End of Windows XP Support Era Signals Beginning of Security Nightmare

colinneagle writes "Microsoft's recent announcement that it will end support for the Windows XP operating system in two years signals the end of an era for the company, and potentially the beginning of a nightmare for everyone else. When Microsoft cuts the cord on XP in two years it will effectively leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks, many of which hold the potential to find their way into consumer, enterprise and even industrial systems running the latest software. Although most of the subsequent security issues appear to be at the consumer level, it may not be long until they find a way into corporate networks or industrial systems, says VMWare's Jason Miller. Even scarier, Qualsys's Amol Sarwate says many SCADA systems for industrial networks still run a modified version of XP, and are not in a position to upgrade. Because much of the software running on SCADA systems is not compatible with traditional Microsoft OS capabilities, an OS upgrade would entail much more work than it would for a home or corporate system."

Comments

what's the difference

[ahotiK]

"When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP in two years it will effectively leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks" So what's the difference between now and when this will happen?

Re:what's the difference

[ThePromenader]

Microsoft already cut the chord a decade ago - with their sh*tty Windows XP boot chime.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

Cutting the chord... what does this mean for C#?

Re:what's the difference

[synapse7]

Two years out an this is news? Come back to me when this is a catastrophe.

Re:what's the difference

[djfreestyler]

Obviously that it will now become Cb (C-flat)...

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

What a shame. My car's only 4 years newer than XP and it still runs fine. So does my TV, even though I had to get a digital tuner for it.

So you have millions of computers that will be unuseable because the OS manufacturer refuses to suport it. Meanwhile, my car needs new struts -- still available and will be for decades. Hell, if it were a '64 Ford I could still get parts and have it serviced.

Good thing we have Linux so those old boxes don't wind up in landfills prematurely.

Re:what's the difference

[Targon]

The PC(by whatever name you prefer), really only became available to consumers in the form of the old Apple 1 back in 1976, and a bit later, the TRS-80 model 1. Yes, there were other machines around, but for the general consumer, these were some of the first machines that were even available to them. The invention of the TV is quite a bit older, and as a static device that does only ONE thing, it makes sense that SOFTWARE is the key thing that differentiates between problems in the computer realm and that of other types of products.

Except for the latest cars, you don't see software updates available as well, so, static devices in terms of functionality/performance vs products where the abilities of the product can actually be updated without a major effort. The fact that we now live in a world where new products can see a MAJOR update every few years is a major change from the days where the same product will be sold over and over for years, with only minor updates. This is the key, how fast do products evolve, and is something you clearly have missed. When you see cars and TVs get major changes to functionality every three years, then you might have a valid point.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

So you have millions of computers that will be unuseable because the OS manufacturer refuses to suport it.

Good thing we have Linux so those old boxes don't wind up in landfills prematurely.

Those two quotes contradict one another. Further, XP machines will continue to crank along doing what they do, apart from maybe you won't want them networked in applications where they would be vulnerable.

Re:what's the difference

[Americano]

So what you're saying is that old vehicles require a substantial amount of repair, upgrades, and maintenance work to keep them running for a long time? Wow, just like computers - you have to upgrade your operating system and do some repair and maintenance work to the computer over its lifetime.

XP is an 11 year old operating system, and will be end-of-support at the age of 13. Windows 7 has been out for about 2.5 years at this point, and Vista for about 5.5 years. Most systems sold in the last 5 years probably are running Vista or Win7, and by the time XP is EoS, those systems sold since XP was sold as a pre-bundled option will be at least 7 years old.

It's likely that the vast majority of people still running XP are corporate customers, and if they can't manage an upgrade to Win7 over the next 2 years, they should probably hire some better IT staff.

Re:what's the difference

[jythie]

There is a big difference, in cars, between 'maintain' and 'upgrade'. With cars you do not need to swap out major systems with new versions, generally you can get original parts or parts that work the same as originals at least. If your carburetor has a defect you do not need to get more tires because the replacement unit requires a new type of engine.

Also, I suspect that many of the existing XP installs that will be an issue are embedded systems rather then corporate customers. People tend to forget about those but they make up a huge piece of the install base, and you typically can not just throw a new motherboard in there to bring it up to 'Win7 compatible'. Often you have to replace the whole unit and the mess that brings about.

Re:what's the difference

[jedidiah]

An XP box that can't be connected to a network is pretty useless for most people. This isn't the 80s.

Re:what's the difference

[cpu6502]

>>>So you have millions of computers that will be unuseable because the OS manufacturer refuses to suport it

I doubt many XP machines will still be working two years from now. I know mine certainly won't (the hard drives are already generating errors). My laptop might still be operational but with only a Pentium 3 I doubt I'll want to continue using it.

Time to jump from XP to 7 which, now that they removed the bugs, is a decent OS. BTW: I doubt your Linux would fit inside my desktop or laptop: They're only 1/2 and 1/3rd gig respectively. Linux is almost as bad when it comes to memory bloat.

Re:what's the difference

[Politburo]

Car analogies are dumb, you know better.

Re:what's the difference

[hlavac]

Haha I always advocated C# should be pronouned cis (as a musical note) not the MS matketing's 'See Sharp'.

Re:what's the difference

[Americano]

With cars you do not need to swap out major systems with new versions, generally you can get original parts or parts that work the same as originals at least. If your carburetor has a defect you do not need to get more tires because the replacement unit requires a new type of engine.

I'm not sure I see the relevance. Nobody's forcing you to upgrade your computer, nobody's forcing you to buy new hard drives and video cards because you decided to upgrade your OS.

A 6 year old computer is going to require maintenance and upgrade work, it's really that simple. Components will burn out; software will need to be upgraded; And yes, that means you may have to spend some money on upgrading your operating system from XP to Win7 in order to continue operating your computer with all the "latest and greatest" security updates.

Nobody's forcing you to replace your computer, and if you're okay with no security upgrade support, you can continue using XP for as long as your existing hardware will keep running.

Re:what's the difference

[cpu6502]

P.S.

Is Apple any better? WinXP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world. Do they still support it?

Ha! A big fat no. They don't even support my OS, which is as recent as 10.5 (last powerpc variant). If anything Microsoft is acting better than Apple does and should receive some praise for supporting XP as long as they have. I've been using the same computer for 10+ years (and thus saving a lot of cash).

Re:what's the difference

[hierophanta]

well played sir!

Re:what's the difference

[ColdWetDog]

Man, our CIO posts on Slashdot. Who knew?

Hi there! Meeting at 9:00, right?

Re:what's the difference

[bobcat7677]

OS != computer. The vast majority of those boxen made for XP can in fact run Win 7 or 8. Or linux as you say. And having to pay for the upgrade is not a valid argument against since I know much much the digital tuner upgrade cost for your old tv :)

Re:what's the difference

[cpu6502]

It's certainly better support than Apple. XP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world. Do they still support it?

Ha! A big fat no. They don't even support my OS, which is as recent as 10.5 (last powerpc variant). If anything Microsoft is acting better than Apple does and should receive some praise for supporting XP as long as they have. I've been using the same computer for 10+ years (and thus saving a lot of cash).

Re:what's the difference

[morari]

Wait until all of the new cars have onboard navigation, app support, turning/braking/steering assist, remote unlocks and ignitions, etc. Then you may just find yourself with a vaguely unusable car due to a lack of software and/or firmware support. Me? I'll stick to my old VW Bug. ;)

Re:what's the difference

[mcvos]

How many major releases have there been since OS 9.2? How many have there been since XP? Especially considering Vista was a big failure.

Apple and MS have very different release cycles. Comparing them is comparing apples and oranges. That said, I was under the impression MS had already abandoned XP quite some time ago.

Re:what's the difference

[mcvos]

With 1/2 GB you've got a better chance of running Linux than Win 7.

Re:what's the difference

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Yes, but Apple has continued to provide significant value in its upgrade path.

This can be demonstrated - not argued - by the fact that you cannot find an instance of 7/8/9 era macos running anywhere. Else the exception of some geek's curiosity collection.

10.5.8 has issues that won't be patched. But really. I had the 17" PowerBook until 6 months ago. Do you really pretend that the machine is still usable? :-)

(I also have a Blue & White G3. It's pretty, at least!)

Re:what's the difference

[petermgreen]

Is Apple any better?

No and no linux distro i'm aware of is either. I think some of the big unix vendors may be comparable or better though.

WinXP was released in 2001 so that would be equivalent to OS 9.2 in the Apple world.

IMO support lifecycles should be measured not from when the OS came out but from when it's successor came out. Still MS is better than pretty much everyone else by that measure too.

Re:what's the difference

[petermgreen]

I doubt many XP machines will still be working two years from now.

Computer hardware seems to be something of a lottery. Some of it fails after a few years but in my experiance if quality components were used it generally keeps going for much longer than that. Hard drives seem to be the most failure prone components but lukilly their interfaces have remained standard so replacing them is not generally a problem (though supplies of IDE drives do seem to be finally dwindling now, most suppliers still have them but usually only a handful of models).

Furthermore with vista being widely regarded as a failure and the general hesitation surrounding new versions of software plenty of people were buying computers with XP preinstalled right up until MS took that option away in late 2010 (you can still downgrade yourself but you can no longer buy off the shelf computers pre-downgraded unless they are old stock).

People understandably resent having to pay a big chunk of time and/or money on upgrading just to get security updates. I bet many won't bother and will just hope they can live without them just as many people continue to drive older cars that don't have modern safety freatures.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, it's major...

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

...it gets even better...

"Even scarier, Qualsys's Amol Sarwate says many SCADA systems for industrial networks still run a modified version of XP, and are not in a position to upgrade. Because much of the software running on SCADA systems is not compatible with traditional Microsoft OS capabilities, an OS upgrade would entail much more work than it would for a home or corporate system.""

So...a heavily modified XP system...that isn't compatible with MSFT upgrades (or, likely...even updates)...and isn't connected to the internet...because they are SCADA systems...isn't going to get updates....they weren't getting anyway....to protect them from vulnerabilities they don't have....since they aren't connected to the internet.

Cute. These folks really know their stuff, huh?

Re:what's the difference

[datavirtue]

Indeed, XP is a train-wreck. They could have updated XP with the measures used in Windows 7, but they did not. I got malware the other day while browsing with Opera--a driveby! WTF!?

Re:what's the difference

[datavirtue]

Uh, you get Os updates for free, or very cheap--no?

Re:what's the difference

[Belial6]

No. You count the age of an OS from the last date of sale. Not the first.

Another 2 years, and MS will have done more than enough in supporting the OS, but lets not use irrational numbers when arguing that point.

Re:what's the difference

[Score Whore]

Rather than saying they have different release cycles you should be saying they have different release methodologies or software life cycles. Apple apparently supports two releases back (searches for "apple software life cycle" only result in forum posts asking the same question), while Microsoft has defined support periods that are generally quite long. Microsoft's approach is important for people who intend to incorporate Microsoft's products into their business processes. Apple's approach is (marginally) acceptable for consumer products.

Apple releases new versions that don't have substantial backward compatibility guarantees about as often as Microsoft releases service packs that do make an emphasis on backward compatibility.

As far as comparing between the two -- in my experience having two macs, a first gen apple tv, an ipod, a couple of iphones and an ipad and five windows boxes running XP, Vista and 7 -- windows service packs frequently deliver not only rolled up bug fixes, but new functionality similar to the kinds of new functionality that you'd find in Apple OS X releases.

Fundamentally Microsoft does a much better job of supporting prior generation platforms than Apple does by far. Hell, Apple, as near as I can tell, obsoletes products just because.

Re:what's the difference

[cpu6502]

Most of the so-called "releases" from Apple are just minor upgrades to the ongoing OS X project..... equivalent to Microsoft service packs. SO:

Apple had 9 updates (9.2,10.0,.1,.2,.3,.4,.5,.6,.7)
Microsoft also had 9 (XP-0, -1, -2, -3, Vista-0, -1, -2, Seven-0, -1).

But Microsoft provides support across ~13 years (from XP-SP0 initial release to 2014) whereas apple only provides support for 1/3rd as long. Apple's philosophy forces people like me to buy new hardware to stay up-to-date (since 10.6, 10.7 won't run on my too-slow Mac).

Re:what's the difference

[cpu6502]

Okay. I'm using both XP (2007) and 10.5 (2010) with their date-of-last sale in the parentheses.

So Microsoft will provide a total support of 7 years from XP's final sale to 2014, whereas Apple only provided 1 and a half years for 10.5.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

"This can be demonstrated - not argued - by the fact that you cannot find an instance of 7/8/9 era macos running anywhere. Else the exception of some geek's curiosity collection."

That's because there is no way to even run a modern browser in an older version of mac os. Firefox won't run on Mac OS X Tiger (10.4). Mac users throw away their old boxes because they aren't even useful for the small *gasp* task of browsing the web. They are USELESS.
On the other hand, Firefox runs perfectly on a Windows 2000 box. You can upgrade to a secure, updated, HTML5-ready browser on Windows 2000. You can't do that on a fucking mac of that generation.

The same thing happens for most software. Older Mac OS X aren't usable in any way or form. PPC macs are deader than dead, landfill material. You can give an old pc to someone who doesn't know much about computers and just want to browse the web and so small stuff, but you can't give an old mac.

BTW I am a mac user too. I own a Macbook, an iPad and an iPhone. I love Apple products, I HATE Apple as a company, I hate the way they do things. What I'm not is a blind apple fanboy. I use apple stuff, but I also have my own home-built desktop computer running a dual boot of Windows 7 and Linux. The home-built computer provides me for more value per dollars spent. The only reason why I still buy Apple products is because I really like the UI, the OS, the blend of minimalistic GUI and unix-terminal power, I don't NEED a macbook, I just enjoy using one (and I have to admit that their trackpad is the best of the crop). I know as a fact that I'll be throwing away my Apple hardware way before I end up throwing away my home built stuff. In fact, I'm never going to throw away my PC, I'm going to donate it to a friend or family the day I build a new one. The mac OTOH will end up in a landfill before the actual, literal death of the hardware.

Fuck Apple. So much for their green marketing. A computer that can't run an updated browser (aka a secure browser) is a useless computer.

Re:what's the difference

[Belial6]

You were not the last sale of either of those products.

Re:what's the difference

[Tharkkun]

OS != computer. The vast majority of those boxen made for XP can in fact run Win 7 or 8. Or linux as you say. And having to pay for the upgrade is not a valid argument against since I know much much the digital tuner upgrade cost for your old tv :)

Not to mention you can buck out a few extra dollars and get a brand new machine versus paying for an upgrade. Computers are so cheap now and if you're using a 7 year old machine you do not need a $800 replacement. The cheap $2-300 computers will do just fine.

Re:what's the difference

[bjwest]

Linux is almost as bad when it comes to memory bloat.

That depends on which (if any) window manager you use. Linux itself requires far less resources than even Win98 did, much less XP, or what Vista and Win 7 require. With the proper WM, linux will run on old 16 bit CPUs with no problems at all. Granted, it won't be all flashy-shiny, but it will run just fine.

Re:what's the difference

[afidel]

I think some of the big unix vendors may be comparable or better though.

Nope, AIX, HPUX, and Solaris all have support windows of less than 10 years on their COTS support contracts. If you're willing to fork over millions of dollars a year to support a development team you can get continued support, but the same thing is also available from Microsoft.

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

You miss my point entirely. XP is an 11 year old operating system that runs on 11 year old computers. You're not going to get Win 7 or Ubuntu 11.10 to run on an 11 year old computer. So Grandma has her 11 year old computer that she only uses for email and checking the weather and stuff like that, which is still perfectly useable, except that FLAWS in its OS won't be fixed.

If there's a design defect found in a '98 Chevy, Chevy will recall the car and fix the problem. For Microsoft to not add featres to XP is fine, for them to not repair software errors is certainly NOT fine.

It's likely that the vast majority of people still running XP are corporate customers

I'm not sure about that, most people I know who have computers (and I know a lot who don't) are running XP and even 98. Hell, a guy I know just replaced his old computer with a newer one, and gave me the old one to use for parts. It's running Win 95 and has most likely been rooted and sending spam for years, thanks to Microsoft's refusal to issue updates.

Re:what's the difference

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

The Apple tradeoffs are a better deal than the PC tradeoffs. Apple are high-value, for limited period at reasonable price.

PC machinery - for the last decade - has been terrible value, for an indefinite period, often on-the-cheap.

The Apple OS value has grown on me. I can get Linux+Gnome to treat me exactly as I want, but the Dell or Lenovo pile of cracking, slow IO crap always makes this very painful.

The old PPC? Good linux box. ;-) You can put a light distro on there and get better value out of a PowerBook, than you could from a Dell D600 with anything Bill produced.

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

I doubt many XP machines will still be working two years from now.

You'd be surprised. In thirty years of computer use I've seen few hardare failures. Usually before a hard drive goes south I've replaced it because it's full and can buy one ten times as big for half the price I paid for it. Hell, I have three drives sitting on a shelf right now, I think one's only 500 mb. In all that time I've had 3 hard drive failures, two CPU failures and one power supply gone bad. But I've gone through three MS OSes (95, 98, XP) and several Linux distros (Manrdake, Mandriva, kubuntu, plus several flavors I tried and didn't like).

My laptop might still be operational but with only a Pentium 3 I doubt I'll want to continue using it.

It'll still be useful for serving files, playing MP3s, surfing most web sites, running OpenOffice or the like, playing classic PC games... Software on it when new will still run, and may not run on a new one.

Time to jump from XP to 7 which, now that they removed the bugs, is a decent OS.

Well, it's certainly a far better OS than their previous offerings, I have it on my notebook and though I plan on putting Linux on it, it still hasn't pissed me off enough to make the effort... yet.

BTW: I doubt your Linux would fit inside my desktop or laptop: They're only 1/2 and 1/3rd gig respectively

If you're talking about memory, they will. I'm running kubuntu 11.10 (the latest release, just came out a few months ago) with 2/3ds of a gig and it plays videos flawlessly. But even then, you can install an old version of Linux; I have a box someone gave me that won't run kubuntu (250meg memory), so I just installed Mandriva 2007 on it. It works fine now.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Apple tradeoffs are a better deal than the PC tradeoffs. Apple are high-value, for limited period at reasonable price.
PC machinery - for the last decade - has been terrible value, for an indefinite period, often on-the-cheap."

Depends on the market. If you're talking about laptops, I completely agree. Apple laptops are better than most PC laptops, in battery life, in construction (unibody case), in OS (Mac OS X has much more reliable support for suspend, comes back to life in an instant..)..

But when it comes to the desktop I beg to differ. iMac are terrible and you can't get anything decent under the $2500 that a Mac Pro will cost you. iMacs use laptop hardware, have terrible air flow and the fusion of the screen and computer for a desktop is not a worthy tradeoff : my computer screens have always outlived my hardware. A single failure and you have to rely on sending the computer to Apple and lose your computer for some time.
My home-built PC is more powerful than any of the iMac, has reliable components, is extensible, has a tower with strong air flow (which is important if your computer is often under heavy load and you care for the lifetime of its components) and it has the best support I could ever get : if any of the components fail I can just replace them myself and it will be MUCH faster than sending the computer for repair, it's just a trip to the hardware store and 15 minutes of work and testing. Even in the case of worst-failure scenario (motherboard failure) it would still take less time to do it myself than wait for a computer sent to lalaland.
The mac pro are great, but infrequently updated and cost just too much depending on your needs. It has workstation hardware, so it can be worth it if you have a need for it but there is no alternative to the shitty iMac if you aren't ready to spend $2500+ on a Mac Pro.
I won't even mention the mac mini which is the worst joke of computing history.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

I just bought an old copy of ubuntu and got negative years of support! Your argument is bad and you should feel bad.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

And this is why my PPC Mac mini now runs Linux.

Re:what's the difference

[Tubal-Cain]

Two years out an this is news?

No. It was news 8 months ago.
What we have here is a regurgitation of the slashdot comments from last year.

Re:what's the difference

[ewok85]

Yes, but you are paying for those parts. Cars, like computer software, usually come with a period where the manufacturer will guarantee a certain level of support. After that you pay for it.

Microsoft will still provide support after the EOL, but you'd have to pay for it. Considering that we've known for many years this day is coming, I'm surprised people are still complaining about it.

Re:what's the difference

[ewok85]

It's likely that the vast majority of people still running XP are corporate customers, and if they can't manage an upgrade to Win7 over the next 2 years, they should probably hire some better IT staff.

I work for a small business and half of our computers still run XP. I've been instructed by management (who have the last call on all spending) that we will not be purchasing Windows 7 licences until the last possible moment, and we'll continue the current pattern of buying new PCs with Windows 7 as a way to slowly replace XP.

As you can imagine it is slowly driving me mad.

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

It wasn't an analogy, it was a comparison showing that they aren't analogous but should be. If Microsoft had any real competetion in the preinstalled OS market, they wouldn't be EOLing XP.

Re:what's the difference

[helix2301]

I still have customers running some Windows 2000 boxes this has been an issue I been dealing with this will just make the situation worse for me.

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

Not to mention you can buck out a few extra dollars and get a brand new machine versus paying for an upgrade.

I hate wastefulness. Putting a functional device in a landfill is just wrong when it would be useful for years longer.

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

An auto manufacturer will pay for most design flaws and manufacturug errors after the warrantee is up. A software bug is a programming error.

Hardware wears, software doesn't. There is no excuse to not fix your own errors.

Re:what's the difference

[ThePromenader]

Well, at least some here are at least wise enough to see the opportunity for a good joke ; )

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

Forty bucks. Windows? A hell of a lot more; I paid $125 upgrading fron 98 to XP arouond 2005. That's half the cost of a small notebook with Win 7 preinstalled these days.

Re:what's the difference

[bkcallahan]

I prefer my 1982 Volvo 244 DL :)

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

10.4 was the last PowerPC revision. If you are running 10.5 you hacked it (which is possible but requires skills).

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

Me? I'll stick to my old VW Bug. ;)

My point exactly.

Re:what's the difference

[WaroDaBeast]

Apple's philosophy forces people like me to buy new hardware to stay up-to-date (since 10.6, 10.7 won't run on my too-slow Mac).

Or you can install a Linux distro on said machine. (Not agreeing with Apple's philosophy here; just stating a fact.)

Re:what's the difference

[gstrickler]

Correction. If there is a design defect in a '98 Chevy that endangers lives, Chevy might recall it and fix it.

Demonstrate that a security flaw in XP endangers lives and your analogy might have some validity.

Re:what's the difference

[morari]

I had a 1987 Volvo 240 and I loved it. Those were cars far ahead of their time, both in luxury features as well as mechanical layouts. The only downside was the the engine was a little underpowered for that heavy-ass body. It wasn't noticeable up on the highway, but it sure chugged along while going up some of the hills around here.

Re:what's the difference

[vandamme]

Which of the 300 distros of Linux were you referring to? So we can refute your non sequitur with facts.

P.s., try Puppy.

Re:what's the difference

[yuhong]

In fact, with Microsoft, Custom Support for Windows is generally $200,000 for first year and more afterwards.

Re:what's the difference

[yuhong]

AFAIK with MS, mainstream support ends 5 years after that release or 2 years after the next release, whatever is later, with extended support ending 5 years after.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I know, XP Pro SP1 and lower isn't supported anymore. That is, no more patches. Well, for consumers at least. Maybe businesses are a different matter. Am I mistaken?

Would it be financially feasible for Microsoft to offer paid support to businesses requesting it? Because Microsoft knows the code and probably could fix the bugs and security issues. Or would it be better to let third parties handle these issues? The problem with the latter is that they don't know the code like Microsoft knows it. Would it be damaging for Microsoft to release the code?

Re:what's the difference

[aonaran]

I disagree, XP, to be useful with all of the fixes and service packs applied, running software that has also had fixes and service packs applied does NOT run on 11 year old machines. It needs at minimum 768MB of RAM, 1GB to be comfortable. Not many machines had that 11 years ago.

To run it on an 11 year old machine you need to either disable some functionality or upgrade the machine. You can do the same with Ubuntu. ...in fact there is probably more leeway to do that in Ubuntu as there are more things that can be safely disabled and still have a functional machine

I have not seen an out of the box XP SP3 system running in less than 512MB without major complaints from the user. Microsoft can claim 64MB minimum requirement still applies, but reality shows it is simply not true anymore.

Re:what's the difference

[mcgrew]

software that has also had fixes and service packs applied does NOT run on 11 year old machines

It sounds to me like Microsoft should hire some Linux programmers to work on their OSes then, the guys they have now must be barely competent at what they do. When I first got XP I think I was running 64 megs. Talk about bloat!

I'm running kubuntu 11.10 on an old machine right now. Its maximum memory is a gig, I have 750 meg in it. It runs videos streamed from the net without stuttering, all while doing other useful work.

I'm not sure how big a hard drive I can put in it, it was nonfunctional when it was given to me, with a trashed hard drive and the CPU fan had come unplugged. I stuck an old 80 gig in it, will probably need to get a bare bones box when I fill that drive (I'm using my other computer for most storage). When I do, that one will be used to sample audio from the newer computer. 7 whole legal CDs a week for free every Sunday night at KSHE. Still very useful.

Re:what's the difference

[Meski]

A better question is how many users are there on 9.2 compared to XP? Someone else can be your google bitch, I can't be arsed looking it up.

