Windows XP SP2 Support Ends Tomorrow

Vectormatic writes "As can be seen on the product page for Windows XP, support for SP2 ends tomorrow, while the majority of Windows XP users still haven't upgraded to SP3. This could open up millions of users/businesses to exploitation, since security updates for SP2 will stop coming in while security fixes to SP3 may clue hackers in to vulnerabilities."

Comments

Oh Noes!!!

[B5_geek]

The sky is falling!!!

If these people/companies don't care enough to have upgraded to SP3, they won't care that support for the OS has ended either.

Re:Oh Noes!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a window for games:

1. Release: It works on high-end machines, maybe with a few glitches that are soon patched
2. A few years later: It works quite well on mid-end machines
3. A few years after that: It works extremely well on low-end machines, right up until...
4. One day: It spontaneously breaks in an update of the OS it was designed for.
5. Many years pass: People lament it's loss (if it was good) and maybe even keep old outdated machines around to play it
6. Many more years: It is largely forgotten
7. Until finally: Someone writes an emulator for old hardware. Goto 3 and stay there.

Re:Oh Noes!!!

[drsmithy]

Odd that I can get support for my 2002 automobile, and if there's a flaw found they'll issue a recall, but an OS from the same year gets no support.

Yes it does. The support is called SP3.

I could get parts for a classic car easily, but try getting a PC game from 1995 to run well.

It's trivial - all you need to do is get an OS and hardware from that period, or replicas thereof - just like classic car parts.

This is especially stupid since software has no moving parts to wear out, and is one reason I hate Windows and love Linux. When support stops for a Windows distro you're out of luck, but Linux support is always there.

"Linux support" for a ca. 2002 - or 1995, for that matter - distro is no better than Windows, and in most cases significantly worse.

Astonishing

[jsnipy]

It is amazing that an service pack would even be supported up to 2 years after the next service pack.

Re:Astonishing

[Anonymous Coward]

I got the problem (SP installation trashed the OS) on Vista rather than on XP, but the same principles apply: Windows installation is not dual-boot friendly. You have to install Windows first, or else. If I had simply reinstalled Vista (a pain by itself), that would have wrecked havoc with my other 10 operating systems installed across altogether three disks.

Instead, I restored an older backup of the Vista partition. SP 1 still trashed the OS. Finally, after I restored an ancient backup from directly after original Vista activation, SP 1 installed.

Of course both that procedure and Windows reinstallation share another problem: before the security patches has been reapplied, the system is in a very insecure state.

Overall, I wish to thank Microsoft for thoroughly wasting my time. I had absolutely no other important work to do, and I really appreciate the experience.

Re:Astonishing

[Mad Merlin]

Decently designed XP applications store data in user's profile.

So... none of them?

Huh?

[The MAZZTer]

"while the majority of windows XP users still haven't upgraded to SP3"? Citation needed. SP3 is delivered via Windows Update. I had it before I switched to 7, my company it using it. It's been out for quite a while. I don't see why the majority of XP users would not be using it...

Re:Huh?

[malignant_minded]

While I can't vouch for the majority of windows xp users I know a bunch of companies that are still at SP2. Also I would guess that many home XP users have found their computer infected enough times to find that it was cheaper to buy a new one than it was to pay a shop three hours to clean it up, thus they ended up with Vista or 7 eliminating them from the statistic. This leaves companies that are making a decision to stay at XP and IE6 since it breaks their hack code Intranet, many of those may be for similar reasons at SP2.

ten years

[FuckingNickName]

I wish Apple or Linux supported a base system for ten years.

$1.20 says they'll continue releasing critical updates as they've done for a while for "retired" service packs in the past.

while the majority of windows XP users still haven't upgraded to SP3

Evidence?

Re:ten years

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux offers support all the time, and the old kernel series are usually maintained for a long time (I think 2.4 is still maintained). The difference is that the only obstacle to upgrading is yourself when it comes to Linux, not money or licensing.

Now, for Apple, that's a different story with which I'm not familiar.

Re:ten years

[Anonymous Coward]

I wish Apple or Linux supported a base system for ten years.

AFAIK, you can still patch your own damn linux system from ten years ago, or pay someone else to do so. That's the definition of _Freedom_. Also, Linux is not a company like Apple or Microsoft. What a ridiculous thing to say.

Re:Note

[Anonymous Coward]

Any piece of hardware from a company worthy of your business will surely have drivers for XP x64. Or, you're using an old device. If you're using an old device, why the hell are you running an x64 OS?

Re:Is SP3 the one with the bigger GBs?

[phoenixwade]

Is it 3G and does it have the wifis?

yes, yes, you can still get your inter-webs. on a more serious note: SP2 can still be exploited? after 6 whole years in the wild? Who would have ever thought that could have happened?

Re:Heh...

[Anonymous Coward]

See, the difference is, with Windows, you're the one getting his ass raped, with Ubuntu, you're the one getting the blowjob.

Re:Citation on the 50% number

[Anonymous Coward]

be nice if we could get a citation on the citation, since they just show a graph with no explanation of where they got the numbers they used for it.

Re:Majority of users wont do it.

[Mongoose Disciple]

with the enormous hidden 'call back home' shit sp3 and on brings, majority of users and sysadmins will not upgrade to it. they are not stupid.

Because the majority of users and sysadmins are aware of any of that? Get real.

I'm sure a lot of people won't upgrade, but seriously, a majority of users probably can't even change their screen resolution without help.

Re:xp and _win2k_!

[PPalmgren]

Liability. Its kind of hard to say "we tried to be as secure as possible but got owned anyway" when you're using an outdated OS out of its support cycle. Now they can shift the blame back on Microsoft's swiss-cheese.

Could you imagine the damage done if said company makes headlines for losing tons of sensitive customer data, and then has a follow-up headline showing their security practices?

Re:the 5billion inthe bank is not enough

[Joe U]

I have to say, M$ decides to not support and leave all the sp2 users open to vulnerability because they choose to, not because they have to

I can see why a company would not want to do regression testing on multiple service packs when the fix is to update to SP3 and it's been out since April 2008. There comes a time when you have to stop support, testing is expensive and there's still support for SP3 until 2014.

You can buy a support contract if you want SP2 support.

Re:xp and _win2k_!

[compro01]

Financial responsibility, yes, but not PR responsibility. You can blame them even if you can't sue them over it.

Re:Heh...

[sexconker]

See, the difference is, with Windows, you're the one getting his ass raped, with Ubuntu, you're the one getting the blowjob.

With Windows, you at least get the reach around, and they do use lube.
In the end, the job gets done and your ass is sore.

With Ubuntu, you're bracing yourself between the toilet and the wall with your ass in the air and your spine irreparably bent, in an effort to barely reach the tip of your cock with your tongue.
If the job got done your back is sore and you've got a mouth full of your own splooge.
If the job didn't get done, your back is sore and you've got blue balls until you shamefully boot into your pirated (no lube) install of Windows to finish what you started.