Slashdot Mirror
Why is Microsoft Patching XP?
akkarin noted a story about a new Service patch for XP. Dubbed SP2c, the new service patch contains no bug fixes or features. Instead, this exciting patch exists only to add new valid active product registration keys. Oops.
Without a service pack it just doesn't feel like windows.
... and they're kinda nervous about their service release record being broken...
The game.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
What happened to A and B?
Did they elope together and disappear into the mountains - and now C is their lovechild?
I wonder how hard it will be to uninstall when it does not work.
If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0.
It's a good thing airplanes aren't designed that way. Solid steel and cement probably doesn't fly so good.
I'm glad I stayed with Windows 98 Second Edition so I don't have to deal with all these endless updates and patches.
a large portion of the world uses XP and it is likely a lot of people on Slashdot have to administrate it.
Why would it not be on the frontpage?
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
The coolest MS activation hack I've seen is for vista. They emulate an OEM bios (usually asus) and install a key that allows the OS not to have to be activated via the internet (lest consumers have to deal with that after buying their new Vista machine). Works flawlessly, well from what I've heard it does. How would I know?
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
It's front page material because it allows us to have fun bashing Microsoft. ;-)
This is Slashdot, after all.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
Why would you need to guess about something which is already publicly known and their obvious policy?
XP will eventually become unsupported, they won't have any new patches for it, and they'll expect everyone to upgrade to Vista. Oddly enough, Windows 3.x, 95, 98, and ME have all gone through this.
Believe it or not, every software company does the exact same thing. Just than when Microsoft does it, it's on a massive scale, and it gets rammed down the throats of everyone no matter what they think.
Longterm this will be seen as a major mistake made by them, in my opinion....
Long term, none of our opinions seem to alter what Microsoft does. It just happens.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Every single f****n programmer knows by now that if you plan for a certain maximum limit, you multiply that number by a factor of 10,000, then raise it to the fourth power and add a few billion just to be sure.
Which explains why a mouse driver needs to be 500MB.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
SP3 is in late alpha, scheduled be released later this year with Vista's SP1.
There are 2 red flags on this that would concern me. One that Microsoft would secretly bundle more rights restrictions into XP (admit it, it's certainly tempting, and it's not like they haven't done it before), and two, that this SP would seemingly make it easier to crack windows keys - I mean, here's all the necessary components, isolated and laid out for you to decipher. Well, that's just my 2 cents.
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Microsoft hasn't done it, but these guys have.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
XP is fine now (when they're not breaking it remotely), Vista was delayed and Vista sucks. If Vista didn't suck then I wouldn't still be reading horror stories about DRM, HD-crippling, driver issues, kernel vulnerabilities etc. etc. etc. long after it has been released. Barely a week goes by without a handful of things like this or this cropping up.
Are all of these kinds of stories just trolls with spin skills worthy of Karl Rove? If the answer is no then Vista sucks. If the answer is yes then there are lot of people angry at MS - probably, at least in part, because Vista sucks so very much: http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=vista
I've been part of several discussions trying to ascertain what advantages Vista actually offers to outweigh the drawbacks and it ain't pretty. The bottom line for us, and I daresay hundreds of thousands of other organisations, is that XP works, is mostly stable and is well supported. Vista can't compete with that - and they're calling it an upgrade?
So if you need Microsoft - and unfortunately we still need to develop with DirectX - then XP will do fine. Vista has to bring something really worthwhile to make us want to go through the hassle of the upgrade and to put up with all the unwanted baggage that Redmond seems to think we all need.
And of course if you don't need Microsoft then you're already laughing. Whatever OS you're using will be just as secure as Vista (if not more so), fully extensible, support all sorts of open formats and not try to wrestle with you for control of your own computer.
I really am glad that Vista's working out for you but unfortunately for most of us the "nifty new features and new look" just aren't enough to justify a broad OS upgrade - certainly for anything other than a home or hobby rig. And my home'n'hobby rigs all run XP or Linux and serve me just fine. =D
Because it's along the lines of "Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead. Doctors report his condition as 'unchanged'."
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
And you dare to imply that Slashdot isn't permanent? Never have I witnessed a more true blasphemy.
We are permanent. We are one. We are +5 Karmawhores and can afford to burn. You promote a false God. There is only one root.
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.