Re:what's the difference

[Meski]

Seems like you answered the question with Linux. And you turn a computer that ran like a dog into one that runs like a greyhound. :^)

Re:what's the difference

[bkcallahan]

This one is pretty good about the get-up-and-go. I've pondered replacing all the ECUs with A2D converters and an R-Pi -- then I could code different specs for different situations, like freeway, city (and as my fellow geek suggested, name one 'Getting away from The Man') and include a limp home mode, something not done on the earlier Volvos like mine with the B21F K-tronic. While it would be far too much work for this car alone, I get a warm fuzzy feeling knowing geeks everywhere would have open source code and schematics to play with on *their* Volvos :) My g/f does think it's cool that I 'hack' computers and cars, lol. (I replaced the CIS module with a DPDT switch and some alligator clips, rofl)

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

is that see or shining c? or maybe sea, since we're all getting mixed up over chords and cords

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

he stupidest

lol cheers fuck face

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

good for playing starcraft:broodwar with ipx. i can't be fagged trying to figure out ipx in linux just to play a game.

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

not to mention set top boxes, routers, etc.

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

with linux it doesn't matter. why wouldn't you want to update your free OS?

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

unless you're one of those enviro-fruitloops with a 20-star energy efficient home (in a tree), biogas and solar, grow your own veggies (and weed) and don't drive a car, then your argument flops

Re:what's the difference

[madhi19]

"Linux is almost as bad when it comes to memory bloat." Bullshit! Linux manage memory very well depending on the hardware. The desktop environment is also a factor but Linux is extremely modular so you can trim the fat to a bare bone desktop GUI that will run pretty damn fast on half to 1/4 of a gig of ram. Bellow 128mb you might have trouble running any sort of Linux at least with a GUI.

Re:what's the difference

[petermgreen]

gnome3? unity?

Re:what's the difference

[crutchy]

switch to xfce, or don't use a wm at all. at least you have the choice. you can selectively update too.

Re:what's the difference

[Anonymous Coward]

You miss my point entirely. XP is an 11 year old operating system that runs on 11 year old computers. You're not going to get Win 7 or Ubuntu 11.10 to run on an 11 year old computer.

Except that I install Ubuntu 11.10 on even older computers almost daily. More specificallly, Xubuntu, as Unity is far too bloated for older computers. My dad's computer from 1999 runs Xubuntu, as it is quite literally the only OS that will run on it. XP is too bloated for that creaker.

release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not liberate the source and let other companies continue bugfixing?

Oh... doesn't fit the business model?

open source ftw and for long term maintenance.

Re:release the source?

[feedayeen]

Why not liberate the source and let other companies continue bugfixing?

Oh... doesn't fit the business model?

open source ftw and for long term maintenance.

An, operating system contains something on the order of tens of millions of lines of code. No company is going to handle a maintenance project like that for free and there is no incentive for Microsoft to pay them for it. As for releasing it in the wild, those tens of millions of lines are not the exclusive product of Microsoft, they almost certainty incorporated code that still belongs to other companies into the final package and this code can not be released even if Microsoft wanted to.

Re:release the source?

[epyT-R]

sounds like a nice list of reasons to avoid proprietary software for mission critical applications like SCADA...or anything really.

Re:release the source?

[bwcbwc]

"Why not liberate the source?"

Maybe because there is XP code still in Vista and later versions?
Maybe because it would just encourage the people who are still using XP to continue using the "Open Source" version?

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

Try reporting a bug with the Linux 2.0 kernel or glibc 2.0, you will be told to upgrade to the latest version. And while the upgrade may be free, the time and effort associated with moving an entire codebase to a modern version isn't.

Which is why you need to heed warnings about deadlines well in advance - these SCADA issues wouldn't have been a problem if planning had started two years ago rather than now.

Re:release the source?

[Hamsterdan]

Could also be used to create new malware targeted at people who can't update...

Re:release the source?

[TapeCutter]

Why not liberate the source and let other companies continue bugfixing?

Oh... doesn't fit the business model?

Of course, if someone in the future is wandering around with a hypothetical bucket of cash trying to spend it on fixing a hypothetical bug in XP then I'm sure MS would happily resurect XP from it's grave and stick a band-aid on it's forehead.

Re:release the source?

[tao]

If you bother to report a bug against the 2.0 kernel, and it's about functionality actually present in the 2.0-kernel rather than something along the lines of "the 2.0 kernel doesn't support USB3", then I can promise you that the maintainer would at least take a look at it.

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

My comment is based on experience, not supposition.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you bother to report a bug against the 2.0 kernel, and it's about functionality actually present in the 2.0-kernel rather than something along the lines of "the 2.0 kernel doesn't support USB3", then I can promise you that the maintainer would at least take a look at it.

Sorry, we're running life critical systems here. We can't rely on "taking a look at it". We need a guarantee which is just a teeny bit stronger than that. Many of our systems do run Linux, but only because a consulting company is willing to fill that gap and assume the role of supplying custom fixes/patches while we wait for "official" ones to make it into the kernal. It's not that we have anything against the community, but frankly we need someone to take responsibility and to be held accountable for all aspects of our system.

As for this news? Shrug. Anybody who doesn't already have a plan still has two years to figure it out and get one in place. I can't find any sympathy in me for someone who hasn't come up with a solution by then.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry Richard, he has a lower uid, therefore only he may claim authority without proof.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are support contracts. Pay for a 2.0 support contract with a big player like Red Hat or SuSE, or one of the zillion smaller players, and the bug *will* get fixed.

Heck, if you are using 2.0 for such a life critical system, how about hiring a kernel developer yourself? Small price to pay for saving lives, I'd say.

You can *not* expect other people to do your "life critical" work for free.

Re:release the source?

[epyT-R]

it is possible that his comment is supposition based on experience.

Re:release the source?

[Pieroxy]

Sorry, we're running life critical systems here. We can't rely on "taking a look at it". We need a guarantee which is just a teeny bit stronger than that. Many of our systems do run Linux, but only because a consulting company is willing to fill that gap and assume the role of supplying custom fixes/patches while we wait for "official" ones to make it into the kernal. It's not that we have anything against the community, but frankly we need someone to take responsibility and to be held accountable for all aspects of our system.

As for this news? Shrug. Anybody who doesn't already have a plan still has two years to figure it out and get one in place. I can't find any sympathy in me for someone who hasn't come up with a solution by then.

Emphasis mine. This is possible only because Linux is open source. Thanks for making exactly the point that needed to be made in favor of an open source OS.

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

There is a real risk with going down that route however, and that is that unless you can get your changes merged into the main branch (far from guaranteed), you are now running a forked version of Linux - and the more you make changes, the more distant the fork gets and the less the main branch followers want to help you.

So you are only compounding the issue - the money you spent on consulting for the fix should have gone toward moving the codebase to a newer version instead.

Re:release the source?

[Bert64]

And a consulting company will happily fill the gap and provide maintenance for a 2.0 kernel, it makes no difference to them... Money is money, and the code is still available.
With closed source you simply don't have the option of hiring a consulting company, it's the original vendor or nothing and it would be utterly irresponsible to make critical systems depend on something you don't have the source of and are utterly beholden to a single vendor for.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the going rate for kernel developers? $60/hr ?

Rather than hiring and paying them thousands of dollars to maintain old code, I'd rather just fork the $100 and get the new windows.

Anyone know where I can hire OSS kernel developers for free to fix stuff in old versions from 10 years ago?

Re:release the source?

[Bert64]

Having the sourcecode doesn't seem to help people create malware targeted at linux or bsd users...

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, but a community will. That has been demonstrated and proven.

So why are there thousands of open source abandoned projects on sourceforge and the like?

I thought when you dump code, people (hopefully competent) automatically form a community and start development and code fixes. You say its "proven"... I guess I just "disproved" you.

Stop being a douche... OTOH, you are an anti-ms troll.. so it must be hard to do that. I understand.. :(

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. Besides, why is he slashdotting from work at 3:34AM?

Re:release the source?

[FireFury03]

Sorry, we're running life critical systems here. We can't rely on "taking a look at it".

If you're running "life critical systems", what the hell are you doing running an OS that isn't designed for "life critical systems" in the first place? (Hint: Windows and Linux are *not* designed for life critical systems). As for not being able to rely on "taking a look at it", that's why you need to pay someone to do this stuff - you can't expect either Microsoft or a Linux developer to work for you for free, but at least with an open OS you can employ a third party to maintain it beyond its normal support life, whereas if you start out with a closed system you're always going to be at the mercy of the vendor.

but frankly we need someone to take responsibility and to be held accountable for all aspects of our system.

If you think Microsoft are going to "take responsibility and be accountable" in any serious way, you obviously didn't read the licence agreement. I presume what you actually mean is "I want to be able to blame Microsoft when things go wrong to divert the shitstorm away from me" whilst achieving nothing actually useful. Ain't blame culture brillient?

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. Besides, why is he slashdotting from work at 3:34AM?

Because the slashdot timestamping system does not stamp posts with your local time. I posted something just afer 14:00 hours yesterday, it is timestamped 7:22PM.

Re:release the source?

[Dr_Barnowl]

This is true, but stupid certification requirements may be tying their hands to the older kernel.

Re:release the source?

[isorox]

My comment is based on experience, not supposition.

Fortunately for you, you have the code, you have the ability to fix the problem yourself (or pay someone to do it)

You can't do that with XP.

Re:release the source?

[toutankh]

Yeah I'm wondering, why don't they just keep supporting it and make money out of it?

Re:release the source?

[thegarbz]

Which is why you need to heed warnings about deadlines well in advance - these SCADA issues wouldn't have been a problem if planning had started two years ago rather than now.

SCADA systems have a very long lifetime. Many vendors offer life-cycle announcements that provide 10 years of planning to suit rare shutdown events where things like SCADA systems can be upgraded. Now these are just their lifecycle announcements. One of our vendors has last year gotten their software and latest SCADA system running on Windows 7. The upgrade path is toss the entire old system, and upgrade. The older system was also subject of a life-cycle announcement last year. So basically we have until about 2021 to upgrade before the vendor stops supporting their system. For that length of time we're going to need to keep XP running.

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

And watch me get hate for pointing out the crazy in that statement...You HAVE the source for linux and still can't fix the driver issues that have plagued it to this very day! Every forum, pick your distro, on EVERY upgrade gets "update foo broke" followed by a list of sometimes HUNDREDS of things! Hell Dell has to run their own damned fork because even on the teeny tiny subset of devices they offer Linux on they STILL can't promise using the default repo some kernel dev won't get a bug in his ass and break shit. so now you want to do the same thing...to hundreds of millions of computers? with NO budget? Jesus Tap Dancing Christ just step away from the keyboard!

As for TFA has nobody heard of a damned firewall? or NOT using IE perhaps? Its not like these bugs are living things, plotting to take over the world like pinky and the brain ya know. Slap Chrome or Firefox on XP, use a decent firewall of which there are several free to choose from, and there ya go! or if it being no longer supported REALLY bugs you just buy the $89 Win 7 Home and call it a day. or hell throw in with a couple of friends and buy the triple pack, I've seen it go for as little as $120 which is a whole $40 each.

When you show me a SINGLE distro, just one mind you, that not using any tricks can be updated from...oh lets say the 2005 release to current with ZERO breakage then you will have a valid argument. but saying that a community that can't seem to fix the drivers when dealing with a MUCH smaller scale than what they would be having to deal with on XP can do the job with NO budget, just the love from the community? i'm sorry but you left batshit a dozen exits back. hell you can't even get all the damned docs filled in, there are plenty that are "to be done' placeholders and that is a job that any person can technically do!

Now cue the batshit FOSSies that make the whole community look like nutters to call me a "dirty M$ Ninja robot poo poo head" and try to asspull some amazing excuse that handwaves the entire Linux drivers and docs issues away. I swear that while there are many in the FOSS community that is very intelligent and can do frankly amazing things with code the batshit loonie fringe just seems to get louder and more numerous as Linux rolls on. Frankly I would laugh my ass off watching the community try to deal with the bazillion and one half ass hacked up drivers that run on XP. i don't even wanna know what it must be like to do regression testing for patches on XP, I bet the guys stuck with that job live on suffering and BC Powder. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if that is why MSFT is pulling the plug because I'm sure quite a few governments and businesses would be happy to shell out if they continued support but I bet trying to find really good coders that understand low level drivers and can truly get a handle on this giant ancient mess of code must be like trying to find heart surgeons willing to spend their days cleaning the shit out of impacted colons. i wouldn't wish the job of dealing with all that old ass patched all to fuck code on my worst enemy.

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

Besides the entire line is moot because if the community thinks they can do better then bring ReactOS up to snuff and there you go! Someone has already done a lot of the early work FOR you, all you have to do is bring it the rest of the way! Then you will truly have a FOSS XP for one and all.

But of course that work is gonna be hard as hell and nobody wants to do it, hence it don't get done. Does ANYONE here think being handed the entire XP codebase would magically make fixing bugs in that huge damned maze of code any easier than just starting over with ReactOS? After all ReactOS doesn't have backwards compatibility going back damned near to DOS built in, isn't gonna have to deal with all this old depreciated crap like .NET 1.0, frankly what this guy is saying might as well be "Just give us XP for free and we'll throw magic pixie dust and make it all better!" which of course is nuts. hell it would probably take the community the better part of a decade just to come to grip with all that damned code and the interactions.

for a perfect example of why the community would be better off using its limited resources on ReactOS just look at LO. I'm sure those guys would tell you they still have a loong way to go to modernize it and bring it up to a more modular design and we are talking about a single program with legacy cruft! In just the system32 folder on my XP nettop you are looking at 256 subfolders containing 6694 files...and that is just one folder...does anyone have any idea how long it would take just to get up to speed on that one folder? Checking the windows folder you are looking at 19, 537 files and 2524 folders. By the time the community, even if they got even say 10% the funding of a Red hat would probably take a good decade just to figure out what interacted with what and how! Now try to fix bugs before they were completely pwned AND trying to learn all those interactions...If you want XP FOSS users you have ReactOS, spend your time there.

Re:release the source?

[rolfc]

;) I have a lot of Linux systems migrating from Debian version to Debian version without a lot of time and effort. That has been going on since 1995 and is the reason that we don't like to deploy on windows.

Re:release the source?

[tehcyder]

No, but a community will. That has been demonstrated and proven. Thanks, come again.

But is there really much of a community of people who are interested in maintaining and patching a ten year old OS from a company that all open source advocates loathe?

Re:release the source?

[Pieroxy]

There is a real risk with going down that route however, and that is that unless you can get your changes merged into the main branch (far from guaranteed), you are now running a forked version of Linux

Yes but in the worst case scenario (your changed not merged) that buys you time. This is priceless compared to Windows where you're left on your own with an insecure system.

Look, this is not a perfect solution, just because there is no perfect solution. But having an open source system is much better than a closed source one for that very reason. You *can* do it on your own if you need to.

Re:release the source?

[DNS-and-BIND]

In no event shall Microsoft be liable for any damages whatsoever, even in the event of fault (including negligence).

-- Windows XP Professional license agreement

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

are you kidding? or are you just stupid?

any sane person who can do a search on the internet can see that linux kernel continues to have DOZENS upon DOZENS of security bugs. hell almost every single android phone running linux can be rooted... because linux developers continue to introduce security bugs in source code of every release.

besides which.. malware is something the user has to install themselves, it has nothing to do with security bugs.. although the existence of security bugs in firefox helps when you want to create drive by download method of infection.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

It most certainly does, but they're at an arms race against people closing them.

Re:release the source?

[felipekk]

Which is why you need to heed warnings about deadlines well in advance - these SCADA issues wouldn't have been a problem if planning had started two years ago rather than now.

Microsoft had publicized these deadlines ever since the product was released. This is not the news here: the news is that a lot of people are still using the system. Serious companies that rely on Windows XP for their business have always known that support would end in 2014, and so have factored that into account.

Re:release the source?

[felipekk]

Well, having the source code is not the cause for malwares, code that is full of bugs is the cause. Considering this, we could say that Linux wouldn't have malwares even if it were closed source, and that XP would have malwares even if it were open source, as long as the "code quality" was the same as the current one.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it fucking does. The difference is that an open source model allows for more people to be reviewing code with the hope that holes are more likely to be closed.

Re:release the source?

[sphealey]

= = = Which is why you need to heed warnings about deadlines well in advance - these SCADA issues wouldn't have been a problem if planning had started two years ago rather than now.

It can take five to ten years (or in some cases I have seen, 20 years) to replace an embedded SCADA system.

Which is a good argument for not using Windows(tm) in any form for industrial control, but that argument was apparently lost in the late 1990s.

sPh

Re:release the source?

[AlecC]

I wonder why a SCADA system needs a direct connection to the wild Internet. Surely it wold be better to have a separate interface system connected to the Net, which one could upgrade as needed, sending commands to an isolated SCADA system using a protocol other than IP? That way, IP sent over the Internet can never under any circumstances reach the vulnerable system.

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

Why do these manufacturers not have explicit, individual support contracts from Microsoft to suit their own longterm requirements then?

Relying on the general public support policy of any OS maker or community for this sort of usage is just fucking ridiculous and proves that, as I have said elsewhere, the problem lies with the SCADA manufacturers rather than the OS.

Re:release the source?

[erroneus]

Yes

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

Good for you, in a recent job I had a PHP codebase developed inhouse by others that was stuck on a very old version of PHP and MySQL - upgrading the codebase was out of the question (it would have taken a rewrite), but the fact that Gentoo explicitly removed the version of PHP on upgrade I needed meant that I could not actually keep the OS up to date using the OS providers methods.

The older PHP wouldn't compile against the newer system libs either, so I was stuck with what I had.

The application suite was infact being replaced by a new system also being developed inhouse, but of course that takes time - and during that time I was stuck with an out of date install.

Yup, shit like that does exist all over the place.

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

As I pointed out above in reply to a similar comment - why the fuck are the SCADA manufacturers relying on the general public support policy if their product is so damn important?

Why don't they have a private support contract with Microsoft?

Seems someone did fuck up here, and it looks like its got nothing to do with the OS...

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

You ignored more than three quarters of his post with that response. What about all the third party code Microsoft is licensing which can't be open sourced?

Re:release the source?

[sphealey]

I don't disagree with you, but the economic pressures are relentless. As late as the mid-1990s a manufacturer could count on there being an ecosystem and trained programmers available for the various high-security, high-reliability architectures on the market (or at least people willing to take jobs being trained as programmers, designers, etc for such systems). By 2000 those ecosystems and finally the architectures themselves had vanished under the avalanche of Wintel systems (bought a new PDP-11 lately? Or even a Tandem Nonstop?). And the cost differential in favor of Wintel went from 1/3x to 1/1000x. It is extremely hard to convince a product development board that your product needs 1000x more funding than the team building what is fundamentally very similar consumer- or commercial-grade system.

And the demand from customers drives things too. Right now every operating manager I work with wants to be able to monitor his plant from home on his iPhone. Customers are putting enormous pressure on their vendors to replace expensive proprietary (but secure) wireless interfaces with much cheaper iPhones. Security gets paid lip service in the spec but doesn't control the decision.

sPh

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because people move on to other things - It's not rocket science.

If I am working on Project A and move on to Project B, I have only limited time to work on coding, so I have to pick one. There's nothing magic about it. If enough people are using the code, it will get maintained. There are a gazillion "pet projects" out on sourceforge which one or two people (including the developer) use; in those instance, sourceforge ends up being a holding tank for code.

I have a few of my applications on github that only I use (as far as I know). It's a place for me to store code and keep a source repository in a centralized place. I have no delusions that anyone would step in and maintain this code if I stopped doing it.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

please bring back ethanol-fueld and ban hairyfeet instead... e-f is way more entertaining

thx

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember when they released the Netscape source? Every begged them to open it and said how it would be so awesome with all those developers helping make it better. Well, every looked over the code, decided it was too confusing and started over on Mozilla. Total waste of time. Set open source back by years to throw away the Netscape codebase but "other people's code" always looks confusing and weird. I guess they believed their own hype that if you get the code you can just open it up in emacs and start fixing bugs. Well, it doesn't work that way. It would take months to get your head around some shit like Netscape, Windows XP would be even worse.

Re:release the source?

[erroneus]

It's the nature of project development both in commercial and community circles -- there are also thousands of abandoned commercial projects out there... not to mention millions of artists and performers out there who aren't rich and famous. You have proven nothing.

In fact, if there was one way Microsoft could kill Linux/Android, it would be to open source Windows XP. Well, perhaps I haven't thought that through completely, but it would unquestionably shake the foundation of public interest and would require less "change" on the behalf of end users everywhere. What's more, as Microsoft continues to push into the clouds and into subscription based software services, having a free Windows compatible OS would actually be a pretty convenient benefit to them... if the timing were right, of course... they'd have to start seeing a decline in the usage of Windows on the desktop before they would be more motivated to make such a move. But if they wanted to upset the growing community of developers, developers, developers developing for Linux and Android... you know?

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Speak for yourself. There are many open source advocates that like Microsoft just fine. I am one of them.

Re:release the source?

[mikael]

Because the support company oor the engineers in the support conpany couldgain experience of product support and create a rival product. Better to employ those engineers on next generation products.

Re:release the source?

[TheDarkMaster]

Well said. I also have systems that I just can't upgrade because the new version of some key library is broken or breaks compatibility, and I found that the FOSS people does not care enough about backward compatibility.

Others will say "but it is easy to migrate, stupid". It can be applied to a "my first app" application, but when it comes to an enterprise application with thousands of users and dealing with many things, is a ... little more difficult.

Re:release the source?

[MoonBuggy]

Relying on the general public support policy of any OS maker or community for this sort of usage is just fucking ridiculous and proves that, as I have said elsewhere, the problem lies with the SCADA manufacturers rather than the OS.

This is really what it boils down to. Everyone's discussing the relative merits of MS support against a team of coders to keep a given linux implementation up to date, but the fact is that the SCADA guys didn't bother to do either, and the customers didn't demand it from them. Negotiate with MS, negotiate with RedHat, employ your own team to write and support a custom kernel based on RMS's personal HURD installation, whatever, but make sure the plans are in place for a 20-30 year support period before you fucking start. Considering the kind of infrastructure we're talking about here, that sounds like some potentially serious incompetence that needs to be investigated...

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

And hey with a scalpel I'm qualified to be your heart surgeon...right? I mean that IS what you are basically saying, because we aren't talking about some fart app here we are talking about the literal heart of an extremely complex operating system and you just acted like it would be trivial just to DIY. Hell even RMS couldn't write his own kernel and you expect Joe average to pull off a major rewrite? And do you have ANY idea how much it would cost to hire a qualified kernel developer to do your own custom rewrite? Might as well say you can fly down to Redmond in your Lear jet and bitchslap the sweaty monkey with your solid diamond dildo until he agrees to keep supporting XP.

If I was Linus personally i'd be pissed as hell that so many like you think what he does is so damned trivial that just because you have the code you could kick him to the curb. you'd be DAMNED lucky if the number of guys that are truly qualified to do that job is even in the triple digits and they sure as hell won't be working for you. hell guys with those skills are practically the rock stars of coding and have top paying jobs and headhunters trying to steal them away..

To use a /. car analogy just because I hand you the blueprints to a Ferrari and hand you a couple of tons of raw steel does NOT man you will be able to actually build a Ferrari or even be able to rebuild one that has been dropped off a cliff. Remember folks its source code NOT pixie dust.

Re:release the source?

[CastrTroy]

I'm not so sure about that. An Android phone isn't any cheaper than a comparable Windows Phone or IOS phone simply because the operating system is free. There are some cheaper Android handsets from China, but they tend to be lower hardware quality as well. The first problem is that Windows XP would have to be ported to ARM. Because nobody wants to have a phone that runs an X86 processor. This would be a monumental task. Not to mention, it wasn't even designed for mobile hardware, so even after you got it to compile, there'd still be a whole lot of work to do to make it a viable platform for mobile computing. And then you have to port all the existing apps to run on ARM. What you are saying basically makes no sense at all. I could see it staying strong in the desktop market. Even if you don't patch it. Put it behind a good firewall, add a modern browser and you are pretty much set. Windows XP can run on some pretty old hardware.

Re:release the source?

[Dcnjoe60]

Microsoft had publicized these deadlines ever since the product was released. This is not the news here: the news is that a lot of people are still using the system. Serious companies that rely on Windows XP for their business have always known that support would end in 2014, and so have factored that into account.

There are a lot more XP computers running in people's homes that cannot run newer operating systems and function quite well for the tasks they are being used for. The problem is that with Microsoft discontinuing support, including security updates, those computers become a threat to any other computer on the internet, even the latest and greatest.

Re:release the source?

[chrb]

And hey with a scalpel I'm qualified to be your heart surgeon...right?

The two are not the same. Heart surgery is a specialism that requires probably a 5 year degree, following by a decade or so of further training under most medical regimes. Software development is a bit more open. The kernel isn't magic, it's just software; if you are a good C programmer you should be able to figure it out enough to complete the task at hand

you expect Joe average to pull off a major rewrite?

Who said anything about a major rewrite? The vast majority of security fixes are very small, and generally target a few lines of code where some trivial mistake was made. The only reason a major rewrite would be required is if the protocols or implementation are completely broken and insecure. And if that is the case, you're better just disabling the broken functionality.

And do you have ANY idea how much it would cost to hire a qualified kernel developer to do your own custom rewrite?

RedHat, Canonical, etc. all ship custom kernels. Kernel development can be hard, but it's certainly not impossible for a good programmer who has never worked on the kernel to do development there. There are probably at least a few thousand programmers in the world who already have kernel experience. Hiring good C programmers isn't cheap, but it may well be cheaper than rewriting your custom SCADA implementation to run on a more modern OS.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

sounds like someone doesn't understand that a lot of hardware and software (drivers/firmware) are made to be proprietary and have to be reverse engineered for FOSS.

This isn't the fault of FOSS, it's the fault of the corporations, some of them bribed to only work with one proprietary OS, and not release info to anyone.

You sound like a paid shill for Microsoft, IMO.

