit boradband speeds to make it a viable download.... or send a SAE for the 7 DVD SP3 set.
...after the press release from the Duke Nukem: Forever team, where they announced they would be going gold when XP SP3 was released.
This just in: Microsoft Windows XP SP3 is now renamed Microsoft Windows Vista, and will ship sometime in early 2009. Possible new features include an updated icon, a completely new marketing campaign, one driver for an HP scanner written in a drunken coding blitz at 3am, and a new desktop wallpaper prominently featuring the Microsoft Logo.
For security, the MD5 hash of this message and sig is 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
Service Pack to fix windows is already out. It's actually up to version 4. It's called OS X 10.4.4
Has anyone else noticed Microsofts gradual decrease in providing updates?
For example, NT 4 had 6 service packs and number 7 was not released. But supposedly was pretty much complete, number 7 added a bunch of features that were supposedly in Windows 2000.. and with the release of Windows 2000 just around the corner.. why would they want to make 2000 less appealing?
Also, notice that 2000 has just 4 service packs..
And it's looking more like XP will be getting just 3 by the end of life period, now... either Microsoft have absolutely amazing QA which means they're fixing all the bugs in their OS's by the last service pack or they want to force people onto their newest OS with the promises of bug fixes etc.
This is disheartening, they're trying to force people into a perpetual upgrade cycle and are being very successful at it too. I guess we can only hope that stuff like Linux and OpenOffice start making some inroads to at least reduce the price of Windows to help reduce the pressure on people who are locked into MS solutions.
It will take 18 months to download...
They put out service packs for 2000 after XP came out..
Or NT after 2000 came out.
While the product is still under 'support', you can expect fixes to come out. Support doesnt end on day 1 of the release of a new version, in the real world.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
How often do you get security patches and bug fixes for OS/2?
Oh how badly we need a Linux port of WoW. I honestly don't have Windows for any other reason anymore.
"We invented personal computing." - Bill Gates
Do you notice that Microsoft gives its old OS a new name, and people say, "Maybe this time Microsoft will treat me right and release a good product." Microsoft has found a weakness in the average person, the way virus writers find weaknesses in Microsoft software, in my opinion.
Software companies with virtual monopolies don't want to release a good product because then no one will upgrade to a new version, even if it has a new name.
"We find we need to re-load Windows XP often because of its vulnerabilities and instability."
I am not sure to whom your "we" refers. I know I am not in that set as the last time I had to reinstall Windows XP because of its vulnerabilities and instability was...well, never. Reboot, why yes I have had to do that countless times when a patch was pushed out. Hopefully that kind of architecture will be out the door with Vista. Until then I can live with reboots due to certain patches. This box has been running the XP SP2 install since, well, I installed SP2. I use it heavily every day to develop code, test, install and reinstall applications, and do my daily software development work. It could be that my company has a competent IT department, but I am sure a lot of it has to do with me not running as Administrator and not installing suspicious software or browsing suspicious websites when I am. My point being that with proper care and feeding an XP system does not need to be reinstalled often.