Re:release the source?

[CohibaVancouver]

A USian

A "USian?" WTF is a (an?) "USian?"

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

Thank you, and your case is a PERFECT example if you don't mind me elaborating..Here you are stuck with machines you can't upgrade even though you are in an enterprise environment with i'm sure VERY qualified admins that get paid damned good money and know how to do a step by step troubleshoot, yet you simply can't afford the downtime. But here is why i get so much hatred from the loonie section of the FOSS gallery, because i speak for the consumers. now if YOU, a qualified admin with i'm sure years of experience, can't upgrade because the breakage would cost too much downtime and loss of functionality....what about the consumers who don't have your skillset? who in the FOSS community speaks for them? sadly nobody which is why i get such hate.

To steal a line from FMJ the FOSSie section has completely deluded themselves into thinking "Inside every Suzy the checkout girl is a C coder or Bash programmer just waiting to get out!" and that is complete and total horseshit. The average consumer, the ones they will HAVE TO GET if they are gonna ever end up anything more than a geeker toy like Haiku,1.- simply do NOT have the skillset to do a step by step troubleshoot, 2.- many do NOT have a completely separate computer (which would have to be running Windows or OSX if you think this thing through logically, because if say the upgrade from Ubuntu leapin Lizard to maniac monkey broke one computer it can just as easily break two) with which to "Google for fixes" for when the upgrade craps all over them, 3.-Do NOT have the intimate knowledge required to even hunt the forums for fixes, because thanks to Torvalds unstable as hell driver model you often have to be VERY specific when it comes to make/rev/firmware of the device broken, and finally 4.-Do NOT have the ability to dissect the code that is given to them because unlike the total lie the crazy section pushes you often HAVE to "tweak" said fixes because they were written for hardware A, rev B, firmware C and you have hardware C, rev G, firmware R and again the slightest thing off and it isn't gonna do shit! Hell a single spelling error or not starting or ending the copypasta in just the perfect spot can shit all over the thing!

So I'm sorry but Linux is completely unusable by a good 90% of the population. i often get bitched at by the FOSSies because i refuse to carry their product in my shop but the only damned way their OS will "work" is if I give away free lifetime support AND keep a bunch of spares on hand so they can have a loaner while i wait the sometimes two weeks or more before a fix to a particular piece of hardware is even released!

And I apologize for the length but i'm just so damned tired of hypocrites and lies and that sums up the FOSSie section of Linux in a nutshell. you get told that its ready for the masses but when you point out that even simple things like keeping the OS in a supported state equals constant breakage you get informed you should give away lifetime support (thus destroying my business for their religious cause) or "buy a supported version and supported hardware" which means $400 a year for RHEL plus a workstation which just priced out the entire customer base, and for what? What do i gain? What does the customer gain? More work, more cost, less functionality. Give me a Linux that costs less than Windows and gives me 10 years of support like Windows and then you'll have a chance. otherwise i have machines that are 8+ years old in the field that run beautifully on WinXP and I have no doubt this copy of Win 7 I installed in Oct 09 will be running just as nicely in 2020 no matter how many updates MSFT comes out with. THAT is what matters to consumers, not some 'free as in freedom" sense of smug.

Re:release the source?

[swalve]

The problem with so many professions is that people don't respect the experience necessary. It isn't about being able to write a few lines of code, it is about knowing which lines of code to change.

Re:release the source?

[swalve]

Isn't this a situation where it would behoove a designer to use a more solid OS, like BSD or whatever actual UNIX is still available? On the other hand, I don't think the problem is the Linux kernel so much, but all the awful packages maintained by well meaning feature sluts?

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Microsoft isn't run by freetards?

Re:release the source?

[swalve]

I have a feeling that the community of people bitching about loss of support does not intersect with the community of people willing to pay for same. At least not to the extent MS can actually make any money keeping a bugfix team together. Fifteen years of support and bugfixes for a $100 OS seems like a pretty good deal to me.

Re:release the source?

[marcello_dl]

OTOH I submit a minor bug in 2003 (something about the powerpc bootloader and firewire boot on mac) and last year I got a mail from the debian BTS saying: try now it should be fixed- I wonder how many commercial enterprises do minor bug fixing to 10 years old systems.

Re:release the source?

[budgenator]

Kernel Maintainers are usually pretty good about bug reports, in fact people are often assigned to maintain previous versions to groom them for a more current future assignment. Sometimes a Distro will back-port a feature from a higher version to a previous kernel, which will be unsupported by the Official version. Glib 2.0.1 was released on Mar 29, 2002, change that now and they'll drive a wooden stake through your cold heart and burn your undead corpse in its coffin, any bugs from 10 years ago either have workarounds or is considered a "feature" and any fix would likely cause more problems than leaving it broken.

Re:release the source?

[godefroi]

The writing has been on the wall for XP for a long, long time. That Microsoft would end support should be a surprise to exactly nobody.

That SCADA systems were (and are) built in such a fragile way, on operating systems that may or may not be security risks (and Windows isn't the only one, here), without a strategy in place for mitigating those risks, is stupid.

The problem here isn't Windows or Microsoft (those systems could just as well be built on a 10-year old version of Linux that turns out to have security flaws), it's SCADA system vendors who want to pretend the underlying systems are perfect when they release.

Re:release the source?

[tao]

Assuming your name is Richard, and you haven't submitted your bug reports under a pseudonym, then I can say for sure that you've either not submitted your bug reports to the kernel maintainer, or that you did so before 2001... So I'm curious as to what experience you're basing your comment on.

Re:release the source?

[CohibaVancouver]

USians like to call themselves American, thinking the term has something to do with a specific country. Everyone else in the world(*) knows that America a name for a single continent that extends from Nunavut to Tierra del Fuego.

Hey Anonymous Coward, where do you live? I'm Canadian, I live in Canada. I'm not American. You call a Canadian an "American" and he'll take offense. For those of us that live in North America, 'America' is the generally-agreed upon term for the United States and "American" is the generally-agreed upon term for people who live there.

Re:release the source?

[aaarrrgggh]

When you look at the other roads they could have taken starting around 1995-6, they actually made a pretty good choice. I have worked on systems installed in 1986-8 that are still operating with much pain and purely DOS or ancient UNIX based programs. This stuff is mainly in the building automation realm, but there is some SCADA as well.

Upgrading from DOS/UNIX to Windows in 1996 was just as hard as it is today to ...anything. If you based your product on Windows 3.11 though, you were set until Vista. If you were one of the poor saps that picked OS/2, you were in a equally bad spot.

The problem then and today is isolating the network. Why do you think VMWare is mentioned? Solid firewalls and hardware abstraction provide a lifeline until you can actually upgrade.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, the 52nd state. Right.

Re:release the source?

[OldeTimeGeek]

Really? Any Panamanians, Brasilians, Peruvians, Argentines want to chime in on this? I've never heard any of them refer to themselves as Americans or where they live as America.

Re:release the source?

[TheDarkMaster]

Uhh... "solid"? Windows 2000 (and now XP, really!) is solid too on a good hardware if you use good enought drivers and stay away from the crappyware.

And you're right, the Linux kernel works reasonably well for me. The problem is you do nothing with just a kernel, you need applications and libraries. And these libraries can not completely change their function calls every 3 months. And that when they work properly.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Netscape 4 was the worst browser ever to have been shit out by a development team. There, I said it. Probably going to make me unpopular, but hey, it's gotta be said.

The reason MSIE won the browser war was because the "competition" was absolutely incompetent. Doesn't surprise me that new developers wanted to start from scratch.

Re:release the source?

[fast turtle]

which is why any good electrical/hydraulic engineer will tell you to flowchart the damn problem before even working on a solution(bug fix) or design. I've not seen any comments about flowcharting other then my own in the last 2 years on /. and it's annoying as hell. Flowcharting may not be glamourous but once you get into the habit of using it, you start writing better code and designing far more modular code because that unglamourous flowchart shows you where you can modularize you fucking code.

I'm currently beginning work on flowcharting a Gentoo Feature (portage) so I can convert it to C/C++ in order to get rid of the damn python dependency. It's a god damn mess but once I've completed the damn flow chart, I'll finally be able to at least start fixing many of the fucking problems Portage has as it's by no means perfect.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the problems with drivers is that the documentation of the devices they run is sorely lacking.

Many perpherial vendors dont bother documenting their stuff and only write and release Windows drivers and no other documentation at all.

Re:release the source?

[slartibartfastatp]

Hi, I live in the Federative Republic of Brazil. Therefore I am a Federative Republican (or FRican)

Re:release the source?

[slartibartfastatp]

It's a ideological virus that spreads among anti-USA people here in Brazil (and possibly latin america as well). You know, "the USA want to rule the world and think all American continent is their playground, so they call themselves 'Americans', even if the entire continent is called in textbooks as 'America' and bla bla bla they are United Statians, not Americans".

Pretty lame argument, if you ask me. I live in the Federative Republic of Brazil, that makes me a Federative Republican and not a Brazilian?

Re:release the source?

[Shoten]

You obviously don't know much about SCADA systems. They are proprietary, top to bottom. And there are reasons for this that do make sense.

First of all, let's look at the whole picture of a SCADA implementation...in this example, I'll talk about the systems that control and analyze the burn inside a coal-fired power generation facility that uses coal to heat water into steam which then drives a turbine; this is the kind of power plant that produces most of the power in our country. (I'm in the United States, for context there.) The systems are analagous to the ECU of a car with a fuel-injection engine, both controlling the delivery of fuel and air while monitoring the effects of those controls in the context of the demands being placed upon the boiler. Just as with a car engine, there is lag in making changes to the burn, just as an engine has delay when you step on the throttle.

There are many devices involved...gas sensors, temperature sensors, lasers...and all of them are purpose-built by the company that makes the control system; they are proprietary. The protocols that are spoken between devices are usually open, like DNP3 or modbus, but the data schemas that are used are also proprietary (most ICS protocols are pretty soft, working more like a layer 6 protocol than a layer 7). The logic that drives decisions, reporting, and the translation of human interaction into discrete behavior by control devices? Also proprietary. The control systems are built by the same company to work end-to-end on that specific type, size and model of boiler, and the whole thing is tested as a unit. For the most part, the notion of modularity...the way that you could replace a Cisco firewall with an equivalent Juniper firewall, or replace an EMC SAN with a NetApp SAN...does not exist in any way whatsoever. (It does in small ways, but even then most manufacturers will refuse to support the system if you so much as change the IOS image on a Cisco switch without it having been tested first, which takes about 6 months for a full facility and requires that it be offline the whole time.)

The complexity of these environments...and the ramifications of improper behavior by any one component...cannot be overstated. So, it's essential from a legal standpoint to have entities backing the pre-manufactured components who can be held accountable should it be necessary. I know, you can't sue Microsoft for software bugs, but you can't look at their behavior over the past 15 years and tell me that there wasn't an effective motivation to improve security. They've dramatically improved the security quality of Windows, while rolling out and evolving a patching system that is now the gold standard for software companies. They have something to lose from producing an unreliable product, even if that loss does not come in the form of a lawsuit. And after seeing what Oracle has done to mySQL and Java, it's not hard to see the potential for disaster if you rely on an open-source project that may have to fork because their patron got acquired, as well. An even scarier possibility is what Tenable did with Nessus when they forked and closed the source, ending support for the older OSS version.

One more thing...this isn't a website we're talking about. It's a power plant. When things go wrong in these environments, it isn't just embarassing. People often die. At one plant I've done work at, a mistake caused a ~300 KV transformer to detonate. Oversimplifying the situation, the power ended up flowing the wrong way, and the transformer's cooling spaces (filled with oil) exploded in a BLEVE, showering the nearby parking lot with flaming oil. It was a Michael Bay-like situation; I saw the pictures that were taken while the fires were still burning. A mistake involving the boiler can cause the flame to collapse resulting what they call a "beer can," when the fire suddenly goes out and the inside of the boiler cools so rapidly (in a matter of seconds, or less) that it crushes itself. This is not a small thing...the walls

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that I doubt you, but just curious - can you point to any mailinglist interactions you had, specifically the issues you brought up with the older kernels and libraries?

Re:release the source?

[jzuccaro]

I can attest to that. After all, we are called Latin Americans. Check this out

Re:release the source?

[ThatsMyNick]

No, what he is saying is, without a scalpel one cannot perform a heart surgeon. If you put out a scalpel for use, may be someone who is qualified to be a heart surgeon will use it to perform your heart surgery, and save you.

Re:release the source?

[Ryanrule]

So, just close up shop and email all your designs and docs to china then. It will be faster with the same result.

Re:release the source?

[ragefan]

That is the fault whomever made the decision to use Gentoo. Gentoo has never been a good solution for long term support. Gentoo is about as bleeding-edge as distros get and old versions of software tend to drop off very fast. If you stability, then go with Debian.

Re:release the source?

[jythie]

Did so a while back when using an old kernel + drivers in an embedded environment. I found the community pretty supportive in running the issue to ground.

Re:release the source?

[jedidiah]

This is the trump card here. You can choose to fix your own problems if you have the source. This is not something merely limited to Linux. This also happens with commercial applications and companies that are smart enough to realize that they may need to do their own long term support.

"open source" is not just a Linux or Free Software thing.

Re:release the source?

[budgenator]

I wonder why a SCADA system needs a direct connection to the wild Internet. Surely it wold be better to have a separate interface system connected to the Net, which one could upgrade as needed, sending commands to an isolated SCADA system using a protocol other than IP? That way, IP sent over the Internet can never under any circumstances reach the vulnerable system.

Its would be easier to use "IANA-reserved private IPv4 network ranges, 24-bit block (/8 prefix, 1 × A) 10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255, 20-bit block (/12 prefix, 16 × B) 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255, 16-bit block (/16 prefix, 256 × C) 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255" or Unique local address (IPv6), block fc00::/7, none of those addresses are internet routable, without a NAT; the "separate interface" is called a Bastion Host.

Re:release the source?

[jedidiah]

> And these libraries can not completely change their function calls every 3 months

I have binaries running that are 10 years old and have kept chugging along through multiple distribution changes. So the idea that Linux is this fragile is beyond silly. Legacy support is certainly possible if you have someone with a clue tending to things.

The key problem here is that Windows and Microsoft products generally violate one of the main design principles of an appliance. It should not need constant maintenance and babysitting. You should be able to deploy it and ignore it without worrying that it will be a threat to self and others.

How long has "Apple OpenStep" been around now? 10+ years. They're having their first visible trojan problem just now. After all that time.

Microsoft's big contribution to the industry has been to lower standards and expectations.

Re:release the source?

[dj245]

Which is why you need to heed warnings about deadlines well in advance - these SCADA issues wouldn't have been a problem if planning had started two years ago rather than now.

We did. But it takes time. It isn't our fault that Microsoft waited from 2001 (XP released) until 2009 (Windows 7 released) to make a new operating system worthy of businesses using it. Would you install Windows Vista on anything? Companies saw what a turd Vista was and avoided it for Windows 7.

Windows 7 was released in October 2009. That is only 2-1/2 years ago. My company waited 6-8 months to see if Windows 7 sucked or not. They also investigated switching to Linux, but with the massive code investment and serious code tie-ins with the inner workings of Windows, they decided against it.

So that leaves us with around 2 years of time until now. We had to account for a lot of changes within Windows 7 and work around them. There are new NERC* requirements that we had to understand, figure out best practices, and comply with. We had to get hardware which is industrial-grade computers (IPC) with the right drivers, which is outside of our control. We had to test the software extensively over months- it is controlling multimillion dollar machines which generate millions of dollars a day in profit so we can not make a mistake that causes downtime.

We are now rolling out our control systems with Windows 7 and have been for a couple of months. Did we take too much time to do so? Maybe. But we are a conservative company and don't like to rush out buggy software, and some of the delays were outside our control.

*These NERC requirements say that certain power stations must not run outdated and unsupported software. In the future, all power stations may need to comply with this also. So it is a good time to be selling control equipment.

Re:release the source?

[jedidiah]

Yet despite all of these published bugs, the actual malware available is NILL.

You are simply engaging in the usual "overly optimistic" attempt by Lemmings to conflate actual malware in the wild with mere bugs.

The problem with Windows is that it automates the execution of random untrusted code. Windows also has the habit of doing stupid things by default with regard to services opening holes that would never exist on a Unix box or a Mac.

Microsoft has a history of harmful information hiding and blurring the distinction between programs and data.

This all leads to a platform where the "Morris Worm" is an example of how to build things rather than something to be avoided.

Re:release the source?

[chrb]

I didn't say that it was possible for anyone, or even easy, but most good C programmers should be able to do kernel development. In difficulty terms it's on a similar level to embedded systems programming, or old games console development where you had access to the low-level system. This is the stuff that teenagers used to do for fun back in the 80s.

Here's some old relevant comments:

reverence and awe (Score:5, Interesting)

I've seen a lot of promising college-aged open source devs that seem to have an overwhelming reverence and awe towards the kernel, thinking it far too complicated for them to work on with their own programming abilities. In reality, most of them could pick up the kernel and figure it out quite quickly, but they'll never convince themselves of that.

I agree with this. I have also heard younger developers say that they can only do Java or PHP, and think that C is too complicated, etc., and so they never try. But if they really did apply themselves, and put in the time and effort, how far did you think they could go? They might never be Alan Cox or Linus Torvalds, but if they really went for it, they could get pretty close.

What about the barrier to entry? (Score:5, Insightful)

Contributing to and old and large code is much more difficult than contributing to a small one. Getting your head around a large code base is no small task and documentation is often lacking. Even if the code is well commented it could be very difficult to understand the overall design of the software and how things interact with each other.

That is true, however, you don't need to understand all the millions of lines of code of the kernel in order to do development, just as you don't need to understand the complete implementation of the C library, or the Java runtime, in order to do desktop application development.

Re:release the source?

[jedidiah]

Sure they are. Their product success is based on the perception that it is "free". This leads to everyone devaluing it and no one being interested in paying for support (extended or otherwise).

The Linux community has nothing on Windows when it comes to "freetards".

Re:release the source?

[Bert64]

And closed source software also continues to have large numbers of security bugs... The fact that the source is open doesn't change the number of bugs that exist, although it can make them easier to find and/or fix.

It also must be said that the linux development process happens in the open... Many bugs are found during the early stages of new code being introduced, in both open and closed source code... The difference is that you never hear about bugs which were fixed during the early development stages of closed source code because the development process is kept secret.

Re:release the source?

[ColdWetDog]

You don't need a live connection to the Internet to get a network into trouble. See Stuxnet.

Got an open USB port? That Hello Kitty USB drive that you 'found' in the parking lot - I wonder what it has on it?

Re:release the source?

[metamatic]

When you look at the other roads they could have taken starting around 1995-6, they actually made a pretty good choice. I have worked on systems installed in 1986-8 that are still operating with much pain and purely DOS or ancient UNIX based programs.

Actually, DOS would have been a better choice, as they could then keep the system running indefinitely using FreeDOS.

Really, for a SCADA, there's no point having Windows unless you actually need a GUI, and maybe not even then.

Re:release the source?

[ColdWetDog]

please bring back ethanol-fueld and ban hairyfeet instead... e-f is way more entertaining

thx

Oh and you are the absolute height of intelligence and wit, Mr. or Ms. AC?

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Overdramatize much?

Linux doesn't have the same driver or software base as Windows, which makes it less interesting to a lot of people for desktop use; it does, however, avoid the problems outlined above that you have with vendor lock in. A screwdriver makes a terrible hammer, but a person who says "maybe for this job you'd be better off using a screwdriver" isn't batshit insane. If you want to keep a system running for a few decades, worrying about having drivers for every new peice of hardware under the sun isn't more important than having the option of getting updates from alternative sources as the need arises.

Re:release the source?

[ColdWetDog]

sounds like a nice list of reasons to avoid proprietary software for mission critical applications like SCADA...or anything really.

Actually, it sounds like a nice list of reasons to avoid any software for mission critical applications.

Re:release the source?

[Richard_at_work]

It looks like some SCADA fanboi somewhere got some modpoints and modded me down on all my SCADA-negative comments....

Touched a nerve, did I?

Re:release the source?

[bryan1945]

It was a fad/meme here a while back. For some reason various people made it a cause to have citizens of the United States be called USians, because "Americans" should include everyone in both North and South America. Didn't last long, but it was annoying as there was at least one guy running through articles replying with "Don't you mean you're a USian?" Kind of like the guy you're replying to.

Re:release the source?

[bryan1945]

I'm sure Mexicans would be especially happy to hear this. Mexico City: "Hola, fellow American!"

Re:release the source?

[bryan1945]

I think they came up with a new term for flowchart because "flowchart" sounded to archaic. It's basically the same damn thing, but with buzzwords. Things like 'bond graphs.'

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell even RMS couldn't write his own kernel and you expect Joe average to pull off a major rewrite?

I'm gonna take issue with this. It's not that RMS couldn't write a kernel, it's partly that RMS went through a period of terrible carpal tunnel and had to become an administrator more than a coder, and partly that instead of writing a simple monolithic kernel, he tried to write a tricky cutting-edge microkernel when the principles of such were barely out of the early research stage. Then linux happened, HURD devteam drama happened, people left, other people came in and tried to figure out what was there, attempts were made to move to a different design, etc...

Re:release the source?

[bryan1945]

Gah, the worst part of a new project is the security review. List the many, many potential problems.... "But that really won't happen, right?" "We can fix that later." And as you said, "That costs too much." and etc until the end of time, just so it's cheaper, done faster, and more convenient for the bosses. And apparently risk analysis is always 'too picky.'

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, the system32 folder actually is the majority of working Windows XP.

The rest of it is mostly resources (fonts, bitmaps, etc...), stubs, and compressed duplicates of things already installed.

Re:release the source?

[DeadDecoy]

That is true, however, you don't need to understand all the millions of lines of code of the kernel in order to do development, just as you don't need to understand the complete implementation of the C library, or the Java runtime, in order to do desktop application development.

Probably not, but I wouldn't trust any line of code I write in a large complex system, without doing system-wide unit tests and real-world tests to ensure nothing broke. I think what some of the above posters are getting at is that system complexity, not kernel-coding complexity, prevents you from plugging any developer in to just patch things up. We don't view kernel coding in awe, we view the systems as a whole in awe as well as the developers who built it from the ground up, because it takes time, experience, and expertise, on par with being a trained surgeon WITH 30+ years of experience.

Re:release the source?

[JWallyR]

bitchslap the sweaty monkey with your solid diamond dildo until he agrees

I think I read that fanfiction too!

Re:release the source?

[mcgrew]

A "USian?" WTF is a (an?) "USian?"

It's a childish term for "American" that's used by bigoted morons who think they're smart. Morons, because there are TWO countries named the "United States." There is the United States of America, and the United States of Mexico. The American nation is on one of the two American continents, and two of the three North American countries are America and Mexico.

Re:release the source?

[hobarrera]

That's because a patch for security holes can be created equaly as fast; but more people dedicate themselves to fix rather than exploit.

Re:release the source?

[hobarrera]

I'm from Argentina, which is on America, and yes, this is the vision generally shared around here.

Re:release the source?

[Billly Gates]

If i had my life savings in a business with equipment costing up to $300,000 all backed by 20 year loans from the bank I would not run a freeware non supported operating system. I would run whatever the manufactur put on the controller computer and fire anyone who coughs near it and lock the bitch down tighter than a virgins ass.

ReactOS is simply not an option. Of course I wont throw out the $300,000 piece of equipment until my 20 year loan is done. ... and maybe keep it for 20 more years running XP?? I surely hope I could find hardware that can run that. I think XP embedded would be better as embedded hardware is supported for a very long time. Hell Intel just stopped making the 386 a year or two ago for embedded users.

If your shop had a piece of accounting software (assuming you were a CPA and not a computer shop) I am sure you would keep IE 6 and XP around too to run it and just use another browser to browse the web. It is cost efficient.

As much MS hatred there is here people like a supported OS that just works the drivers will work and even with ReactOS you can't be too sure GNU zealots wont force an abi to make sure all drivers are opensource like they did that killed Linux on the desktop.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

IBM provided fixpacks and support for OS/2 for a VERY long time. There's still an upgrade path w/ eComStation around.

Maybe the banks that migrated from OS/2 to XP are kicking themselves right about now.

Re:release the source?

[PoopMonkey]

Real programmers don't draw flowcharts. Flowcharts are, after all, the illiterate's form of documentation. Cavemen drew flowcharts; look how much it did for them.

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

Hey look, the hate appears again. Lies and bullshit all over the place, with haters to mod you up.

You HAVE the source for linux and still can't fix the driver issues that have plagued it to this very day!

What driver? Can you point to the one you're referring to?

Every forum, pick your distro, on EVERY upgrade gets "update foo broke" followed by a list of sometimes HUNDREDS of things!

Unsubstantiated HYPERBOLE!

Hell Dell has to run their own damned fork because even on the teeny tiny subset of devices they offer Linux on they STILL can't promise using the default repo some kernel dev won't get a bug in his ass and break shit.

More bullshit!

When you show me a SINGLE distro, just one mind you, that not using any tricks can be updated from...oh lets say the 2005 release to current with ZERO breakage then you will have a valid argument.

Not even Windows can do that, unless you don't touch a damn thing. If you use it, good fucking luck.

Now cue the batshit FOSSies that make the whole community look like nutters to call me a "dirty M$ Ninja robot poo poo head" and try to asspull some amazing excuse that handwaves the entire Linux drivers and docs issues away.

Oh, but if anyone calls you on your terrible, shitfilled rant then you're TOTALLY JUSTIFIED and RIGHT in your statements! You are immune to criticism and are always right!

No, sorry, you're full of shit and your arguments in this retarded little rant are utter and complete garbage.

I swear that while there are many in the FOSS community that is very intelligent and can do frankly amazing things with code the batshit loonie fringe just seems to get louder and more numerous as Linux rolls on.

And then you go off on idiotic rants like this that paint you as being an equally "batshit loonie."

Frankly I would laugh my ass off watching the community try to deal with the bazillion and one half ass hacked up drivers that run on XP.

Yeah, shitty drivers suck.

I bet trying to find really good coders that understand low level drivers and can truly get a handle on this giant ancient mess of code must be like trying to find heart surgeons willing to spend their days cleaning the shit out of impacted colons.

The vast majority of drivers involved in this shit isn't hard to maintain or work on, it's just closed source and run by companies completely unwilling to move out of their old, static business models.

But hey, we're letting reasonable discussion get in the way of RIDICULOUS HYPERBOLE AND A STREAM OF BULLSHIT!

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

Maybe you should pay for support?

People who are doing things as they will aren't likely to cater to your demands.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

True, but perhaps the manufacturer could switch to ReactOS with the selling point of fewer security bugs and long-term support. Unlikely, but at least it doesn't involve running an unsupported OS on your expensive equipment.

Re:release the source?

[Billly Gates]

You think they or myself would care for the $199 for XP Pro in that situation?

ReactOS is not supported anyway. There is no $100 an hour support line and people who the manufactor can call to come help me out with ReactOS. Don't touch it and pray it doesn't break is the best option.

I doubt some hobbyist will care about the drivers for my wierd PLC set of equipment.

Of course my case was extreme but many server apps rely on IE 6 for the client and these are expensive as well. These ASP and IE 6 browsers can't run on ReactOS. Large enterprises can not leave. There is no strategy regardless of cost if you are huge that wont throw you out of business if your workers can't get anything done for just a single day.

Re:release the source?

[geminidomino]

It's "American" applied through a "recto-cranial invasion" filter.

Re:release the source?

[TheDarkMaster]

Maybe. I also considered moving to libraries maintained by more professional developers, but the system functions that depend on them are not important enough to justify the extra cost . Given also the cost of migrating the code to use better (and paid) libraries, is better - at least for now - just do not try to update those that are in use.

Re:release the source?

[TheDarkMaster]

Good for you, but it is not my experience. Have you tried updating - in my most recent desktop case - the X server? I assumed I could, only do discover that I will need to update the whole distro and it would cause me a world of other issues. And a Windows 2000 (even XP) can function well as a server, if you just do not let a user using it as "desktop".

Re:release the source?

[CAIMLAS]

When you show me a SINGLE distro, just one mind you, that not using any tricks can be updated from...oh lets say the 2005 release to current with ZERO breakage then you will have a valid argument.

I have a machine at home which started it's second life in 2002 or so (P3 celeron 733MHz) as a Debian 2.0 box. It's now been upgraded (performed yesterday, a bit late) from that release up through Debian 6. This past update was done remotely, from 1800 miles away. I didn't think twice about rebooting it and expecting it to come back, and every package upgraded properly. There's a fair amount running on this machine, too: mysql, apache, virtualbox headless, and a handful of packages not installed via repository (via standalone deb). Basically, it's a cobbled mess of a machine, and I had no problems. Similarly, I had no problems with the 5 upgrade, and don't remember anything with the 4 upgrade, either: typically, if things get clobbered during an upgrade, I deem it time to wipe and reinstall (which is why I don't typically bother upgrading Windows at all, beyond minor updates).

Also, there's a crucial point you're missing: a linux distribution is a lot more than an OS. It's packages (You realize that I could (probably) update my kernel and base useland for quite some time without running into any sort of compatibility issues, I presume? ) Despite this difference, shit usually Just Works. For instance, for a closer analogy, you can upgrade FreeBSD (which includes all the base utilities) on major versions and still use the same ports tree, usually without any of those ports breaking. Even minor service patches or service packs usually break interoperability in Windows.

Re:release the source?

[aaarrrgggh]

DOS would have continued to run, but the issue was really the trend towards Wonderware/GUI type systems. The Windows path let companies upgrade the front end (to a point). Improved situational awareness through easy-to-understand graphics trumped knowledgeable workers with years of experience on using and operating a system.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are a few major SCADA vendors that have offerings running on Linux or BSD or any number of other things, but that really isn't the "problem" with the end of XP support; it's that the SCADA replacement cycles have little to no relation to Microsoft's release cycles (or anyone's, for that matter). Most of them are also run on engineering schedules, not IT ones, and engineers frankly do not care how old a system is as long as it behaves as expected. There are still PLCs being controlled by floppy-loaded DOS systems out there and I know of at least one electric utility that still runs their outage tracking system on a VAX.

I'm curious, have you had any of the NERC regulatory tendrils reaching into the environments you work with? I mostly work in bulk electric transmissions and the regulatory changes of the last few years have necessitated a large number of changes in our SCADA support model and purchasing decisions, principally with regard to how we're supposed to comply with the security patch regime, and the vendors have been less than cooperative as the SCADA end of their business isn't typically a profit center, it's something they do to get their big revenue industrial equipment in the door.

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

Exactly! Even becoming a good troubleshooter takes years of experience because one has to realize and follow a methodology that goes from the most basic to the most complex step by step by step, yet people think someone like me can just walk in to a broken network and magically flip a switch and instantly find which node has failed, what is causing a strain on the network, or where the bottlenecks are.

Now take that up to 11 with a system that is literally tens of thousands of times more complex, where thousands upon thousands of programs and subsystems are gonna be interacting with this code in ways most will have NEVER even thought about until the whole thing comes crashing down. i may disagree with a lot of the reasoning behind what Torvalds does as far as direction but I'd be the first one to say that he is one of only a handful ON THE ENTIRE PLANET that can do that particular job. you are talking about millions of lines of code in and of itself, not counting how all of that is gonna interaction with millions of lines of code that isn't under your control...wow. the mind boggles at how truly complex of a system we are talking about.

Which just makes what the FOSSies try to claim even more of a farce, that just because you have a "C for dummies" book and have written some little text editor you can then step into Torvalds shoes and actually maintain the Linux kernel AND create truly robust patches capable of plugging holes written by black hats AND do this without completely crippling the system. Again its source code and NOT pixie dust, one has to be intimately familiar with the material AND the interactions before even attempting such a delicate operation. And the whole "hire someone to do it" is even more of a farce because the handful of guys capable of doing that work can charge more than the most expensive lawyers and what's more they WILL get it, because THAT level of skill and experience is just as rare and just as highly prized as a top level brain surgeon!

But lets be honest swalve, its a total handwaving asspull is what it is. its a cheap totally bullshit excuse to handwave away those that point out that they have NO choice but to constantly deal with breakage because to keep a Linux system under support with the frankly insane pace of development you have to be dealing with upgrades pretty damned constantly. I mean look at what we have seen in just the last 3 years, the entire audio subsystem has been ripped out, both major DEs shitcanned and started over and a hell of a lot of the graphics and wireless subsystems are either being majorly overhauled or in the process of being replaced.

Having the code doesn't magically erase all that, nor does it give one the skills to magically fix all those system when a major change breaks something that was critical to you. this is even why companies that have large Linux webserver farms will have Windows on the desktop, because with ten years MINIMUM support you can deploy and then not worry about it until the hardware fails if you so desire. Just now am I seeing the great XP dieoff start to gain steam with tons of older P4s coming in as SMBs get new systems. hell the one i'm typing this on is a circa 2004 Sempron that was traded in that I decided to keep as a nettop and its still running the same XP that it was deployed with! That is over 8 years on the same OS with ZERO broken programs or drivers. frankly i would love the hell out of it if you could get that kind of time out of a Linux system but frankly if anything its going the other way, with length of support getting shorter for most distros. this is fine if your tme costs nothing and you enjoy tweaking and fiddling with the OS but if you need that machine to "just work' its a fricking nightmare.

Trying to say that doesn't matter just because you have the source code is like handing someone a pile of aluminum and saying that surely they can repair that busted 707, after all they have all the resources right there, right?

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

I'm typing this on a circa 2004 Sempron that was traded in by a customer that I decided to keep because it makes a great nettop. its the same install, that is 8 years with ZERO driver or program breakage. and nooo, it doesn't have any "super sekret magic invisible" malware because this customer followed my advice and practiced basic safe computing, like not downloading crap programs from dodgy sources or opening email attachements. So how much more solid do you need? I had a customer last week that JUST NOW retired his Win2K box, it was still running great but he finally replaced the program that was holding him onto XP. I built that box for him in Aug 2000 and the Win2K is STILL running, he just demoted it to being the controller for a laser cutter.

as a long term Linux advocate told me when I asked why he was going to buy a Mac "Its not getting better. things get 80% there and then someone gets an itch and its all thrown out and they start over, its just never getting any closer to finished" and sadly he is correct. I hate to wish ill on anyone and truly hope he lives a long life but i have a feeling that after Torvalds breathes his last they will quietly put in an ABI (because the religious argument doesn't hold as many ALREADY only offer binary blobs, so having a broken driver subsystem obviously isn't forcing them to follow the GPL way) and people will be amazed when so many problems just disappear. Until then I can say its just not a usable system for consumers, its just not there.

Re:release the source?

[Tubal-Cain]

Many of our systems do run Linux, but only because a consulting company is willing to fill that gap and assume the role of supplying custom fixes/patches while we wait for "official" ones to make it into the kernal. It's not that we have anything against the community, but frankly we need someone to take responsibility and to be held accountable for all aspects of our system.

You: We need this fixed
Open Source: Upgrade, or fix it yourself.
You: We can't afford to upgrade.
Open Source:Tough luck.
You start maintaining a patch while you work on an upgrade plan.

You: We need this fixed
Microsoft: Upgrade.
You:We can't afford to upgrade.
Microsoft: Tough luck.
You go without a patch until you manage to cough up the cash.

Re:release the source?

[epyT-R]

Generally, I agree with your position here. I don't advocate ripping out windows and replacing it with OSS, I advocate them designing their own minimalist system to suit their specific needs.. You don't want ANY code running on such hardware that doesn't need to be there. For stuff like this KISS is 'the' most effective way to prevent unexpected behavior.

When it comes to things like power plants, if the code is to stay closed and only rarely looked over/maintained, then at least have the brains to keep the control system network off the fucking internet, even if it means the big shots can't monitor their plants from home. Every link should be using some kind of crypto as though it IS on a public net...and the whole system should not be based on some stripped version of a consumer desktop operating system that was never intended to be that secure in the first place. Idiocy like this is how shit gets hacked. I realize the platform is popular, but it's riddled with security issues that are well known and have been for years. You want to talk about people dying?? security issues at a power plant will cause that when some asshole on the internet decides to michael bay a 300kV power transformer for 'teh luls'..

It is irrelevant how much microsoft may or may not have improved their patching process.. if their internal practices were better and their code didn't have to support 15 year old platforms, there wouldn't BE that much to patch in the first place. I don't blame microsoft in this case, I blame whoever made the choice to use their product in sensitive applications like industrial control systems.

As far as control software goes in general, I think it's a good idea to have the source available as well as the ability to at least verify what's running on the chip is what you have in source. Taking your car example, these days politicians and car manufacturers are using computer software to insert their hands between you and the equipment you own/are responsible for. This can result in annoyances (eg inability to self service) to serious safety issues (eg funky electronic throttles), that said manufacturers will just deny exist until forced to by lawsuits. While this might sound like a system with a natural limiter, it's not because the limiter only works on trends.. if the problem exists on some $20k+ can and it only affects a few people, and one of those people is you, then what do you do? well if you have the code, you at least have the option of fixing it yourself (or hiring someone to do it), AND, most importantly, it can be verified by outside sources whether the problem exists in the first place.

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

Oh look, you decided to continue threadshitting. One vague response to another.

But here is why i get so much hatred from the loonie section of the FOSS gallery, because i speak for the consumers.

No you don't.

now if YOU, a qualified admin with i'm sure years of experience, can't upgrade because the breakage would cost too much downtime and loss of functionality....what about the consumers who don't have your skillset?

Aside from vague accusations of "breakage" (you're always vague in your FUD), what specific problems have you encountered? What mission critical systems are you running that need to constantly be upgraded in ways that risk breakage? Why are you not following proper procedure before upgrades and putting production hardware at risk?

what about the consumers who don't have your skillset? who in the FOSS community speaks for them? sadly nobody which is why i get such hate.

Because you're bullshitting and ignoring the obvious problem of the fact that the platform would need someone to invest time and attention into a solution that works best for those users, but it's pointless with the Microsoft and Apple duopoly in the desktop space. It's just not worth it.

To steal a line from FMJ the FOSSie section has completely deluded themselves into thinking "Inside every Suzy the checkout girl is a C coder or Bash programmer just waiting to get out!" and that is complete and total horseshit.

Yeah, but you're the only person I see making that statement and losing your shit over it.

The average consumer, the ones they will HAVE TO GET if they are gonna ever end up anything more than a geeker toy like Haiku,1.- simply do NOT have the skillset to do a step by step troubleshoot, 2.- many do NOT have a completely separate computer (which would have to be running Windows or OSX if you think this thing through logically, because if say the upgrade from Ubuntu leapin Lizard to maniac monkey broke one computer it can just as easily break two) with which to "Google for fixes" for when the upgrade craps all over them, 3.-Do NOT have the intimate knowledge required to even hunt the forums for fixes, because thanks to Torvalds unstable as hell driver model you often have to be VERY specific when it comes to make/rev/firmware of the device broken, and finally 4.-Do NOT have the ability to dissect the code that is given to them because unlike the total lie the crazy section pushes you often HAVE to "tweak" said fixes because they were written for hardware A, rev B, firmware C and you have hardware C, rev G, firmware R and again the slightest thing off and it isn't gonna do shit! Hell a single spelling error or not starting or ending the copypasta in just the perfect spot can shit all over the thing!

Hey look, it's hairyfeet stating the obvious in a way to spread the most FUD he can. That and spread more insane FOSS hatred around.

So I'm sorry but Linux is completely unusable by a good 90% of the population.

Sorry, this is yet another unsubstantiated statement backed only by your mad ranting and no hard evidence.

i often get bitched at by the FOSSies because i refuse to carry their product in my shop

Well, it's a good thing FOSS doesn't need a shop to carry it.

but the only damned way their OS will "work" is if I give away free lifetime support AND keep a bunch of spares on hand so they can have a loaner while i wait the sometimes two weeks or more before a fix to a particular piece of hardware is even released!

Hey look, someone runs a worthless computer shop. But of course you'd be a paragon, a veritable font of knowledge regarding Linux and FOSS as a whole. Or maybe you're just a crazed troll.

And I apologize for the length but i'm jus

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

So it looks like hairyfeet and TheDarkMaster decided to tag-team on the FUD.

And these libraries can not completely change their function calls every 3 months.

Thankfully, they don't!

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

Have you tried updating - in my most recent desktop case - the X server?

Why? Did you have a good reason to?

I assumed I could, only do discover that I will need to update the whole distro and it would cause me a world of other issues.

Right, which is why you don't generally fuck with the core libraries of the system unless you absolutely have to and are willing to deal with the resulting conflicts. Care to mention why you felt the need to upgrade the X server, and how you decided to try doing so?

Cause I know you can't arbitrarily upgrade random core components in Windows.

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

I'm typing this on a circa 2004 Sempron that was traded in by a customer that I decided to keep because it makes a great nettop. its the same install, that is 8 years with ZERO driver or program breakage. and nooo, it doesn't have any "super sekret magic invisible" malware because this customer followed my advice and practiced basic safe computing, like not downloading crap programs from dodgy sources or opening email attachements. So how much more solid do you need?

Who the fuck are you replying to? TheDarkMaster is practically fellating you.

as a long term Linux advocate told me when I asked why he was going to buy a Mac "Its not getting better. things get 80% there and then someone gets an itch and its all thrown out and they start over, its just never getting any closer to finished" and sadly he is correct.

Unsubstantiated FUD that is at best hearsay.

I hate to wish ill on anyone and truly hope he lives a long life but i have a feeling that after Torvalds breathes his last

Except you wish ill on Torvalds, apparently. Cause you don't express regret at doing something... unless you're gonna do it.

they will quietly put in an ABI (because the religious argument doesn't hold as many ALREADY only offer binary blobs, so having a broken driver subsystem obviously isn't forcing them to follow the GPL way) and people will be amazed when so many problems just disappear. Until then I can say its just not a usable system for consumers, its just not there.

Problems won't disappear. Like now with the closed drivers, the problems will continue to exist and just be unfixable.

Re:release the source?

[bigtrike]

Basing such a system on so many systems with single points of failure which aren't designed to be fault tolerant seems kind of insane. There's a reason why your ECU isn't running on top of Windows.

Re:release the source?

[TheDarkMaster]

Oh, really? I see you are unable to see my point. You worry too much about the literal meaning of what I wrote and less than it should with what I wanted to pass when writing (and worst, english is too simple to express a complex idea).

But since I see that you need an explanation simple and direct, I live having problems with libraries that change the way they work (breaking that depends on them) or the new version nows depend on obscure libraries (many betas, or even alphas) that seems that only the developer of then can make it work. And this is FUD? Only in your planet I think.

Re:release the source?

[thegarbz]

That doesn't mean it's secure. The Stuxnet systems weren't connected to the internet either. Yet SCADA systems do need some form of external access, and in the modern case this is via USB or CDR.

Re:release the source?

[thegarbz]

I would question the need to have support for the OS at all. Physical isolation of a SCADA system combined with limited access control and procedures should be more than plenty to keep people out of a system. That and changing default passwords would help a lot too. I'm still amazed stuxnet worked at all given the number of variables and possible ways it could have gone wrong.

One way or the other you'd nearly always be relying on an inside job from some expert to infect a SCADA system that is properly isolated. ... Alas many aren't.

Re:release the source?

[petit_robert]

"The key problem here is that Windows and Microsoft products generally violate one of the main design principles of an appliance. It should not need constant maintenance and babysitting. You should be able to deploy it and ignore it without worrying that it will be a threat to self and others."

I happen to think this is precisely the reason why it spread.

Because it serves the interest of executives/management types at large, who actually benefit from increasing complexity : it shields them from responsability, while allowing them to claim more management fees.

What the fabulous achievements of open source(*) have shown is that management is not only surperfluous, it is detrimental to the success of large scale complex projects. And I believe the latter (management) will in the future be replaced by the former (open source software) for the structure of large organizations.

I realize it may take some time and meet some resistance.

(* : meaning vastly superior software compared to proprietary)

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

I see you are unable to see my point.

You didn't make one. You spouted some vague accusation and moved on, requiring us to implicitly accept that you are somehow right.

I live having problems with libraries that change the way they work (breaking that depends on them)

Libraries generally don't change on a whim, unless you're pulling the sources from trunk and building them manually.

or the new version nows depend on obscure libraries (many betas, or even alphas) that seems that only the developer of then can make it work.

Can you even cite one example of this, since you apparently run across it so frequently?

And this is FUD? Only in your planet I think.

It's FUD because I hear very general, vague statements that try to cast a shadow over the use of FOSS projects, but not once have I seen you present a concrete example of the problem you're describing.

Re:release the source?

[TheDarkMaster]

FOSS projects already have a "shadow", I do not "need" to add another one. Okay, examples? My most recent is the iText (Java, for creating PDFs). I uses the version 2.0.8 and can't upgrade to, for example, 2.1 or maybe the most recent. Why? Because then changes a lot the way to make a PDF, breaking my actual code in a extensive way, I will need to rewrite a somewhat big report generator to be able to upgrade. And rewrites costs money and time.

And some days ago, I tried to upgrade my Pidgin IM. To discover that I will need to, more or less, upgrade the entire Gnome library base. A difficult thing on Slackware, many because the use of beta libraries by Pidgin itself or library dependences, or the "lib Hell" (analogous to the Windows "DLL Hell"). The problems grows like a rolling snow ball.

Well, I can simply upgrade the Slackware distro, right? No so right... I will break the OTHERS systems (yep, I tried). Is like try to push one card from a castle of cards.

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

Oh look, its a FOSSie, aka basement troll. How's the koolaid, is it cherry? You want some links on breakage? be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it and that is showing that one of the largest OEMs on the planet can't keep your craptastic OS running without having to do their own fricking fork!

This is why a decade old Windows beat the shit out of Linux on netbooks or how ASUS has given up on your bullshit or how about Walmart running away from linux as fast as it can? want some more? Nice thing about having the truth on your side instead of religious dogma, i can do this alllll day long! How about you actually have the balls to celebrate getting a whole 1% market share while you are actually lower than JavaME and there is a whole website dedicated To your bullshit and excuses

And how about that "great" Linux security that is supposed to be why we should put up with all this horseshit? Get ready, here they come! Kinda makes that koolaid just a little bitter now, don't it? Now why would anybody care when they could get a Mac or Win 7 and not deal with all this lies and horseshit?

BTW if you'd like a little more food for thought, what OS was 3 of the 4 CAs running that were compromised? take a look and see. Maybe they just had bad configs? Surely someone with knowledge would be safe right? Guess again and its not a fluke by any means.

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

you forgot one- ms licences code from hundreds of vendors and has non-disclosure agreements

Re:release the source?

[Microlith]

Oh look, its a FOSSie, aka basement troll. How's the koolaid, is it cherry?

Quick! Resort to the ad-hominem because you have nothing else!

be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it and that is showing that one of the largest OEMs on the planet can't keep your craptastic OS running without having to do their own fricking fork!

Ah yes, Dell fails completely to supply proper drivers for their hardware when shipping an OS and it's the OS's fault. Not that the GPU in the system uses a closed driver and Dell completely forgot to include it in the platform.

This is why a decade old Windows beat the shit out of Linux on netbooks

And Microsoft placed a lot of unilateral restrictions on what could be put on netbooks. Never mind that Microsoft is a monopoly and is guaranteed to sell. But again, ASUS did a shit job setting up Linux on their netbooks and as a result it ran like crap.

Nice thing about having the truth on your side instead of religious dogma, i can do this alllll day long!

Nah, you can just post to weak articles about incompetent vendors not doing for Linux what they do for Windows, and being shocked when it fails. Just like when they all get schooled in the mobile space by Apple.

And how about that "great" Linux security that is supposed to be why we should put up with all this horseshit? Get ready, here they come!

Fucking troll.

2005-02-16
2006-03-28
2011-10-06

Is someone paying you to post this ancient crap?

Kinda makes that koolaid just a little bitter now, don't it?

No, it just reveals you for the idiot you are.

BTW if you'd like a little more food for thought, what OS was 3 of the 4 CAs running that were compromised? take a look and see. Maybe they just had bad configs?

Or there was a zero day security flaw. Those exist for your beloved Windows and OS X as well. They are all eventually patched, and as we know security is a Process and not a product.

But no, you aren't here to post reasonable things. You're here to post hate and FUD.

Re:release the source?

[hairyfeet]

See this is why I love LMAO at the FOSSies, they are so "There is but one true god!" they can't even think, like how you at the very first sentence threw an insult and then dared to get butthurt when i slapped your dumb ass down.

You want some fresh bitch slapping? Be careful what you wish for FOSSie, how about a nice kernel exploit? Or how about the guy that wrote EEEBuntu saying Ubuntu sucks which considering they are the current savior of Linux kinda tells you something. But why don't you say "Use Distro X" and then have the balls to name the X so i can show its just as big a POS, huh? As for why the older ones? frankly everyone has stop giving a fuck about your OS, you aren't even newsworthy anymore really. Now its all Win 7&8, OSX&iOS, and of course Android which just shows what happens when a company bitch slaps the community and takes it away from them, why it actually fucking runs!

How sad that even with a bug spreading through OSX there are writers pointing out that's no reason to torture yourself with Linux , after all even a virus ridden OSX actually runs which is more than most distros LOL! But hey, you can always tell them they can fix it otherwise they don't need that right? LOL! And I noticed you just couldn't fricking resist screaming "Nigger!" which in FOSSie is done by screaming PaidMicrosoftShill, hey you think you could throw in one more FOSSie cliche please? Then I'll have a FOSSie Flush ROFL!

But if you didn't have cliches and your pathetic attempts at insults why then you might have to have an independent thought and realize what everybody knows that even when MSFT put out a universally reviled OS you STILL got curb stomped, does that give you ANY clues? or all they all brainwashed by those black choppers that have been following you? Hell when the Chinese were given the choice of your "free OS" or pirating Windows they chose the latter even if it meant staying on XP and using IE fricking 6, LOL! Does that ring ANY bells? A smart person would say "what are we doing wrong the other guy is doing right?" but a FOSSie who is just like a Moonie in that they blindly follow, instead says "Its all a conspiracy! They are all shills keeping the masses from true salvation!" and then you wonder why we all laugh at you because you DON'T Listen, you DON'T learn, and Torvalds could take a big steaming dump and hand it to you and you'd thank him for his generous gift. So enjoy that fresh bitchslapping loony, enjoy the fact that the world really doesn't care...but I do, I enjoy slapping you, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Oh and Microsoft doesn't need shills, they have YOU. Its batshit loony tunes like YOU that make the entire community look like retarded basement trolls, its YOU that gives everyone the fodder for all the "Linux is for lusers" jokes, because you sound like a religious whacko. Frankly all any Microsoft or Apple rep has to do is show posts like yours and say 'you would want you company de

Re:release the source?

[Anonymous Coward]

When Visa was released, I was fixing Laptops by back-reving them to XP.
Me? I back reved my desktop to w2k adv serv.

I have ... source code. Dont you?

Re:release the source?

[funky_vibes]

When you show me a SINGLE distro, just one mind you, that not using any tricks can be updated from...oh lets say the 2005 release to current with ZERO breakage then you will have a valid argument.

Do you mean to imply that this is possible to accomplish, with any currently popular OS apart from Linux distros?

But since you asked, I can give you one, Gentoo.
I have boxes that automatically update fine since around a decade back, and they have always contained up to date versions of a huge amount of the currently most popular software, although they barely have enough hdd space now...

The Linux distro update fiasco you speak of; I believe it is entirely a consequence of having binary packages. Just see how many FOSS projects guarantee binary compatibility, and you will get the picture of why it's a bad idea.

Re:release the source?

[sourcerror]

, the more distant the fork gets and the less the main branch followers want to help you.

So what? You won't get the latest video drivers for your dialysis machine?

Support?

[arisvega]

When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP in two years it will effectively leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks

I can't say I'm going to miss Microsoft XP support.

I can't say I 've ever had Microsoft XP support, either-

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

So you are still running Windows XP RTM with no security upgrades? Good luck with that.

Re:Support?

[mug funky]

maybe you should have paid for your copy?

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

>>maybe you should have paid for your copy?

Oh I tried. Microsoft, however, would not sell me a copy. They only sell licenses.

Re:Support?

[thegarbz]

Never found the time. Maybe in 2 yea... oh wait.

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

No? I had a very nice man from Microsoft call me yesterday. He explained that they'd seen a virus coming from my system and showed lots of errors in my logs. He recommended some software which would clear it all up. Only cost $49.99 too.

Re:Support?

[tehcyder]

>>maybe you should have paid for your copy?

Oh I tried. Microsoft, however, would not sell me a copy. They only sell licenses.

I thought that software isn't the same as a tangible physical object? So if you can't steal it, how can you own it?

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you ever applied an update to an XP machine to patch a vuln?

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is you don't even own the copy you have. You CAN steal a non-physical object, it's just that copying ISN'T stealing. I can TAKE your copy, that's stealing.

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

So you are the one who never updates their computer? No SP3, no critical updates, unpatched IE6...

Re:Support?

[Trogre]

I have. They keep ringing me and kindly telling me how to remove viruses from my computer by giving them RDP access.

Though they usually hang up after I tell them that XFCE doesn't have a Start button.

Re:Support?

[Anonymous Coward]

Their support often consists of "Yes, we know about that fault, no we're not going to fix it. reinstall."

Non issue

[Anonymous Coward]

in 2014, anyone will have had a decade for the switch to Vista, and 5 years for win7. If I was concerned about security support form MS, I wouldn't complain about being able to use a decade+ old OS (let alone 13 years old when support ends) in the modern wild.

TL;DR: Need better stories /.

Re:Non issue

[Anonymous Coward]

My Netbook came with XP installed in 2009. I believe new computers were still being sold with XP for a year or more after that?

Re:Non issue

[Anonymous Coward]

My laboratory acquisition system runs on old legacy drivers from NI and drivers provided by the system vendor. While NI does a semi-decent job keeping stuff going in terms of support, the vendor flat out refused to update the drivers to work under Vista/7. Claims we need to replace a significant chunk of the setup (the bill would have 4 digits for a single workstation). Sometimes, upgrade is just not an option. We will probably end up plugging the machines into a separate local LAN, at the small cost of the loss of any remote work capqbilities.

Re:Non issue

[Bert64]

Irresponsible of them to create such a system on a general purpose third party and closed source os...
It should be running on an embedded device, where they control the entire software stack. And you should have taken that into account before you bought the device... Far too much short term thinking.

Re:Non issue

[rjstanford]

And the device might have cost 3X the price of the original - in a market where people won't pay 1.n X the price to buy the original and then upgrade it later.

That's the kind of thinking that's often a) 100% accurate, and b) completely impractical if you want to still be giving paychecks to your employees next month.

Re:Non issue

[flappinbooger]

in 2014, anyone will have had a decade for the switch to Vista, and 5 years for win7. If I was concerned about security support form MS, I wouldn't complain about being able to use a decade+ old OS (let alone 13 years old when support ends) in the modern wild.

TL;DR: Need better stories /.

Seriously, there WILL be millions still with XP in 2014. It will be a free-for-all for at least 6 months and it will be on "the news".

Until the typical user doesn't think his browser is "windows" and swear they "just bought the thing, how can I need a new one" when it plainly says Packard Bell on the front, don't assume this is not going to be a problem.

I've served my time, the foot pedal / cup holder jokes are only funny until you meet the user they are based on.

Re:Non issue

[swalve]

The problem is that they probably DID pay 3x the cost of the original. I see lots of HP Vectras and Dell Optiplexes hooked up to $100,000 lab devices, where they paid $10,000 for the damned computer.

Re:Non issue

[operagost]

Seems to me that configuring a local firewall to default-deny for both incoming and outgoing, and only allowing network access to authorized hosts would take a little more work but be a lot more convenient for the users.

Re:Non issue

[Belial6]

You count the age of an OS from the last date of sale. Not the first. So, for many people, in 2014, the OS will only be 5 years old.

5 years seems like a reasonable cutoff point for supporting an OS that has had 2 new versions, but lets be honest about the OS's age.

Cutting the chord

[Anonymous Coward]

About time. XP default sounds suck.

Re:Cutting the chord

[Anonymous Coward]

Not always. Sometimes, DJ's can work magic: the Windows song.

Re:Cutting the chord

[operagost]

Not much proofreading going on at Network World, huh? I also found the new phrase "hey-dey". What the heck is a "dey"?

Alternative title?

[EnempE]

Nothing to worry about, yet...

Companies have two years to upgrade from software that is more than ten years old or install a firewall on systems in industrial networks.

Re:Alternative title?

[AmiMoJo]

To Slashdot editors: please, FFS, can we just have some news without the heavy bias and inflammatory commentary? That's what comments are for. We can't mod stories as "flamebait".

Re:Alternative title?

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess what has even longer support... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_Embedded#Windows_XP_Embedded

Re:Alternative title?

[Bert64]

Installing a firewall is not a sensible answer, it's just hiding the problem... Sooner or later there will be a pinhole breach through the firewall wether it be removable media, vulnerable clients, a vulnerable service that is explicitly let through etc. Once that happens, all the easily exploitable machines inside become easy fodder...

There have been many documented cases of old worms getting into a network of never-patched boxes which is just hidden away from the world, and causing absolute chaos.

Re:Alternative title?

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that installing a firewall for a company with XP systems is like installing a gate to keep leaves from landing in your yard? People will walk in and out of your network with infected laptops,a nd once any zombied host is inside your network, it can reach back through normal web traffic to get updates, control signals, and new tools to hack the rest of your network.

Fools that think "hey, we can just install a firewall!" help pay my salary cleaning up after the mess.

Re:Alternative title?

[operagost]

It's trivial to configure Windows to disallow the use of removable media. In addition, if you set default-deny on all incoming and outgoing connections, you're only in trouble if you don't keep the presumably still-supported hosts that client trusts protected.

Re:Alternative title?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or you know, adobe flash and fucking java like it always is.

Re:Alternative title?

[ColdWetDog]

Guess what has even longer support... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_Embedded#Windows_XP_Embedded

Most assuredly . Has anyone ever seen a Windows XP embedded system actually upgraded? (Stares at GE portable Ultrasound purchased in 2006 with 'copyright 1997-2001' splashed everywhere.)

Anyone?

Does it really make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost nobody ever runs Windows Update on those old SCADA machines anyway, I don't really think this is such a big deal.

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[1u3hr]

I've been running several XP laptops for years without any upgrades. Just use a third party firewall, and never use IE or Outlook.When I set up for relatives, I added Avast free antivirus.No problems. Anyone corporate will just throw away an old PC. If it's something embedded, they'll have it behind layers of security. MS patches are reactive anyway, if you depended on them you'd have been fucked long ago.

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

So how do you handle code execution vulnerabilities in other software that can leverage privilege escalation bugs in the OS that have been fixed for years?

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost nobody ever runs Windows Update on those old SCADA machines anyway, I don't really think this is such a big deal.

And 90% of the time those SCADA systems are on private networks anyway, not open to the Internet. Generally SCADA systems monitor infrastructure and machinery that is far too valuable to not secure it properly.

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whats the big deal with unplugging the internet from these Scada machines either? This is a non-story.

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[FlynnMP3]

If it's something embedded, they'll have it behind layers of security.

I take umbrage at this statement. It is never wise to assume anything when it comes to security. And if you've been following the articles related to SCADA systems and industrial security that have been popping up lately, it is obvious that the industrial controls market somehow thinks that *their* systems will never get a virus anyway. With the latest crop of SCADA software touting Cloud Storage/Control and Mobile Access as the latest and greatest _must have_ features, security will be more of a concern than ever.

My opinion here, but anybody that wants cloud control for industrial systems should be hung by their balls and hit in the head with a shovel. It's a stupid idea and fraught with problems. Cloud data storage - not so bad, but still a gateway for countless future problems.

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost nobody ever runs Windows Update on those old SCADA machines anyway, I don't really think this is such a big deal.

I guess you've never heard of Stuxnet?

Re:Does it really make a difference?

[1u3hr]

I take umbrage at this statement

Okay, make it "they should have it behind layers of security". If they don't, well, in your words, they should be hung by their balls and hit in the head with a shovel. Lets just hope it's embarrassing rather than catastrophic when the shit hits the fan.

Cloud storage and control? Good God, do they realise that the "cloud" includes North Korea, Beijing, Kiev, Lagos, Baghdad....

And they do it 100 yrs after Titanic sinks, hmmm..

[Anonymous Coward]

You just have to wonder if its more than coincidence that this gets announced on the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic. Coincidence??? Hmmm...

Well...

[Aphrika]

...that's two years to do something about it. What does everyone expect; Microsoft to support it forever?

14 years of support seems pretty generous - I mean how many versions of OS do Apple currently support? Certainly not all the way back to OS X 10.0. I'm also sure that a lot of those embedded and industrial systems will be updated before then. That's more the job of the manufacturers than Microsoft.

Re:Well...

[Darinbob]

Computers last longer than 2 years. And Windows 7 does not run on older computers very well, it's a memory hog. Plus if you bought your computer with XP you will need to pay a hefty fee to buy Windows 7.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Computers last longer than 2 years.

And so did XP: it has been around since 2001. That means when the deadline hits it'll have been around for 13 years.

At the end of the day, if you don't want to be forced into upgrading your systems someday then don't base critical hardware around something which someone else controls and is known to make redundant now and again. "But it's cheaper to buy someone else's solution than develop your own!". Yeah, it is, but the tradeoff is that you're at the mercy of their update and redundancy schedule. Businesses should have taken the longevity of the systems into account before they bought it and planned accordingly: it's no secret at all that this sort of thing happens.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, I've used it at one of our office buildings and it was definitely a big step back from Windows XP in terms of usability. And Windows 8 doesn't look very promising either. If they can make Windows 9 less resource intensive and a return to Windows XP in terms of interface then I'll switch. If not, I'll stick to Windows XP until the first major worm makes it impossible to have it connected to the internet. I don't know what I'll do then, but unless Microsoft changes direction radically even Linux might be a better solution than upgrading to a newer version of Windows.

Re:Well...

[mug funky]

though i agree, there's programs i use which still do not work properly on anything else, or if they do, features (like playback through an archaic MPEG-2 decoder card) certainly do not.

i can _almost_ get some of these things to work in wine, but not enough to be able to use them for work.

maybe it means running a sandboxed machine and a connected machine in tandem? still more pain in the arse than just continuing with XP.

or MS could iron out some kinks, but where's the motivation for them to wrestle their code to run with obsolete software/abandonware when nobody's going to pay them for it?

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

"even"? While I agree with you that every version of Microsoft's OS gets a bit worse you just sound resistant to change. GNU/Linux is a hell of a lot better.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

My iPhone 3G was less than 3 years old before apple stopped support. Can no longer update the os so am stuck on an unsupported os.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

I can answer that for you. All the way back to Snow Leopard. I am still running Leopard on my first gen. MBP and it did not get the Java update that plugs the hole which Flashback is exploiting. Apple is really doing itself a disservice here, having more infected systems in the wild and losing it's reputation of offering a more secure computing experience for the end-user. Which has been really only been dumb luck for them, seeing how the respond to published vulnerabilities in their systems.

Re:Well...

[arbiter1]

yea apple gives like 1 year support for stuff, look powerpc chip, after switch to intel they made 1 more os x for it then cut it off. they make ppl buy new stuff but that is apple fanboyz for ya. fact MS supported xp this long is generous of them as they probably been losing money on it for least 5-6 years.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll stick to Windows XP until the first major worm makes it impossible to have it connected to the internet.

That's only 2 years from now.

Re:Well...

[dbet]

Apple is a bit of a different situation. 10.6 and 10.7 were both $30.

Re:Well...

[mikael_j]

Leopard (10.5) was released in 2007, Snow Leopard (10.6) was released in 2009. Lion (10.7) which is the current version of OS X was released in 2011.

Now, compared to Microsoft's support this isn't very good (after all, 2007 is only five years ago) but at the same time I've noticed that compared to the Windows users I interact with most Mac users are a lot more willing to keep software up-to-date, I don't know anyone still running Leopard (IRL, not ACs on /.) but I can name a few people who insist that Windows 98 is "good enough" and plenty who stubbornly refuse to upgrade from Windows XP.

By comparison, how many Linux desktop users do you know who still run Red Hat Linux 7.1 or Debian 3.0? How about FreeBSD 4.4? Maybe the problem is more with the users than the manufacturer...

Re:Well...

[fearlezz]

I agree, the 14 years was pretty generous.
When XP was originally released, I was running some SuSE 7.x version. The first 7.x version was released in september 2000. The last 7.x version went end-of-life in december 2003, meaning a support span of 3 years and 3 months. Fedora has something like a thirteen month support span, depending on the release date of version x+2. Only RHEL appears to be supported for 10 years.

There is one big difference: all Linux distros release a new version every 1-2 years. The next windows release took 6 years, but the next windows release that was really usable in companies took a few years more.

Re:Well...

[Cimexus]

Price has a lot to do with it. Mac OS upgrades are on the order of $30. Linux is free. A new copy of Windows costs significantly more (even if just an OEM copy).

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

What does everyone expect; Microsoft to support it forever?

No. Instead, they could allow someone else to support it - by releasing the source code. Being able to forcibly obsolete your product by withdrawing support is not something that copyright law was intended to protect.

Re:Well...

[jones_supa]

But it runs slower and has more bugs.

Re:Well...

[thegarbz]

I'm also sure that a lot of those embedded and industrial systems will be updated before then.

I'm very sure a lot of those WON'T be upgraded. Those that do need to pass several barriers:

1. Manufacturer needs to provide an updated system.
2. The system needs to be able to be taken down for maintenance. I know some industrial plants have an 8 year maintenance shutdown cycle.
3a. You need the motivation to upgrade. Security holes in an OS is not motivation, the vendor will have to EOL the entire system before most people will move.
3b. If the entire system isn't EOL'ed the vendor will need to provide an OS / interface update for their existing system. Seeing a vendor provide a partial update like this is rarer than rockinghorse poo. Assuming they have the motivation and capability to do it, some systems need to pass certification as well which they often don't think is a justifiable expense.
4. Speaking of justifiable expense an upgrade like this would involve stripping all I/O out of the old control system, replacing the system itself, recommissioning and loop checking, and then testing the software. Often the time constraints for such an activity is measured in days not weeks. It's a big and very labour intensive job, not to mention expenses will run in the hundreds of thousands. That's a LOT of money for maintaining the status quo.

Basically I guarantee there'll be plenty of embedded and industrial systems running on Windows XP for many years to come. How do I know? Well currently there are plenty of embedded and industrial systems running on Windows NT4 as well. We have about 8 such systems at our plant. One of them at least gets upgraded "soon". Windows NT4 was EOLed in 2004, the PLC was EOL'ed in 2007, we received approval from the corporate bigwigs for the upgrade last year, and the next scheduled shutdown is 2017. Fun fact, we buy old PCs capable of running Windows NT4 from our employees and have about 10 of them in storage, just in case.

Although it could be worse, one plant in my city runs a PLC from the same vendor as the one above which is a version older still. Their attached PCs run DOS.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

My MacBook Air which I bought a year + 4 months ago, will be less than two years old when 10.8 comes out. And will cease getting security updates because it's running 10.6. This is completely unacceptable, especially since I paid for three years AppleCare at the same time.

Of course it will actually get software updates because by that stage it will be running Ubuntu (or possibly Windows 7).

As a result it will be the last Mac I buy. I actually bought my first PC a couple of months ago, having previously exclusively bought Macs since 2002.

Bye Apple.

Re:Well...

[Minupla]

This is why most security folks highly recommend SCADA and industrial control systems be put on an isolated network with an air gap. Typically these systems have a limited need to read /. And absent Bruce Schneier deciding to hack your plant, you're pretty safe if you got nothing connecting the SCADA/industrial control system to an external network. Remote maint can be a pain, but these things can be worked around. My suggestion is a firewalled PC running a supported OS and all the latest shots and such that you can set up a g2m on and is only plugged into the SCADA/industrial control system network during maint (which as you rightly point out is infrequent) and has cross card routing disabled.

Again, not proof against Bruce in a bad mood, but mere mortals will find it hard to crack :)

Min

Re:Well...

[MDillenbeck]

14 years of support is generous, but I think Microsoft is missing the point - there is an opportunity here to make money. They should calculate the cost of continuing to support the product, figure out what they want their margin to be, then crunch the numbers to see where supply and demand intersect to meet that income. Basic capitalism - there sound like their is a market, so try it out for a year. For anyone who wants to continue to use XP and wishes to continue receiving patches and updates for it, they can pay for the service, and for those that don't? Well, that is their choice. If the numbers predicted fall well below the numbers of expected, then they have an argument that it is unreasonable to continue supporting a 'legacy' product.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

The 'slower' depends on your configuration...I've run an OpenBox based setup on a 133MHz box with 64MB of RAM...try getting XP to run smoothly on that! True, KDE4 with too many transparent animated moving plasmoids (my current setup :-D) is slower than XP, but it's still about the same as Vista/7 and better.

Bugs too, (K)ubuntu seems awful atm, Debian are pretty good at finding them. It's not as if Windows is perfect...

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have 7 running on an eight year old machine and it runs like a champ. So I guess that makes you wrong.

Re:Well...

[dave420]

Windows 7 runs rather well on older hardware.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Windows XP has fewer core process dependencies and does actually have less bugs than Vista 7 8.

Re:Well...

[drinkypoo]

I mean how many versions of OS do Apple currently support? Certainly not all the way back to OS X 10.0.

Piss on Apple. When Solaris 2.5.x was out you could still get support for SunOS 4.1.4. That's many versions into a major version upgrade. PC companies like Microsoft don't even know the meaning of support. (And now Sun's hosed since Oracle thinks it means only "earning opportunity")

Re:Well...

[w_dragon]

They almost certainly ran the numbers, and came to the conclusion that the higher returns are in having developers work on new versions, rather than keep working on security patches for old ones. Oracle plays the 'pay us more every year to keep using the old version' game. The amount you have to pay them goes up very, very quickly. A large company could afford an extra year, maybe 2, but after that you'll find yourself paying more to keep using something out of date than you do for the yearly license (which you're still paying).

Re:Well...

[rjstanford]

Makes you wonder if they might have done just that?

Re:Well...

[rjstanford]

Yup. Of course, you had to pay for it. Apple would rather have you pay $30 for an OS update than thousands of dollars a month for a support and maintenance contract. But hey, that's the difference between building primarily workstation-focussed products and primarily server products (and yes, I know that Sun made workstations too).

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Given that XP had a finite number of bugs to start with, and that they've been fixing bugs for 14 years, they must be close to the bottom of the barrel now, so *yes*, it's not much to expect to have "infinite" support since the support work decreases each year and it'll be over one day when the last bug is fixed.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

What this news mean is:
-its time to buy! New ver. of Windows, maybe Vista than.. :).
-or set up all your data externally and go for open software like linux,
Saying this im pretty happy with my Win7.
And im OK with my old WinXP.

Re:Well...

[Dcnjoe60]

14 years isn't generous if you still use the device. There are still cars on the road from the 80s and 90s and they are still subject to safety recalls, even though they are 20 years old. If the computer running Windows XP had a power supply that was found to cause electric shock, don't you think that Dell or whoever made it would have to replace it? Why would the operating system not be any different? The support that is being dropped are security patches which impact the rest of the computing world.

Microsoft (or Apple or anyone else) has an obligation, since it released the software in the first place, to either make it safe for use or to replace it -- just like any other manufacturer. They need to continue security software updates, to keep the rest of us safe, or they need to open source XP so somebody else can do it.

Re:Well...

[Dcnjoe60]

I agree, the 14 years was pretty generous.
When XP was originally released, I was running some SuSE 7.x version. The first 7.x version was released in september 2000. The last 7.x version went end-of-life in december 2003, meaning a support span of 3 years and 3 months. Fedora has something like a thirteen month support span, depending on the release date of version x+2. Only RHEL appears to be supported for 10 years.

There is one big difference: all Linux distros release a new version every 1-2 years. The next windows release took 6 years, but the next windows release that was really usable in companies took a few years more.

The other difference is that the next version of Linux usually runs quite well on the previous hardware. That is not the case with Windows. So very often, it's not even an option to upgrade an older machine to the latest release.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Price has a lot to do with it. Mac OS upgrades are on the order of $30. Linux is free. A new copy of Windows costs significantly more (even if just an OEM copy).

Software costs have almost nothing to do with the costs of an upgrade in this case. Even if Windows licenses are 10x Mac OS or RHEL licenses, thats still cheap. A company needs to potentially test, re-code and re-test their application. They may need to seek approval from government or industry review boards or certifications. Then you've got to pay to re-train the support people and update help desk scripts and personnel.

Windows licenses are essentially free in most cases especially in SCADA, FDA or other military applications.

Re:Well...

[CastrTroy]

Depends what you qualify as older. Windows XP System Requirements say it will run on 64 MB of RAM with 233 MHz Processor. The recommended is only 300 MHz with 128 MB of RAM. Have fun getting Windows 7 to run under those conditions. The minimum amount of memory for Windows 7 is 1 GB, and it requires 16 GB of hard drive space. When windows XP was released, many computers didn't even have 16 GB of space.

Re:Well...

[drinkypoo]

Actually, what Sun never* made is PCs. They made servers, and they made workstations.

* I suppose you could stretch the definition, but seriously, all the Sun stuff was made with good kit except the i386pc which we won't talk about. It wasn't castrated for personal use, it was all pro-grade. SBUS right up until PCI for example.

Re:Well...

[bobbomo]

I don't see the issue either. RHEL does not support a 14 year old product either.

Re:Well...

[tibit]

I agree. Nobody in the industry wants to replace or tweak running PLCs unless really necessary, and the OS being out of supports rarely counts as being so. Properly designed, such systems always do have either an airgap or a well-maintained firewall+router. It's orders of magnitude cheaper to keep the firewall/router combo up to date. The competent techs who run such systems usually have hard disk images of every machine (they all fit on a USB stick nowadays), and should be able to restore the systems, should there be a breach, in pretty short order anyway -- if the breach is known, that is. Monitoring the logs on the firewall would usually give a clue that something is amiss, those systems normally don't start sending stuff out of the blue.

There's also another angle to the story: Windows XP Embedded is not normally meant to be updated, heck, the update service is IIRC disabled by default as usually such systems are meant either to be off internet or there to be only a well firewalled, normally closed maintenance VPN available between the PLCs and the maintenance PC. I would not put any embedded OS, not even linux, directly on internet without an intervening supported and maintained router/switch.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think 14 years back in Apple history *almost* takes you back to the 68000-era machines, right around the conversion to PowerPC, before they went to Intel-based systems...

Re:Well...

[Hatta]

The problem isn't that they're ending support after 14 years. The problem is that they haven't released anything better in all that time.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

The current Mac OS upgrade is $30, the previous upgrades were all on the order of $100+ each. What is the upgrade cost for Red Hat (we should compare commercial OSs to commercial OSs)?

Do you know that there are 8x as many Vista users as there are Linux desktop users? ( Source: http://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 )

There are three groups of people running WinXP:

1) Folks running really old computers (Pentium-based, not Pentium D, Core, Core 2, or i series) - they wont upgrade till the hardware fails, and when they do they'll likely get a $300 computer that includes WIn 7, if Win 8 is still not out.

2) Corporations that have a standard image, deployed on old and newer hardware - they will upgrade to Win 7 (IMHO) once MS finally removes support for Win XP - they are too comfortable with Familiar WIn XP and there's little money for the upgrade (time/manhours - a corp. with Software Assurance can run nearly any desktop OS on the licensed box, be it Win XP, Vista, Win 7 or Win 8 when it comes out, for the same annual license fee, they don't have to "buy" the OS upgrade) in this economy.

3) Embedded in appliances/machines - these installations won' be upgraded until the machine the OS is embedded in is replaced

Re:Well...

[gstrickler]

Bingo. This also applies to "middleware". I have many times argued with developers about the value of using in-house developed tools and/or simple APIs that can easily be replaced as OS, networks, or other items are updated (or no longer updated) rather than use every shiny new vendor/platform/OS specific shortcut. Using such shortcuts may cut out a little work now, but if it locks you to a specific vendor/OS/version, it's going to become a support problem in a few years, and by then, you'll spend far more time dealing with and/or working around the problem you have created than you would have by doing a little more work up front. If you can't fairly quickly replicate the functionality and substitute another version/vendor/OS/in-house solution, then you haven't done an adequate jobs of designing your software.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, so you have scheduled shutdowns in 8 year cycles. What happens if there is a hardware failure? Drives and PSUs fail most frequently it seems. I'm guessing the reason for this is that it costs a lot of money to simply because of the productivity stoppage. That seems like a terrible single point of failure right there.

It seems like there ought to be some sort of redundancy model. Dual controllers that work in active/standby. This is how it works in telecom. Upgrade the standby and then switchover. Repeat.

I hope at least that this stuff is firewalled to limit your exposure to threats. Otherwise goodbye production line!

Re:Well...

[operagost]

OpenVMS 5.5-2 was released in 1992 and it's still supported... although next year it will finally go into "Mature Product Support", which basically means that if you want something fixed you'll have to pay for it.

Re:Well...

[MrAngryForNoReason]

A new copy of Windows costs significantly more

A new copy of Windows 7 costs about £70 (including 20% UK Sales tax) , hardly an insurmountable amount of money.

OSX updates may be cheaper but they come out every year. New versions of Windows come out roughly every 3-5 years so the price difference averages balances out over time.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not pay $30 and get 10.7? Really pay $150+ (OEM) for Windows 7, but not $29 to Apple. Ummm... Yeah that make sense.

Re:Well...

[Ryanrule]

Yeah, 7 and 8 run BETTER than xp on previous hardware.

Re:Well...

[cpu6502]

128 MB?

It's a lie. I have a laptop that, when I remove the RAM expansion, drops down to 128 and it thrashes the hard drive severely. Yeah sure it "runs" but you can't open a web browser or Word file.

As for Win 7, its minimum appears to be 256 MB, though it has the same hard drive thrashing problems.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that one one-off payment of $150 is a lot better than the deal I've had with Apple where I pay $30 a year for each machine and then they arbitrarily cut off support for my machines after a few years. I now have a stack of PowerPC paperweights. One of the Intel machines at work is no longer supported because it's 32 bit. If I'd bought a PC instead of an iBook in 2002, I would still be getting software updates from Microsoft.

Re:Well...

[b4dc0d3r]

Most computers that run XP will be able to run 7/8 with no problems. You didn't mention compatibility, so I'll ignore that in the form of drivers, which may not be available for 7, and applications which use poor security or assumptions rather than asking the OS for its properties. Linux apps and drivers know what to expect because of frequent changes (binary compatibility is not guaranteed). Windows changes are so infrequent that developers have been able to largely ignore them.

95 ran slower because it was 32 bit thunked to 16 bit under the hood. 98 ran slower because IE was integrated, so the entire shell went through the browser. ME ran slower because it is a well-known bastardization of DOS and Windows, and requires no further explanation.

XP was the big change, 6 years later. It ran slower because it was based on the NT kernel (and was actually a real operating system instead of a GUI tacked on to DOS). Vista was the next big change, another 6 years later. It ran slower because they moved graphics processing out of the kernel, and it is well known as a turd.

7 ran faster because they put graphics back into the kernel, and made a lot of genuine improvements, and 8 should be plenty zippy regardless of whether you use Metro or not, or both. And I'm predicting that if there is a Windows 9, it is unlikely to backslide into crap territory.

In other words, your assumption was valid for a specific timeframe but no longer holds.

Re:Well...

[Dcnjoe60]

In other words, your assumption was valid for a specific timeframe but no longer holds.

Actually, a circa 2001 computer that came with XP still runs current linux distributions quite well, not necessarily fast, though. That same computer won't run Vista or Win 7, so I think the assumption still holds.

Re:Well...

[HCase]

For a $100 software package with no recurring costs 14 years is pretty good. Besides, XP is safe in the sense that cars are safe. Recalls and replacements are issued if a problem is found that causes the thing to physically injure/kill people during what is considered normal use. If a malicious 3rd party breaks into your 20 year old car, there is no recall.

While those cars from the 80's and 90's still run, they are less safe and easier to steal than new cars. The only updates that have to be released for them are if they find a way to injure their owners. XP updates are security updates. Did they give your 80's car a free update to a transponder key to make it more secure? Did they install new airbags or traction control system to keep it safe?

I'm sure if your XP version finds a way to jump out of the box and injure you that it will be dealt with.

Re:Well...

[Dcnjoe60]

For a $100 software package with no recurring costs 14 years is pretty good. Besides, XP is safe in the sense that cars are safe. Recalls and replacements are issued if a problem is found that causes the thing to physically injure/kill people during what is considered normal use. If a malicious 3rd party breaks into your 20 year old car, there is no recall.

While those cars from the 80's and 90's still run, they are less safe and easier to steal than new cars. The only updates that have to be released for them are if they find a way to injure their owners. XP updates are security updates. Did they give your 80's car a free update to a transponder key to make it more secure? Did they install new airbags or traction control system to keep it safe?

I'm sure if your XP version finds a way to jump out of the box and injure you that it will be dealt with.

No, but they did give my 1992 pickup truck a new software upgrade because of a problem with the ignition -- which had nothing to do with my safety, but did improve emissions. So, Mazda provided a software upgrade to a 14 year old truck to benefit others. That is different than Microsoft continuing to provide security updates to XP to protect others on the internet, how?

Whether Microsoft sold XP for $100 or $1000 doesn't matter. I didn't even buy my truck new, and yet I got the software update. If there are all of these XP computers out there in two years that are basically no longer secured, would they not be the prime target of a group wanting to inflict cyber-harm? I'm not talking about harm to the users of those machines, but to the rest of the net. I do understand that operating systems are complex, but Microsoft made certain design choices for various business and marketing reasons. Why should they not be held to the same product liability as any other manufacturer?

Even more so, because the user does not own the software, they have purchased a license to use it. Therefore, shouldn't Microsoft, as the owner of their own software be responsible for maintaining it as long as it is licensed to be used? Could they be held liable if there were some kind of cyber attack that exploited XP once they drop support? Maybe who ever thought up those EULAs wasn't as smart as they thought.

Re:Well...

[CastrTroy]

Depends what web browser you are running. In 2000, we didn't have firefox in it's current version, which seems to like to use 100 MB of RAM just to start up. You could definitely run the stock IE version that came with it, probably all the way up to IE6. Also web pages themselves tended to be a lot smaller, because many people were on Dial-up in those days. Same logic goes for just about all the applications that you would want to use. If you used windows XP with year 2001-2004 software, doing 2001-2004 tasks, you wouldn't have much of a problem. Just don't try running iTunes, Firefox, or any of the other memory intensive programs we all take for granted these days.

Re:Well...

[petermgreen]

Afaict the main thing people need out of "support" contracts from OS vendors at a late point in the operating system's lifecycle is security updates. If a functionality issue hasn't become apparent in the first year or so then it's probablly something you can live with but a security update that has just become known to your adversaries is a different matter. Sure you can TRY to isolate the networks but as stuxnet has shown that isn't exactly a bulletproof strategy if your adversary is determined enought.

Can you imagine the shitstorm if it was known that MS had backported the security patch that blocked the latest worm to XP but you couldn't get it without signing an agreement that cost $$$. Further do you think that shitstorm would be worth the money they could make out of selling extended support contracts.

Re:Well...

[narcberry]

Exactly. SCADA solutions outlive their dependent parts.

Where can I turn if I just want an existing solution to last?

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. It's time to let go, and move forward. What phone were you using 14 years ago? What OS did that run? How many technological devices are we still using today that we were using 14 years ago?

I've already forced half of my customers kicking and screaming into Windows 7, and after a week or two, they were fine. We've had 3 years to get over the whole throwing our arms up and crying that we don't understand. Time to man up, princess.

Re:Well...

[Belial6]

5 years when they cut off support. There is no generosity in offering support for a product 5 years before you sell it. You count the age of an OS from the last date of sale. Not the first.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you serious? That's like saying everyone should build their own cars so we don't have to get our oil changed every 3,000 miles. Who has that kind of time? Who has those kinds of resources? If they don't have the knowledge or time, who wants to hire someone to sit around for 10 years, just in case something needs to change, so they could save on the inconvenience of a tri-monthly checkup?

That's why we have an economy and a society -- so I don't have to go slay a deer every night to eat. I can buy a dead animal at the store. I don't have to lay asphault just so there's a road between my house and my work. So I don't have to get on a bike to generate electricity just so I can listen to some music. So I don't have to play my own music if I want to listen to music...

Re:Well...

[HCase]

1. The cost of upkeep is built into either the initial or recurring price of a product. There is no recurring cost, so the initial cost to the consumer does matter. Price is one of the factors taken into account by people when factoring in how much service they expect. XP was sold with an end of support date and that date has already been extended. No one purchasing it new should be relying on updates now. Should they still have to provide support for 98? 3.1? DOS?

2. With a quick search I didn't find any information about a recall on 1992 Mazda truck ignitions, so I can't comment on specifics. I will say I haven't heard of government required recalls to decade old vehicles to improve their emissions. Of course a company can support a product for as long as they want, the question is if Microsoft should be legally required to continue support.

3. I dislike most EULAs, sadly, most make it easier to push blame away from the producer, not harder. I don't have a copy of the XP license, but I believe it had disclaimers saying that the installer agreed not to blame Microsoft if their computer was compromised.

4.(out of order)
The cyber-harm claim is a bit worrisome. They should have to continue to support the software because criminals could take advantage of the security holes and cause harm? An OS itself simply can't stop everything, and other software can be modified to create trouble as well. So does all popular software need to be supported for free and forever? Stolen cars are used in crimes with some frequency, should Mazda have to upgrade your ignition to use a transponder key to try and make sure that someone malicious doesn't take it and ram it into something?

Re:Well...

[Dcnjoe60]

1. I do understand the cost of upkeep being built into the price. However, even if the manufacturer didn't, doesn't mean they don't need to keep the product up. Microsoft, being one of the wealthiest companies in the world would find it difficult to argue that it cannot afford to keep XP up. Win 98 and prior cannot really participate on the internet, so the threat from them is pretty limited. XP on the other hand is still widely used and if left unsecured poses a big threat.

2. I just had the truck serviced. I don't know if it was recalled or just a service bulletin. I do know the truck is long out of warranty and there was no charge to me.

3. The EULA prevents me from going after Microsoft if Windows damages my data or loses it, etc. However, if my unsecured machine is hacked because Microsoft no longer provides security patches and that machine takes down Bank of America, I'm not sure my EULA with Microsoft protects them from Bank of America.

4. This is similar to item 3. Again, I'm not saying Microsoft should have to keep patching errors in the OS that are purely functional, but those that can lead to exploits that can lead to the compromise of the intranet and/or other infrastructure and systems, then yes, I would say it is their responsibility. Let's not forget that Microsoft made billions of dollars from XP sales. If they made a business decision to not set aside reserves because of the overwhelming success of the their os far exceeded their expectations, that is their problem. Ford made a business decision to not add a $1 shield to the Pinto because of the cost and they paid dearly for it in lawsuits (but not as much as the lives destroyed).

As for stolen cars and the manufacturers liability if a crime is committed, they are not related. I purchase and own my car. I do not own my own copy of Windows, Microsoft makes it quite clear in their EULA that they do.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

He said "older", not "sweet fuck that shit is older then your mom".

Re:Well...

[mhotchin]

Are you sure you have all 128 available? Many laptops take their video RAM out of the stuff on the motherboard, you may have substantially less available to the OS that you think.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

not all software or hardware runs on 7, so if you would like to buy me a new 100,000 PLC controller cause some 99$ OS wants to enforce an artificial upgrade to an incompatible version, your more than welcome to

Re:Well...

[thegarbz]

Indeed, but ... see stuxnet. I don't think malware directed at control systems will commonly take the network viral infection path. They will likely be a targeted attack by someone with detailed knowledge of the system, and the ability to get physical media to the SCADA machine.

Re:Well...

[Minupla]

Agreed, but that's physical controls, which are required for almost any computing hardware. If you have unfettered physical access to the system the ONLY thing any technical controls are going to do at that point is slow you down (hopefully long enough for the physical controls to catch up). Something like tripwire is the solution for detection of code tampering.

In a perfect world, yes you would be able to keep your SCADA systems up to date with all patches and run the latest OS, The reality is however that even if MS continued to support security patches for XP until the end of time there would be SCADA systems which are unpatched because of __________ (there's ALWAYS some reason). So the compensating controls around code tampering are still required. As are the compensating controls around network access.

Min

Re:Well...

[yuhong]

Yea, most computers from the Win2k and later era should be able to run WinVista/7 as long as it has enough RAM. 32-bit Vista/7 can run most XP drivers.

Re:Well...

[thegarbz]

A tripwire system is not practical. The purpose of these machines is to be able to change the control scheme and thus any implemented tripwire would need an override and you're back to square one. Realistically you have no chance in the software once the physical barriers are overcome. Many classic physical barriers include a keyswitch in the system itself that disables updates to the running logic.

Honestly I don't see how stuxnet could work if you don't have an inside man (like the Iranian double agent) and I don't see how you could protect against such an attack if you do have an inside man.

I remember a discussion on here about the lack of security on Modbus and how SCADA vendors are slack because of it. But the fact is most protocols rely on physical security such as the Modbus link going from the control system to one machine and not to a network. Once you have access to that network all bets are off anyway regardless of what security you put in place.

Re:Well...

[Minupla]

Agreed that changing the control parameters would trigger tripwire, but assuming you have appropriate separation of duties in place the person monitoring tripwire would look at the maint schedule, confirm the change in (in this case rotational velocity) parameters and approve the change. Or note that the parameters are not as per the approved change and scream bloody murder.

Min

Re:Well...

[thegarbz]

Sounds fine in theory but you way over estimate the industry. This is an industry which has flat out killed people because people have started up pieces of machine that others were working on. Admittedly this may be a cost they need to bare for security sake but don't assume you can line up the operations and maintenance department of any plant. In many cases these two departments have an Us vs Them culture.

No sympathy

[Richard_at_work]

This deadline has been known about for the past five years - if you can't resolve upgrade issues in seven years, then you are the problem, not the maker of the software being EOLed.

This isn't happening overnight, you had your chance to do something about it. You might not agree with the EOL, but that's beside the point.

Re:No sympathy

[gl4ss]

it's not like you received too much support from ms by default for running 3rd party scada sw anyways..

those scada systems should not be directly connected to internet anyways though.

however, doesn't ms still kinda receive the right to ship security patches/fixes? I bet they do. you never knew if stuff was going to be fixed before this and you'll never know after this. support just kinda meant that you could phone them up(oh and responsibility for defects doesn't stop just because you eol a product line, no matter what the eula says..).

Re:No sympathy

[Waccoon]

Reminds me of how long it took for peripheral manufacturers to write drivers for Vista, despite how long they had developer previews available.

Hey, just another example besides good ol' IE6.

Re:No sympathy

[rrohbeck]

New netbooks with XP were sold until 2010:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/pc-makers-no-longer-allowed-to-preinstall-windows-xp-on-new-netbooks-as-of-october/6507

Re:No sympathy

[Richard_at_work]

And they will have had four years of support, so what's the problem?

Re:No sympathy

[RulerOf]

those scada systems should not be directly connected to internet anyways though.

Tell that to Iran.

Bottom line: "Cutting the cord" for potentially vulnerable systems is a good philosophy in theory, but it simply doesn't work in practice.

Re:No sympathy

[Anonymous Coward]

No sympathy if you run a proprietary OS with all the disadvantages of vendor lock-in.

Re:No sympathy

[DarkXale]

MS are still perfectly entitles to ship updates, yes. And they might continue to do so for issues not exclusive to XP. But whether they do, well thats anyones guess. But what Microsoft ultimately does end up doing will be quite telling; and could be important when choosing an OS for 'today' that itself needs to be around for 10+ years. (As you'll certainly be facing this issue again by then)

Re:No sympathy

[drinkypoo]

if you can't resolve upgrade issues in seven years, then you are the problem

Windows 7 massively broke backwards compatibility, you insensitive clod! It doesn't run Civilization 2 or several other classic games I've got and paid for, even in XP mode which is pure canned crap compared to even the free vmware player.

The truth is that Windows XP has been sold as recently as what, last year? That's a VERY short EOL for a recently-shipped operating system.

Re:No sympathy

[dingen]

The bottom line is that people who are running software that is as old as Windows XP simply aren't customers anymore, as far as Microsoft is concerned. They aren't in the business of caring for people who aren't buying their products, simple as that. Want support? Then buy something that was actually released in the last decade.

Re:No sympathy

[Anonymous Coward]

those scada systems should not be directly connected to internet anyways though.

Yes, because malware never never makes it behind firewalls (or airwalls for that matter).

Re:No sympathy

[MrAngryForNoReason]

It doesn't run Civilization 2

I'm not sure if this is intended as a joke or not but saying that backwards compatibility is massively broken because a game that was released 16 years ago won't run is pretty funny. Especially as apparently you can actually play Civ 2 on Windows 7 if you have the gold edition (released in 1997)

Re:No sympathy

[narcberry]

Can I buy an XP support package? No? Then stfu.

Re:No sympathy

[Belial6]

The only problem is people claiming that the people needing to upgrade have a 14 year old OS. 4 years in not a problem. We just need to be honest about the length of time.

Re:No sympathy

[gl4ss]

those scada systems should not be directly connected to internet anyways though.

Tell that to Iran.

Bottom line: "Cutting the cord" for potentially vulnerable systems is a good philosophy in theory, but it simply doesn't work in practice.

well.. iran is doing the obvious solution now? cutting the cord to the internet in entirety? though fucking that up by leaving holes in the fw..

Re:No sympathy

[drinkypoo]

I have Civ 2 multiplayer gold and it does NOT work on Windows 7 x64, I have personally tested it. It also does not work in XP mode. And since I want more than 3GB memory Win7 i586 is not acceptable

Re:No sympathy

[Anonymous Coward]

"Windows 7 massively broke backwards compatibility, you insensitive clod! It doesn't run Civilization 2 or several other classic games I've got and paid for, even in XP mode which is pure canned crap compared to even the free vmware player."

So run a 13 year old game in Dosbox?

Re:No sympathy

[Anonymous Coward]

Waah. Would you like some cheese with that?

Its not like XP will stop working. Just setup your computer to dual-boot to XP and Win7, Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, whatever. Problem solved. Just stay off the internet and you don't need to worry much about security issues.

Re:No sympathy

[Anonymous Coward]

et tu nobless oblige ? Or was that supposed to be Ef You, Nobless Oblige

Re:No sympathy

[DeadboltX]

Try DosBox. The game IS 16 years old after all. Even in XP it may have needed to be set for win95 compatibility.

the CHORD, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

So we'll only have two notes of support, instead of at least three?

Proofread the summaries! (please)

[Mitreya]

When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP

Cuts the cord?
Or is this some sort of operation that will prevent XP from playing guitar?

Re:Proofread the summaries! (please)

[Mitreya]

When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP

Oh, what do you know, TFA says "chord" too
Ok, in that case someone should write summaries, instead of always lifting 2 paragraphs from TFA verbatim.

And I've never seen heyday spelled as "hey-day". Just doesn't look right.

oh my god!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Y2K all over again!! We're doomed!

Well... Look on the bright side.

[Anonymous Coward]

This 'nightmare' assumes the human race will still exist in two years. Or that we will still have a level of technology that needs computers.

Given some of the insane things we are doing to our earth, water, air, food, people, countries and societies...

I have serious doubts if that assumption is correct.

"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[bwcbwc]

Anyone still running XP at this point probably hasn't been patching the OS anyway. Not to mention using an admin account as their primary login ID. Not to mention the parts of the XP architecture that make it more vulnerable even if it IS fully patched.

The XP security nightmare began in 2002. A few remaining machines left in 2 years won't make the problem any worse.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Calydor]

That's a bit of a generalization.

Is it so hard to believe there are people with up-to-date XP systems who simply don't feel like forking out a couple hundred dollars to fix something that isn't broken?

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Anonymous Coward]

I installed my XP 64 a bit over 4 years ago and I haven't had a reason to reinstall it yet. I'm sure I will have win 7 on my next rig and that that will be within 2 years, but still it's cutting it close. I still don't belive that I am the biggest threat for becoming a zombie.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[MiG82au]

Eh? What uninformed crap.
I work in an aeronautical engineering company as a stress analyst. 3 out of 7 people in my office (including me) are using up to date XP. The newer people have Win 7 on newer computers, so it's not even a matter of seniority.
A core 2 duo with 2 GB of ram and XP works just fine.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Richard_at_work]

No, it isn't hard to believe, but should MS be required to continually support them on a platform that is currently two major versions out of date, soon to be three?

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[mikael_j]

There are still plenty of companies running Windows XP.

Hell, I know one company with 100+ employees in the telecommunications industry that didn't replace Windows 2000 on desktops until 2010, and only because some software they were using was no longer supported on win2k (this "no longer supported" being the kind where it simply won't run right anymore). And yes, they upgraded to XP. AFAIK they're not planning on moving to 7 or 8 for until they absolutely have to...

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[arkhan_jg]

who simply don't feel like forking out a couple hundred dollars to fix something that isn't broken?

a) Windows 7 home premium OEM is $99.
b) Windows XP is, in fact, broken.

The underlying security model of XP is fundamentally flawed. Despite a vast amount of plaster work on top, security capabilities of OSes have moved on a long way. There are significant improvements in Win 7 over XP under the bonnet when it comes to being a secure OS. I use OSX, android and linux myself, so I'm no windows fanboy, but to be fair they have learned a lot from their mistakes and the decade of attacks.

Windows XP is over 10 years old for heaven's sake. It hasn't been sold for what, 4 years now? How long exactly do you expect microsoft to provide security patches for that creaky old boat for, for the $50 your system builder originally paid for that OEM licence? Forever? Hell, Apple generally end-of-life's their desktop versions every couple of years - they only really support current and previous version. So if you're older than 10.6 (august 2009) you're no longer getting patches. And you're complaining that your 2001 operating system has only two more years of free security patches left?

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Calydor]

Please re-read my post.

I'm not complaining that XP is about to go off life support.

I was correcting the GP's broad generalizations about current XP systems, particularly the part about not patching the system anyway.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Anonymous Coward]

I work in a fortune 50 company doing exactly this. The supervisors/managers all just got shiny new Win 7 laptops, while all the hourly employees are stuck on ancient HP systems running XP. I suspect that when the XP EOL date finally rolls around, they'll just severely restrict access to the Internet from those PC's to try and mitigate the risk instead of paying the cost to upgrade them to a modern system.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[unl0rd]

This is how I feel too. I still use XP on one machine because Windows 7 has removed any easy to use search functionality (and Agent Ransack plays up sometimes), and I don't always have time or the patience to spend 2 hours+ to get the scanner on a new MFC printer working in linux (slackware). For these reasons and others, XP is what I still use on a still functional AthlonXP machine.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[tibit]

If it's an industrial system that was put in use 5+ years ago, if it cost a couple thousand dollars to update it'd be considered cheap. If you factor in the cost of labor, you may be looking at a couple thousand dollars just to get an upgrade plan written. Of course the company has saved money on an in-house automation engineer and let him/her go long time ago, so it'll be a consulatant doing all that, and we're assuming that a competent and professional one will be found -- someone who won't rack up the hours just because they can.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Anonymous Coward]

At least those companies will be moving to a stable platform. Imagine the companies that moved to Vista as soon as Microsoft released it..

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[bwcbwc]

Yes, it's a generalization. Generalizations only have to satisfy the 80-20 rule. I'm sure there are a few people out there or even a sizeable minority who do their best to be secure but don't have the time or budget to upgrade. But an OEM disk of Windows 7 Home premium is under $100. The XP users who are security conscious have probably spent more on anti-virus and security software over the past few years since Win 7 came out than they would spend on an updated OS. Penny-wise and pound foolish?

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[bored]

The underlying security model of XP is fundamentally flawed.

In what way? The model in 7 is basically the same as the security model in NT 3.1. The two most significant tweaks to the "model" itself was the runas and code signing functionality added in W2k.

In that way, the security changes in vista were actually little more than forcing people to use functionality already built in. Plus, adding a prettier face to it.

So that said, It seems to me that simply running as a limited user in XP gives you the majority of the security improvements gained by vista. The code signing is handy, but not really useful for the average windows user. It _IS_ handy for the expert who can detect signatures that have been tampered with, and attempt to track down the identity of the person who creates signed malware.

The one good thing about vista is that a lot more companies have fixed issues in their software that kept it from working in a limited environment, or actually signed their binaries to avoid the unsigned app notice. That helps XP users just as much as it helps users of 7.

All that said, for the security minded, running something like sandboxie on XP is actually going to give you _MORE_ security than running 7 by itself.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Belial6]

You would be wrong. I have 3 XP systems running running in my home. All three are up to date. One is a nettop that my son uses for car trips. It plays movies fine, and most games from GOG run just fine on it. One is an Acer Revo that is used as an HTPC, and one runs on my server in a VM for an application that I want accessible from any desktop in the house, and is shared between me and my wife.

None of these are insurmountable in 2 years. My son's nettop should really be replaced with a laptop at this point. The HTPC is pretty much EOL for it's current purpose anyways, so it will likely get relegated to being a Linux File/Print Server. And, the VM could just as easily be a Win7 VM.

All of these systems have all security patches installed. None of them have been replaced with Win 7 because there is currently no gain in doing so.

Re:"Beginning" of security nightmare?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because if you don't run with an admin account, lots of functionality simply doesn't work. For instance, most games written before about 2000 either won't save, or won't run at all.

And among the things that won't run is Windows Update.

In other words: if you routinely run as admin, the chances that your XP version is fully patched are excellent. If you don't, they're close to nonexistent. You'd have to be one of the anal types who actually logs in specially just to perform maintenance. That's - not many people.

What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Every time I read about the ending support, I wonder what happens to the so called XP mode in Windows 7. It's an installation of Virtual PC with a XP image ( http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/download.aspx ). Since Windows 7 is supported by MS, how can they leave those users alone?

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[memzer]

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/support/faq.aspx

Is Windows XP Mode supported throughout the lifecycle of Windows 7?
No. Windows XP Mode is a full virtual version of Windows XP and follows the same support lifecycle as Windows XP. Windows XP extended support phase ends in 2014.

Unfortunately IE6/7/8 will live on and I have nightmares that we will be supporting them until 2038...

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Anonymous Coward]

IE 8 is the latest that Windows XP supports. rest assured that Microsoft intends to cut support around the same time.

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft product uses Unix time? Who would have guessed?

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Anonymous Coward]

IIRC VC++ 2003 and earlier used 32bit time - VC++ 2005 triggered the move to 64bit time; any code using mktime32 would also obviously be affected ;)

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[JDG1980]

Unfortunately IE6/7/8 will live on and I have nightmares that we will be supporting them until 2038...

Support for IE6 ends at the same time as support for XP. The only reason Microsoft has supported it this long is that it's considered to be a "component" of XP, and XP is still under support until 2014. See http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifewinfaq for details.

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[King_TJ]

I imagine MS will continue to support XP mode as far as troubleshooting its setup and initial configuration inside Windows 7, so in that respect, they're not leaving those users alone.

It will just become a tool allowing you to run an obsolete OS inside of your current one, and they'll draw the line at helping you with anything actually going on inside XP Mode once you've gotten it correctly set up and launching the virtual OS.

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Billly Gates]

I find it hysterical ... well maybe not for you and I send my condolences.

But I find it funny the whole push for intranet apps was to leave old x3270 terminals and legacy mini computer and mainframe software behind. Now you had something that would work regardless of the OS in a web browser. No more tie in! ... 10 years later and we are setting up Citrix and terminal software to run a supposedly non tied in browser based solution that only works with a single OS on a single version from a single vendor. Shakes head

That is fucked up

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately IE6/7/8 will live on and I have nightmares that we will be supporting them until 2038...

I doubt that anyone using XP Mode will be using it for IE6 -- surely they'd use the browser already installed in their host Windows 7 installation?

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[toddestan]

So, that means that IE7 is supported until at least 2017 (due to Vista) and IE8 until 2020 (thanks to Windows 7?) Ugh.

Re:What about XP mode in Windows 7

[Anonymous Coward]

IE6 lives on. IE8 has declined rapidly since IE9 was released, and IE7 is vanishingly rare. Honestly, I suspect most occurrences in my server logs are from people using later versions with weird compatibility settings for reasons of their own.

So yeah, we're stuck with IE6 until the great majority of those old XP machines become unusable, but in all seriousness I suggest you stop testing for IE7/8 right now. No-one has any good reason to be stuck with those browser versions - let them choose whether they want to upgrade, or see increasing numbers of websites looking increasingly weird.

When they cut the "chord" ...

[dbIII]

When they cut the "chord" does that mean they'll get air on their g string?
Typos aside, a lot of places are going to get caught with their pants down due to some software, even current software, not running properly in Vista or Windows 7 yet. The worst I've seen is a 2011 release of geophysics software that will not run due to the licencing software that comes with it using one of those evil USB dongles and doing a licence check in 16bit MSDOS mode. That sort of bullshit is deliberate insanity since everything in the MS evironment was 32 bit before USB even came out.

Re:When they cut the "chord" ...

[tibit]

I think you're making it up or are misinformed. Can you do a strings dump on the supposed dos driver for that dongle and see who makes it? What are their system requirements?

Still running it

[Anonymous Coward]

I am still running Windows XP myself, I personally don't see much benefit in upgrading with my current hardware. My plan is to go from Windows XP to Windows 8..

...running the latest software...

[djsmiley]

I'm all for bashing Microsoft but how can you say

"When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP in two years it will effectively leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks, many of which hold the potential to find their way into consumer, enterprise and even industrial systems running the latest software"

while talking about XP? Its over 10 years old. Microsoft have been trying to push people away for two versions of windows. While their upgrade cycle might be very clunky, I don't think the blame can fall fully on them for people who run software which is 10 years out of date, and now out of support.

Re:...running the latest software...

[dbet]

It's not exactly correct to say it's 10 years old, as if that's the last time they sold it. People buying new computers just a couple of years ago were given XP as their system. This isn't an argument for more support, just a fact.

Re:...running the latest software...

[scsirob]

I own an Opel Astra. It is about 9 years old. Opel has released several new models and types, all better than mine, probably safer and with more features.
So in your view, Opel can now tell me that they will not fix my car anymore if something breaks? And if a fatal design flaw is found (eg. all brakes stop working after 10 years), they don't have to act with a recall? Hmmm.

Re:...running the latest software...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, opel won't fix your Astra, however some 3rd party mechanics might. The ac on the Astra has a design fault with the thermal fuse on the compressor Opel/Holden will not fix that. I know, I owned one. Landrover have a fatal design flaw with the engine and transmission. 1 day out of warrenty and they would not fix. Accc tried to take them and they said stuff you.

Re:...running the latest software...

[cbhacking]

Absolutely! Unless you pre-purchased a support plan that extends beyond the "about 9 years" you mention, your manufacturer is probably under no obligation in any way to fix your car. In fact, they're not even under any obligation to accept money from you to fix your car (nor is Microsoft, although they will in fact continue supporting outdated OSs if you pay them enough). As for the recall, that's not required either, no. It might be economically wise (as it, "end up costing less than the lawsuits and loss of business") but I'm not aware of any law that would compel them to do so.

Personal anecdote: I couldn't find anybody who was willing to fix some damage to my 1990 Subaru Legacy. It's not that it wasn't fixable, it's just that they literally couldn't find the required part. Even ignoring that the cost would have been greater than the insurance value of the car, I literally couldn't find any shop in the area that would take my money to do it, because the car has been out of production for so long that the wrecking yards had even sold off all their working copies of that part.

Also, a car analogy here is stupid, despite Slashdot tradition. A car is quite reasonably expected to run for at least a decade and usually much longer if treated well. The manufacture and maintenance of them is a practice well over a century in age. The rate of improvements in them, despite your "all better than mine, probably safer and with more features" comment, is really quite minor year-over-year. None of those things are true of desktop operating systems. Additionally, my 22-year-old car still ran on pretty much the same "hardware" (internal combustion of gasoline, asphault-paved roads, etc.) today as it was designed to do over two decades ago. These days, sub-$500 new computers come with too much RAM for XP to even address all of it!

Re:...running the latest software...

[Bert64]

And the end of support date is not a secret, it has been published for years and even extended i believe... If someone paid for XP without first understanding what they were actually getting then that's their own fault.

Re:...running the latest software...

[Anonymous Coward]

It can, if you agree to that when you bought it, if you bought (i seriously doubt it), you must have read the licence agreement, if you didn't, well then basically you are a moron, and you should shut the fuck up. YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN ABOUT SOMETHING YOU AGREED ON.

Re:...running the latest software...

[Cro Magnon]

Personal anecdote: I couldn't find anybody who was willing to fix some damage to my 1990 Subaru Legacy. It's not that it wasn't fixable, it's just that they literally couldn't find the required part. Even ignoring that the cost would have been greater than the insurance value of the car, I literally couldn't find any shop in the area that would take my money to do it, because the car has been out of production for so long that the wrecking yards had even sold off all their working copies of that part.

Interestingly, I have a similar tale of woe. Last year my old washing machine went pfft. I bought it back in the 1980s. At a used appliance place, so who knows how old it really was. A few months prior, it had needed fixing and the tech had a hell of a time finding parts, told me that he expected another part to fail and there was no chance in hell of him finding the parts to fix that. So, I didn't even try to get the last problem fixed. I had to buy another machine.

Nothing is "supported" forever, and PCs are known to be relatively short-lived compared to other, simpler appliances.

Re:...running the latest software...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm all for bashing Microsoft but how can you say

"When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP in two years it will effectively leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks, many of which hold the potential to find their way into consumer, enterprise and even industrial systems running the latest software"

while talking about XP? Its over 10 years old. Microsoft have been trying to push people away for two versions of windows. While their upgrade cycle might be very clunky, I don't think the blame can fall fully on them for people who run software which is 10 years out of date, and now out of support.

The quote is factually accurate. Numerous people have pointed out that the problem has to do with the people who decided to keep XP. "A nightmare for everyone else" only implies bashing Microsoft if you're the type of person who believes that it's someone else's job to take care of you (the results of that perspective are almost never good.) If you believe that we are each responsible for making wise choices with available resources, then the implication is not "Microsoft should be bashed" but "relying on a proprietary, ten year old platform that was designed to be replaced at your expense is likely to cause the exact problems that everyone, including the manufacturer, has warned you about."

Re:...running the latest software...

[Anonymous Coward]

I own an Opel Astra. It is about 9 years old. Opel has released several new models and types, all better than mine, probably safer and with more features.
So in your view, Opel can now tell me that they will not fix my car anymore if something breaks? And if a fatal design flaw is found (eg. all brakes stop working after 10 years), they don't have to act with a recall? Hmmm.

I own an Opel Astra. It is about 9 years old. Opel has released several new models and types, all better than mine, probably safer and with more features.
So in your view, Opel can now tell me that they will not fix my car anymore if something breaks? And if a fatal design flaw is found (eg. all brakes stop working after 10 years), they don't have to act with a recall? Hmmm.

So in your view, Opel can now tell me that they will not fix my car anymore if something breaks? And if a fatal design flaw is found (eg. all brakes stop working after 10 years), they don't have to act with a recall? Hmmm.

Here's a view - software and your car don't operate / function / update in the same way. It's plain stupid to act like they do or make straw man arguments based of this idiocy.

Re:...running the latest software...

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're telling me you ran into a problem running Legacy hardware? :)

Beginning?

[gmuslera]

Is like watching the exorcist and in the last minute realizing that you were watching an horror movie. If in the 1st 5 minutes you didnt realized that you were having a really bad nightmare and kept sleeping even being aware that you could wake up at will, you probably enjoy it.

Same as it has always been

[Gadget_Guy]

This is no different from when Windows 2000 reached its end of life, or 98, or NT4. The life cycles of Microsoft products tend to be consistent and well known.

Anyone using Windows on a SCADA system should not just rely on Microsoft's updates for security. Lock them down, limit Internet access to a minimum, don't use Administrator accounts, don't install any Adobe products, don't use the systems for general purpose web browsing and don't feed them after midnight. Most security holes require some active interaction to work.

I still have a bunch of Win2000 systems in use and they chug along fine.

Re:Same as it has always been

[soundguy]

Yes, it's absolutely different. MS was not still selling those other OSes 10 years after they were introduced. OEM copies of XP were still available in 2009 and it was still being loaded on brand new netbooks in 2010. They'll be cutting off support just 4 years after the last official copy was sold. Those early netbooks CANNOT run Vista or 7 because they don't have the resources. Since they were specifically designed for internet use, the only way to keep using them for their intended purpose will be to load them with Linux, unless ReactOS gets a lot farther along by then.

Re:Same as it has always been

[rjstanford]

So, people (incl manufacturer) were choosing to install an OS on their hardware that had incredibly well-known and published EOL dates coming up, even though Microsoft had updated versions with substantially greater lifetimes ahead of them already released. And, somehow, that's Microsoft's fault. Not the manufacturer's fault, not the purchaser's fault... Microsoft's fault.

Whu?

Re:Same as it has always been

[JDG1980]

OEM copies of XP were still available in 2009 and it was still being loaded on brand new netbooks in 2010. They'll be cutting off support just 4 years after the last official copy was sold.

These netbooks weren't even designed to last 4 years. You get what you pay for.

Re:Same as it has always been

[Billly Gates]

It is different.

PHBs now have finance and accounting backgrounds and refuse to upgrade and look at everything outside of sales as a cost and burden to contend with and not an asset.

IE 6 was supposed to be the way out to being tied into a platform. Instead it is the tying factor and many corporations already spent again for a solution that already worked in 1999 when their apps ran on mainframes that now run IE 6/ASP. Wait didn't we just spend $$$$ just 8 years? What! You want me to pay again for a third time! How do I know we wont have to repay for the same solution in 2020 when IE 8 is phased out? ETC.

That was not as big as a problem in 1999 when people still ran NT 4 and Windows 98. I would like to say an intranet site today will always be backwards compatible with future platforms and browsers but IE 6 has scared the shit out of many CIOs who wont believe anyone who says otherwise.

Re:Same as it has always been

[soundguy]

What part of "still authorizing new licenses for their obsolete OS 10 years after introduction" do you not understand?

Re:Same as it has always been

[soundguy]

I have 3 of the early Asus models. They all still work just fine and since they do not have hard drives to generate extra heat and vibration, there's a high probability that they will still be working just fine a decade from now. I have a 1998 Thinkpad laptop upgraded to Win 2k that I use for a print server on my LAN. Surprisingly, it still has the original hard drive. My caching DNS machine is a 1999 Penguin Computing pizza box, again with the original drive (currently showing about 90,000 hours).

Re:Same as it has always been

[Gadget_Guy]

If someone still wants to buy an old version that has only limited support then why should Microsoft knock them back? You know they didn't stop selling Windows 3.11 until 2008!

Re:Same as it has always been

[Rich0]

Well, often the accountants are short-sighted, but sometimes they really do have a point.

Whenever you make a big investment, a big factor in the decision is how long it will last. In the past software upgrades were not factored into these decisions. Suppose I want to buy an MRI machine for $500k. That's a lot of money, but the scientist in charge says that it is worth it because the machine will last 25 years, and the value it creates makes the investment worthwhile. The accountants attack the math mercilessly and they agree. So, in comes the MRI machine, along with a fancy controller that runs Windows XP. Then in 10 years corporate IT comes along and says that XP is no good, and the computer needs to be upgraded. The scientist points out that the controller software only works with XP, and they checked and an updated version is not available for Win7. Then corporate IT makes a few phone calls and happily reports back to the scientist that they are mistaken, the vendor has a nice fancy piece of Win7 software, and they just need to upgrade to a newer MRI to use it. At this point the accountants get quite angry, because spending another $500k just to do a software upgrade doesn't make sense, and if a 10 year lifetime were anticipated they'd never have authorized buying the machine in the first place.

Modern IT practices often result in writing off capital investments that have substantial remaining book value. That is something that makes accountants cringe. And it is also something that makes them even more reluctant to invest in IT. Sometimes I'm not convinced this is always the wrong decision. I've found that keeping things simple is often a LOT more important than making them complete.

ReactOS might be ready for us to switch to by then

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm still waiting for them to reach 0.5 beta. If they do by April 2014, I'll definitely switch to ReactOS.

incompetent morons

[Anonymous Coward]

Sooooo let me get this straight, There are industrial networks that still rely on XP for SCADA AND they are not protecting them with other security mechanisms AND they are connected to the internet. And the security nightmare here is somehow Microsoft's fault and not the incompetent morons running these unprotected systems?

Re:incompetent morons

[Anonymous Coward]

sed -e 's/incompetent morons/industrial engineers/g'

Re:incompetent morons

[DarthStrydre]

isn't s/ usually used when you're substituting something that's DIFFERENT? *ducks and runs*

Special treatment again?

[Waccoon]

How many Linux and OSX releases are supported for 12 years?

It's not like old drivers will easily work on the new OSes, kernel upgrades are a sure thing, or your old hardware will be supported by the new OS (such as the move from 32-bit to 64-bit Macs).

Personally, I'm far more interested in how MS is going to handle product activation... or more likely, they just won't. Call me lazy, but I haven't bothered to get myself a corporate edition of XP Pro to replace my regular retail version. What will happen if I swap motherboards?

BTW, I have Win7 on my laptop, but my workstation is still XP, because I just can't stand the new taskbar, among other things. I have reasons for not upgrading that go beyond, "I don't need to."

Re:Special treatment again?

[wvmarle]

How many Linux and OSX releases are supported for 12 years?

How many Linux distributions (where maintainers stayed in business) have not seen a major upgrade for the better part of a decade? That's the time it took from XP to Vista. And then the upgrade wasn't even considered an upgrade by many - so maybe you should look at the time it took from XP to Win7 even?

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

The issue isn't discontinuation of XP. The issue is that of freedom. You can't fix XP yourself. You can fix GNU/Linux yourself. You can rely on others to fix GNU/Linux. If you bought the right hardware (free software- none of these non-free drivers/firmware crap) you wouldn't have this problem.

And it is even easy to do now with http://www.thinkpenguin.com/ as they only ship such hardware.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

This should help you out:
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-7/make-the-windows-7-taskbar-work-more-like-windows-xp-or-vista/

Re:Special treatment again?

[JasterBobaMereel]

1) XP SP3 is only 6 years old...anyone on older version stopped doing automatic updates

2) I can still get older versions on Linux, and more older hardware is still supported by Linux than windows ever supported

3) Win 7 supports far less hardware than any version of Linux, and does not support most "legacy" hardware and a lot of software....

XP may be old but if it is what people still want it does not reflect very well on newer offerings ...

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

How many Linux and OSX releases are supported for 12 years?

I can upgrade my Linux systems (a) for free, and (b) without the OS now feeding everything through its DRM system, or whatever it was Vista did which everyone was up in arms about at the time, but nobody seems to remember now. I'm still fundamentally opposed to something I'm supposed to be owning doing such things.

(And I don't expect ethical behaviour from Apple.)

Re:Special treatment again?

[scsirob]

Linux kernel 2.4.0 was released in 2001. Until very recently there was still active development on it.

Re:Special treatment again?

[sensationull]

3 - Really, How old are your machines?

I have installed Windows 7 onto hundreds of machines up to seven years old and have found drivers for everything apart from a few old GPUs and scanners. Almost everything else has just installed automagicly either bundled on the media or grabbed on first boot from Windows update the rest has just required a quick trip to the vendor site. This is even with the 64 bit versions on 6 year old hardware.

Sofware is mostly supported but you are right that there is a lot that was written really badly and won't run as Windows is actually protecting itself.

I am heavily sceptical about - 2 - linux supporting more hardware than windows, almost all the hardware in existance was released with Windows drivers, Windows supporting less just does not make sense and it is not what I have encountered.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

bullshit, the amount of people with the skillset to fix a kernel security issue in GNU/Linux and are willing to sit around working on 12+ year old versions you can count on the fingers of a cross eyed butcher and even if you could find such a set of individuals the cost of employing them would be astronomical. Not to mention please show me this free hardware that is made for industrial systems?

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never even considered the idea of Windows having better hardware support than Linux (or even BSD). In my mind Windows has always just been a desktop computer OS (which just about manages on laptops and small servers with heavy modifications). Linux and BSD on the other hand are completely different beasts, capable of running on almost anything.

Maybe there are pocket calculators, cranes, cash machines, routers, TVs, air conditioning systems, fridges, traffic-light systems and air-traffic control hubs out there all running Windows but I've never even thought about it. Scary :)

Re:Special treatment again?

[Lonewolf666]

If you want a vendor you can blame if things go wrong, Red Hat claims "Each major release of Red Hat software is supported for up to 10 years". Which matches Microsoft's normal procuct life cycle (14 years for XP is an exception).

That might be one of the reasons Red Hat is popular with business customers.

Re:Special treatment again?

[moronoxyd]

2) I can still get older versions on Linux, and more older hardware is still supported by Linux than windows ever supported

And these older versions of Linux get about as much support as Win XP will get in two years time.
There really isn't a difference between using an old linux that doesn't get any security fixes anymore or using Win XP after it doesn't get any security fixes.
Both will still work, but be insecure.

And about hardware support: I know a bunch of printers, scanner, webcams etc. that are not supported by Linux. Trust me, I tried.
The truth isn't as simple as you try to picture it.

Re:Special treatment again?

[couchslug]

"I haven't bothered to get myself a corporate edition of XP Pro to replace my regular retail version. What will happen if I swap motherboards?"

OK, you are lazy. XP has been a free download for a long time, including driver packs, from the usual sources. So has 7 with SLIC loaders which permanently bypass activation. It's easy to get "clean" .isos of both.

I don't care for either. I'd rather run Free Linux than "free" Windows.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Bert64]

Linux is a different beast entirely...

For one, the upgrades are free, and there are still sufficiently light weight versions available that you should be able to run a modern version on your old hardware should you need to.

Also most Linux applications are open source. Most old applications still run fine on new Linux versions, some may work just fine with as little as a recompile (and chances are someone has already compiled anything used by more than a handful of people), and even in the worst cases it's possible to modify the code to get it working (and again someone else is likely to have done that already)... I regularly use a handful of programs which have not been updated since the mid 90s, running on a modern 64bit linux system.

And finally if all else fails, linux is open source... So just because one distributor has ceased providing support, doesn't mean you can't find someone else willing to maintain it. If there were as many users stuck on RedHat 7 as there will be on XP then there would be more than enough demand for several companies (and probably non profit groups too) to spring up and provide such support.

On the other hand, considering all the above, how many people do you really think are truly stuck on old linux versions? Most ancient Linux installs i've seen were down to laziness, where the system is not deemed critical enough to bother updating, and could be updated just fine if someone would bother. By contrast, i regularly see NT4 systems around which cannot be upgraded.

It is possible to make win7 use the xp style taskbar...

Also, if you don't qualify for a corporate volume xp license then you won't be able to get one legally... You could probably claim that after it reaches end of support xp is abandonware, but you'd still need to resort to a warez corporate version or an activation crack.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Bert64]

Windows only really has drivers for hardware that was intended for use with x86 compatible systems. I have various PCI cards that were designed for use on Sparc, Alpha or MIPS based machines and for which there are no windows drivers, but linux handles them just fine... Sun ethernet cards being just one such example.
And then there is the hardware itself, windows either does not run at all on other platforms, or only has an ancient long abandoned version... MIPS and PPC support were cut off after NT4 SP1, Alpha support ended after NT4, IA64 support is going away and ARM support is not released yet, and will be very limited compared to what linux has.

I also have a number of headless servers that cannot boot windows because they don't contain any video hardware (linux boots fine on serial)...

I have an old HP all in one scanner/printer, HP only produced closed source drivers upto 32bit windows xp and macos 10.4 (ppc), the linux drivers are open source so not only do they still work, they come by default on most desktop oriented distros. Incidentally, the printer component still works by default on windows/osx using a generic deskjet driver, but the scanner component does not work at all.

I used to have a DEC Tulip NIC in my workstation, none of the 64bit versions of windows support it (unless you count the old version for the alpha cpu), and yet linux continues to support this card in the latest kernels.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some, it reached complete EOL at the start of this year though.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Waccoon]

And until very recently (2 years from now) there will still be development on XP.

Whether you like the development they're doing or you think it's adequate is a different situation than it not being supported.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

How many Linux and OSX releases are supported for 12 years?

How many Linux distributions (where maintainers stayed in business) have not seen a major upgrade for the better part of a decade? That's the time it took from XP to Vista. And then the upgrade wasn't even considered an upgrade by many - so maybe you should look at the time it took from XP to Win7 even?

XP shipped End of 2001, Vista Shipped end of 2006. That would be 5 years, Not sure what calculator you are using but I would not call 5 years the better part of a decade.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I am heavily sceptical about - 2 - linux supporting more hardware than windows, almost all the hardware in existance was released with Windows drivers, Windows supporting less just does not make sense and it is not what I have encountered."

No. All of the desktop hardware in existence is supplied with Windows drivers. This is not the same thing as "all the hardware in existence". SCADA systems, which are typically embedded, flight control, weapons control, appliances based on RISC or ARM (not to mention network devices running custom chips), all non-intel/x86 server hardware etc etc is more Linux oriented than Windows oriented. Its not even a comparison really, the Windows deployment base is itty bitty compared to the Linux deployment base. Look up the statistics, its not even close.

Secondary to that - whoever built a fucking SCADA system on windows xp = fired. Now. All of them. Developers, Managers, Executives the whole damned company even. A mission critical "can't stop" function should not be running a damned desktop operating system. I dont care who produced it.

Re:Special treatment again?

[sensationull]

Ah, yes, you are talking about extremely specific hardware that is compared to x86 stuff is about as common in the general population of computers as unicorns are in the population of horses. Likewise by the processor types.

I do take your point with the printers as many of the cheaper devices never did get signed drivers for the later versions. As you say most of the time a generic, or in hp's case from the same series. To be fair, no one - least of all hp - would have thought that those printers would still be working by now given the quality of their internals which were generally the printer equivilent of a winmodem. They were generally kinder to their laser all in one line as those could concevibly still be working.

There again, printing itself is a bit of an anachronism, I got a printer quite some time ago, and a ream of paper which I still have not made it a quater of the way through. With that kind of usage pattern even the much lower end hp all in ones will keep going forever so long term drivers may be more important but with a new one costing NZD$60 at a supermarket is the hassel really worth it. A wasteful view I know but I have had meals more expencive.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is that if you have an important (as per the example, SCADA) system, with Linux at least you can weight the price of upgrading the system versus suporting it.
With Windows, you don't have that second choice.

Having said that, I have no simpathy for anyone who actually thought that MS would support Windows XP forever.
If you depend that highly on a system and have no upgrade strategy for it, you get what you deserve.

Re:Special treatment again?

[rjstanford]

XP shipped End of 2001, Vista Shipped end of 2006. That would be 5 years, Not sure what calculator you are using but I would not call 5 years the better part of a decade.

I don't know. The late 90s were pretty darn fun, for me at least. Way better than the first 5-6 years, and some fantastic New Year's parties to boot.

Re:Special treatment again?

[JasterBobaMereel]

Please go out and buy a copy of Windows 95 or 2000 (or in a couple of years time XP) .... oh you can't - But I can download and use legitimately a very old version of Linux

I know these will all be insecure but in some cases I just don't care (they will not be connected to the internet) and I have no choice the hardware will not run a later version...

XP is very often used on POS devices (I know from the reboot screens) and many of these are unlikely to be able to be upgraded, what do you suggest people do with these? (I suspect the answer is they will just keep running it until the hardware dies)

Also XP (or at least the core of it) is what the XBOX runs ... perhaps people should upgrade these as well?

Printers Scanners and Webcams, are the prime examples of hardware that only ever had Windows drivers, and the manufacturer never even released the driver for later or earlier windows versions ....try getting a driver for one of these for a version of Windows that came out after the device and you will have the same issue ...no driver and no support from the manufacturer ...

Re:Special treatment again?

[tibit]

That's about right :)

Re:Special treatment again?

[tibit]

It's an interesting offshoot of the hardware abstraction layer and a particular OSS kernel development model. People were getting linux to work on those Sparcs, Alphas, and MIPSs, so they wrote drivers for the hardware. Those drivers would then, barring bugs, work on any machine with a PCI subsystem. Bugs could be fixed as there was source for them. The drivers did not need to bit rot if they were decently made. The ongoing maintenance was usually required to be done by whoever redid kernel infrastructure; they'd have then to fix all the drivers that got broken by, say, finer kernel locks, etc.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Bert64]

Non x86 hardware is actually very common...

Consider ARM based phones, ARM/MIPS/PPC based set top boxes routers and wifi access points, PPC based games consoles, PPC based macs from just a few years ago, MIPS/ARM based netbooks and tablets etc.

They are also common in larger businesses, i see a lot of PPC and zSeries boxes from IBM, some of which are running Linux, especially in places like banks. There are also a lot of Sparc boxes around, although those are usually running Solaris.

My solution to the printing problem (i have similar usage patterns to you, maybe a handful of sheets a year) is to buy an old but still fully functional laser printer which supports postscript. I can pretty much guarantee that any os i try to print from will support postscript, and will continue to do so many years from now, so no need for drivers. Also being a laser printer, the ink doesn't dry out like it would in an inkjet.
It has a paper tray which holds 500 sheets, i filled it when i first got the printer 4 years ago and its 3/4 full still, and the toner is good for a few thousand more sheets.

Re:Special treatment again?

[tibit]

You are not serious, are you?

Re:Special treatment again?

[0111 1110]

If you can find a Windows 7 x64 driver for my Chaintech AV-710 sound card that actually works I would be most grateful and would immediately pirate a copy of Windows 7 Embedded so that your employer could gain even more market share. Working drivers exist for Linux and XP x64, but not for Windows 7 x64.

Re:Special treatment again?

[allo]

> Win 7 supports far less hardware than any version of Linux
uh, oh ...

what about some VERY early version of linux?

Re:Special treatment again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your point doesn't make any sense. Linux is always backwards and forwards compatible with every version. If I had an old SCADA system from 1995 and I was wise enough to put Linux on it I could today upgrade the kernel and all of the tools to their latest versions today. Microsoft's development model is broken that every time they release a new version of their OS they have to strongly break compatibility. This is silly and can be avoided if they tried and it wouldn't take a lot of effort. For example, there's no good reason that you couldn't use IE9 on XP, they just didn't want you to. They can claim until they're blue in the face that XP lacks the sandboxing support, but software engineers can easily code around things like that. They could turn off reliance on the sandbox when under XP, or they could port their sandboxing capabilities to XP. They refused to do either because they want to force people to upgrade to their latest and greatest OS. Chrome, Firefox, Opera, and Safari all run on XP. This is a big black eye for MS in my opinion. I think relying on anything from MS for industrial systems is a disaster.

Re:Special treatment again?

[Belial6]

Your confusion on drivers is that you are under the impression that drivers written for Windows 3.1,95,XP will work on Windows 7. Linux has drivers for more software because most of the drivers can be, and more of the are, updated to work on each new version of Linux. Where as with Windows, the manufacturers frequently don't bring their drivers forward to new versions of Windows, so the hardware is not compatible with Windows 7.

Re:Special treatment again?

[sensationull]

Yea there is that kind of hardware around but most of it you would not need or want to put windows on. Here at least I can count on one hand the number of general purpose computers that I have seen recently that are not x86 based. SPARC etc are more of a curiosity, PPC was in the Mac but they were insanely expencive and are all so old now that all I know of have been binned.

When you limite it to places where Windows has business being (consumer and work PCs/laptops) the driver support is extremely good. For random gear like the stuff your describing I'd probably have to raid a university basement or something. In consumerland x86 is king for GP PCs. Phones and ultramobile stuff is really something they did not contest with full blown windows, CE and Phone 7 run on it though but that is outside the topic just like routers and APs as they are embedded defined use objects rather than general purpose gear to anyone but those who can customise them.

Re:Special treatment again?

[JasterBobaMereel]

...I like all the notices on these "for distribution with a new PC only" I did say 'legitimately' these are breaking the licence agreement before I even open it,..

Re:Special treatment again?

[tibit]

Read carefully. Not all of them are like that. Many of them are OEM and require bundling with any piece of PC hardware. A memory stick will do.

Re:Special treatment again?

[madhi19]

Forget getting an old version of Linux you can get a modern slim version like Puppy or DSL and run it on some very old hardware we are talking stuff that can't even run XP.

Hey look! Bias!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Microsoft's RECENT announcement..."

Fuck this outright lie and loaded statement. The support cycle for XP is as old as the OS itself. The end of extended support date was set over a freaking decade ago. It's not like they suddenly just said that everyone has 2 years to upgrade.

If Slashdot is still around in 8 years I fully expect a "MS ENDS WINDOWS 7 SUPPORT - FORCES UNNEEDED UPGRADE!!!1" posting.

Re:Hey look! Bias!

[Bert64]

Your seeing this from the wrong angle...

While it's somewhat greedy of MS to force people to upgrade like this (after all, many products continue working for much longer than this), the blame is firmly placed on the users...
If you bought XP, then you did so knowing that support for it would end no sooner than a given date. If you bought a product with a finite lifespan, and then failed to make appropriate plans for a replacement before the end of that lifespan then its entirely your own fault.

The problem is that lots of people did this... There is a lot of short sighted thinking out there..
Now normally noone else would care if someone shot themselves in the foot like this, but with us all being interconnected over the internet, one person's stupidity can easily affect others.

Anti virus vendors do this for years now!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get articles like these; it looks to me as if people are now somewhat blaming MS for stopping support (after 13 years for crying out loud!) due to possible unsecured boxes?

First; this is not the responsibility of Microsoft but the owners of said PC's. If they're smart they'll upgrade to Windows 7 while they still can (so before Win8 comes out).

Second; If this is such a big issue then I'd put more blame on anti virus companies. You know; the ones which provide a virus scanner "free of charge" with a new PC. Of course; its only free for 3 months or so and I'm more worried about the thousands (if not more people) who think they're protected ("I got a free scanner, I have nothing to worry about") while in fact their subscription has ran out a long time ago.

Re:Anti virus vendors do this for years now!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's much more than that. it's a matter of timing also. It doesn't matter that they set the EOL a fucking decade ago, they set it, they can change it.
Currently, it's perfectly timed to coincide with the collapse of the monetary system and government.

Clearly you were not listening at all when the article said upgrading is NOT AN OPTION.

virus scanner "free of charge" with a new PC, is not the same as XP powering a fucking SCADA system.
This is why you don't get it, cause you don't know what the fuck your talking about. Remember that when someone hacks your sewage and your home fills with shit.

Having an Anti-Virus and actually understanding how virus's work are two different things. If your an idiot your anti-virus won't matter. And alternatively if you know your system well enough, you don't need anti-virus at all. Anti virus isn't the core operating system.

Sorry about my attitude, it's nothing personal, I'm just sick and tired of all this fucking fascist with idiot remarks agreeing with said fascist bullshit. It's a good thing your name isn't attached, or you would never get a job in IT.

Re:Anti virus vendors do this for years now!

[moronoxyd]

It's much more than that. it's a matter of timing also. It doesn't matter that they set the EOL a fucking decade ago, they set it, they can change it.
Currently, it's perfectly timed to coincide with the collapse of the monetary system and government.

Clearly you were not listening at all when the article said upgrading is NOT AN OPTION.

So it's Microsofts mistake that the companies that develop SCADA systems and the companies that bought SCADA systems didn't care to think about upgrade paths, even though they knew well in advance that support for Windows XP will end and even WHEN it will end?

People should really stop blaming everybody else for their own stupidity.

Re:Anti virus vendors do this for years now!

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides, I think it's a fair bet that many of those SCADA systems are written a lot worse and set up with far more insecure default configurations than even an unpacthed unfirewalled first release of XP. They're merely obscure enough that the garden variety botnet herder doesn't bother with them, instead leaving the holes for the more dedicated black hat with specific industrial targets in mind to exploit.

Windows may be buggy and insecure, but doesn't even come close to the software written for expensive measurement hardware. No safeties, hardware being driven to destruction by software, crashing on core functions of the system. Though the fact some of that software was obviously written in Visual Basic might indicate what kind of development model they had.

Re:Does anyone *really* think XP is going anywhere

[mug funky]

best post in this story :)

It's not just SCADA...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not just SCADA equipment where the OS can't be replaced due to the manufacturer failing to support anything newer than XP.

I work in a University science department and there are many pieces of scientific equipment which is run by machines running XP, such as mass spectrometers and electron microprobes. In addition to this there are expensive pieces if equipment for which drivers are not available for Windows 7, either 32 or 64 bit and very many where the software won't work correctly if it doesn't run as administrator.

This doesn't even include things such as display screens which have embedded computers running Windows XP Embedded, such as those made by Samsung, which are still being sold with XP installed.

Re:It's not just SCADA...

[Black Parrot]

It's not just SCADA equipment where the OS can't be replaced due to the manufacturer failing to support anything newer than XP.

Plus, if you use SCADA you're probably fuxored already.

Re:It's not just SCADA...

[Anonymous Coward]

We have mission-critical mission management software that simply doesn't work on Vista/7/2008 either (Not will vendor provide support). We're utterly and completely fucked and the useless software vendor is sitting on their asses and given it's military software there's no other option. VMs and Terminal Services only go so far...

Re:It's not just SCADA...

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, lucky you, we've got some systems still running a variety of scientific equipment on DOS, Windows 95, 98, 2000 and there might even be a Windows Me in there (unless that got downgraded to 98 due to issues). Most of the Windows ones are on the network too, because the alternative for data transfer usually is to use floppy or ZIP disks (several of those systems don't support USB mass storage), and the supply of still working ones on hand is diminishing.

Re:It's not just SCADA...

[tibit]

Get some students to reverse engineer the heck out of it, get it running on linux, publicize your efforts, and scare the shit out of the vendor. Such endeavors mean that old hardware will be kept alive, cutting directly into their sales of new stuff. They will pay notice if they know their front end from their rear end; if they don't -- good for them anyway.

Lobby to pass a law to FORCE them to keep updating

[Anonymous Coward]

That is all.

General Purpose OSes have no place in PLCs

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems foolish in hindsight for PLC makers to adopt any General Purpose OS for dedicated, safety-critical, hard-realtime applications. Write or license an embedded controller OS with only the software support needed for the hardware used, and stop there, says the Armchair Engineer (who hasn't picked up a scope probe in decades).

Re:General Purpose OSes have no place in PLCs

[Shimbo]

Seems foolish in hindsight for PLC makers to adopt any General Purpose OS for dedicated, safety-critical, hard-realtime applications.

SCADA isn't hard realtime, almost by definition. It's the bit that provides the human view of what all the individual PLCs are doing (fault monitoring, trends, and slow control). The flexibility of a general purpose OS is well suited for that part.

Re:General Purpose OSes have no place in PLCs

[tibit]

So you seem to be the armchair engineer who lives in a fairyland where non-general-purpose OSes don't have security holes. I have seen TCP/IP stacks that run on MCUs with 256kb of RAM have exploitable holes, so the fact that it runs on a tiny MCU doesn't mean it's automatically secure. You obviously only run software that has been formally proven to have no explotable security holes, and obviously have money for it. We who live in the real world, OTOH, ...

Just wondering about activation

[scsirob]

Set aside for a moment that XP is pretty old. I bought a legal copy of it. It does not have an expiration date on it, I am entitled to run it as long as I wish. My license appears to allow me to replace my hardware if it fails. But at some point XP may find that the changes are 'suspect' and require me to re-activate my legally bought copy. Will Microsoft continue to run their activation servers?

If not, will Microsoft provide a 'Golden Key' to activate without their Genuine Advantage Farm??

Re:Just wondering about activation

[Anonymous Coward]

I've already reached that point with two Windows XP installs; they will not activate anymore despite being legally purchased. I've not even been able to get them restored over the phone.

This was an issue I _knew_ was coming when I first heard of Activation, but everyone was saying it was not going to be a big deal.

I guess they're right, those two computers now run OSS systems =/

Re:Just wondering about activation

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, for security sake, Microsoft should make it clear that after EOL it disables the OS' network stack.

Re:Just wondering about activation

[Cimexus]

I'm pretty sure yes, they will continue to run their activation servers for a long time. As you say, your license doesn't expire.

If in the bleak, distant future when robots rule the world you are still using XP and MS wants to turn off the activation servers they will probably release a patch to disable the activation stuff, or provide a 'golden key' as you say. I'm sure by then they won't care too much about potential piracy of a 20+ year old OS. (That'd be like them caring that I may or may not have some pirated floppy disks of DOS 6.22 sitting in my garage somewhere...)

Re:Just wondering about activation

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF are you on about, I had 2 XP systems that had hardware replacements just this week and both were easily and trouble free activated over the phone?

Re:Just wondering about activation

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF are you on about, I had 2 XP systems that had hardware replacements just this week and both were easily and trouble free activated over the phone?

Was that a question.

Re:Just wondering about activation

[LinuxIsGarbage]

As a case study, at the end of it's life "Money Plus" had activation bits removed and Microsoft released a "Sunset" version which did not require activation:
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=20738

Office XP is the first mainstream product requiring activation that has left the extended support phase of the lifecycle. The activation and update servers for it are still live.

I believe Microsoft has on several occasions said they will provide "golden key", patch, or whatever to work around Activation if they deem keeping the servers online not feasible. Probably once market share is negligible which will likely be past 2014 (maybe closer to 2020?)

I believe Windows update servers are still online for Windows 98.

As far as a patch, in the seedy underworld, WinXP workarounds that aren't VL or SLP based are based on loading a tiny driver that tricks the Activation bits into thinking the OS was booted into safe mode (Activation checks aren't done in safe mode).

Omg its the end of the world!

[wye43]

Someone, please, just think of the poor children running SCADA systems!
Oh wait, its only Windows XP
Oh wait, its actually in 2 years
Oh wait, its just support

Seriously, do we need a "Windows XP is gone and the world is already burning" scare-article posted every month on Slashdot? For the entire period of 7 years of pre-announced end of support for an ancient OS? This shouldn't even be on idle. Is this a tech site or little Suzie's shopping ground for pink dresses?

Support, or broken crutch?

[AliasMarlowe]

I can't say I 've ever had Microsoft XP support, either-

I did, back in the days when XP SP1 was promulgated, but it was not one of Microsoft's prouder moments. The SP1 package downloaded, but would not install. Several attempts yielded the same result, and various help articles on the MS web site were consulted fruitlessly. So I duly filed a report on the MS web site, not expecting much to happen. Somewhat to my surprise, I got a phone call a couple of days later (must have been international, I'm in Finland, and the support person spoke English with an Indian accent). She talked me through what I had already tried, and it failed yet again. So then she told me to disable all firewalls, both in the PC and in the router, and try again. I suggested that would be unwise, since my router logs indicated several nasty packets (fake routing, port probes, etc.) per second were being blocked, and none appeared to be from Microsoft. Her response was that the only way for me to install SP1 was to disable all firewalls. In other words, connect with pants down and legs open to a stream of questionable health. Yeah, right.

I paid attention to her advice, but did not follow it. Instead, I installed Warty Warthog, which seemed to work quite nicely (but had issues with wireless which meant wired connections only). A beta version of Breezy Badger followed, and it autodetected and supported almost everything on the laptop, including the wireless. XP was thrown away shortly thereafter, and the 8-year-old laptop today runs Xubuntu (10.04 LTS, soon upgrading to 12.04 LTS).

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[bronney]

wait.. so what you just said was you never had XP support either..

btw it's "connect with pants down and legs spread" :D

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[FreonTrip]

Just curious - did you happen to try disabling network connections, disabling firewalls, using the full-size network installer from a local volume, rebooting, then re-enabling firewalls before enabling network functionality again?

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[bdleonard]

I was just about to post something similar. I find it hard to believe that using the offline installer was not the first thing they suggested when the "Windows Update" based install failed.

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[Anonymous Coward]

The correct answer was to download the NET install package (which is called that because it is do be donloaded by a network administrator and applied to a lot of machines).

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fishy story. Why not just disconnect the computer from the Internet while you install SP1 if you are worried about bringing down the firewall?

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[AliasMarlowe]

I was just about to post something similar. I find it hard to believe that using the offline installer was not the first thing they suggested when the "Windows Update" based install failed.

Actually, it was the full so-called offline installer that I downloaded, and it failed each time, including trying it with the network cable unplugged. I forget how big the package was, but it exceeded 100MB (maybe 300MB, it was a while ago). Luckily, I had a 3Mb link at the time[*], so the download took less than an hour each time.

I have no idea why the update failed, or even if it was failing because of a network connection issue. Please note that it was MS support who suggested that the internet link was at fault (and I had been quite clear which SP1 package I had). The support person was probably just reading from a script when she told me to disable all firewalls, and she was unwilling to suggest anything else until I had tried that step. So the process ended there.

Whether a network link was needed or not, the suggestion provided by MS support would have left my PC defenceless for some time. Since SP1 was supposed to fix a load of security holes, this sounded like appalling advice.

[*] Actually, it was supposed to be 2Mb, but the ISP had not enabled the DOCSIS on my crappy cable modem, so I usually got closer to 3Mb. They fixed that "problem" about a year later.

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[tokul]

Her response was that the only way for me to install SP1 was to disable all firewalls. In other words, connect with pants down and legs open to a stream of questionable health.

No. In other words you had to think as computer technician and not as mouse button pusher. Your computer has both software and hardware components responsible for network connectivity. Download redistributable SP1 version with firewall on, disconnect your PC from network, turn off firewalls and install SP1.

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[oreiasecaman]

Use 12.04 first on a VM... upgrade only if you can tolerate Gnome3/Unity for more than 5 minutes

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[AliasMarlowe]

Download redistributable SP1 version with firewall on, disconnect your PC from network, turn off firewalls and install SP1.

Which is essentially what I did, as explained in my reply to another making a similar point. Download full offline update package, try to update while disconnected from network, update fails. And the firewall was in the router, not in the PC, so when disconnected from the network, the firewall was irrelevant. It was the MS support person who (perhaps following a script) instructed me to disable all firewalls and connect to the internet. She insisted that firewalls both in the PC (disabled) and in the router (ZoneAlarm, AFAIR) must be disabled, and would not suggest anything else. And yes, I had told her which SP1 package I was using.

Whatever way you slice it, it was a support failure from MS.

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[AliasMarlowe]

Use 12.04 first on a VM... upgrade only if you can tolerate Gnome3/Unity for more than 5 minutes

Actually, that laptop was migrated from Ubuntu to Xubuntu some time ago. Because it's XFCE, the Unity suckage and Gnome3 excreta won't affect it.

I have tried 11.04, 11.10 and a beta of 12.04 in VMs on one of the more capable PCs, and been dismayed by their GUI ordure. Consequently all other PCs in the house have also migrated from Ubuntu to Xubuntu. All are still running Xubuntu 10.04 LTS.

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't say I 've ever had Microsoft XP support, either-

I did, back in the days when XP SP1 was promulgated, but it was not one of Microsoft's prouder moments. The SP1 package downloaded, but would not install. Several attempts yielded the same result, and various help articles on the MS web site were consulted fruitlessly. So I duly filed a report on the MS web site, not expecting much to happen. Somewhat to my surprise, I got a phone call a couple of days later (must have been international, I'm in Finland, and the support person spoke English with an Indian accent). She talked me through what I had already tried, and it failed yet again. So then she told me to disable all firewalls, both in the PC and in the router, and try again. I suggested that would be unwise, since my router logs indicated several nasty packets (fake routing, port probes, etc.) per second were being blocked, and none appeared to be from Microsoft. Her response was that the only way for me to install SP1 was to disable all firewalls. In other words, connect with pants down and legs open to a stream of questionable health. Yeah, right.

I paid attention to her advice, but did not follow it. Instead, I installed Warty Warthog, which seemed to work quite nicely (but had issues with wireless which meant wired connections only). A beta version of Breezy Badger followed, and it autodetected and supported almost everything on the laptop, including the wireless. XP was thrown away shortly thereafter, and the 8-year-old laptop today runs Xubuntu (10.04 LTS, soon upgrading to 12.04 LTS).

And you never considered not being connected to the internet while doing it? When you disable firewalls, AV etc. not being connected would be recommended...

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Although I agree mostly with the point you're making and have personally switched to Linux Mint which worked perfectly out of the box, I would like to point out that you could have just unplugged from the internet. Unless you have more details that you failed to mention...

Re:Support, or broken crutch?

[LVSlushdat]

I'm sort of the default tech support for everybody in my church and neighborhood. I'm working my way thru the people in both area who have computers that: currently have XP installed, and are unhappy with the slowdowns due to malware infestation (which is essentially EVERYBODY with Windows XP on the system). IF their system is un-recoverable without heroic measures (and expenditure of time @ $65/hr), OR they have lost (or never made) their recovery disks, my fix for these people is to pop an Ubuntu LiveCD into their system and say "See how much faster it is, when you don't have any Microsoft cruft on it, and you don't have tons of malware.." and then backup/wipe/install Ubuntu/restore.. The first person I did this for, was a bit hesitant at first, but now that she's been on Ubuntu for about 6 months, she's a convert. About a month after doing her machine, her husband wanted to be converted also, and his XP install was not even choked with malware. Since then I've done 5 more systems, 3 of which were by word-of-mouth from the two original "converts", and expect to do several more in the next month or so... Most of these systems are 4-6 years old with a ram max of 1 or 2GB, so I really couldn't recommend putting Win7 on them, EVEN if the user was willing to pay for it (I don't pirate Windows.. I mean WHY WOULD I, WITH LINUX SO MUCH BETTER).... Everyone I've converted is astounded by how much faster the system is now...

Re:Lobby to pass a law to FORCE them to keep updat

[Anonymous Coward]

That would only work if the same laws applied to everyone. That would be an unmitigated disaster for the open source community which for most part shelves older versions far sooner.

Scaremongering as usual

[DNX Blandy]

It wont make any difference, the 2 main ways viruses etc get into a machine is: 1). Browser 2). Email. The router acts as a natural firewall so it's all down to the browser, anti-virus and the user being a bit savv and looking out for anything that's not right. Security nightmare my arse! We already have a security nightmare and it's the users fault mainly for not watching out.

Re:Well... Look on the bright side.

[CSMoran]

This 'nightmare' assumes [...] we will still have a level of technology that needs computers. [...] I have serious doubts if that assumption is correct.

I suggest you try placing a wager on it then. I'm sure there'll be plenty of people willing to bet, say, $100 on "we will still need computers in two years". If your doubts are THAT serious, why not capitalize on them?

Pretty long EOL too

[Sycraft-fu]

All Windows versions come with 10 years of guaranteed support. 5 years of primary support, where they get new features and service packs, 5 years of extended support, where they get bug and security fixes. MS is known to increase that, but never decrease. In the case of XP, they did extend support. XP is getting 14 years total of support.

I have zero sympathy. You have to cut support for old versions at some point. Even if you are doing everything for free, it just gets infeasible to maintain old code all the time. Ubutnu only does 5 years on LTS releases. In MS's case, it is also because bills need to be paid. They don't charge yearly for maintenance or patches or anything, the cost of that is included in the purchase price. Well, that means that price has to be paid every once and awhile, and once per 10+ years isn't unreasonable.

As you say this isn't happening overnight, nor is it a situation of MS suddenly reducing support life. This has been known for a long, long time. Any company that is sticking their head in the sand about it is bringing about their own problems and on their own heads be it, they can't blame MS at all.

Look people, XP goes out of support in 2014. STFU and deal with it. You've 3 choices:

1) Upgrade. Really, this is not hard. 7 Is an extremely good OS, I've been very pleased with it. It will be supported until January 14, 2020 at a minimum, unless MS chooses to extend it so you've at least 8 years before you need to upgrade again. Once a decade-ish isn't too often to upgrade.

2) Isolate. You can just take the damn thing off the Internet if it is really a problem. We've done that at work with a few old Windows 98 systems. We are a university and so don't always have money for new toys. We get some old piece of equipment that is controlled by software that only runs in 98 or earlier. Fine, it just doesn't get on the net. Yes it is a bit inconvenient. Deal with it. The air gap works.

3) Protect. If it really is an issue, you can lock down and protect the systems. Put them all on a private network that can only be accessed via a controller system that is bitchy about what is and is not allowed in and out. Then internally have each system run a locked down firewall and set of services. Disallow any web access, only access to internal systems. Lock everything down tight, with multiple levels of security, and even lacking patches you can likely keep it secure.

This is nothing more than companies whining because they want to be lazy. They don't want to take the effort to upgrade to a new version of Windows, don't want to take the effort to increase security, and just think that MS should patch shit forever to support their laziness.

No sympathy here.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

You missed 4. Wipe XP and install Linux. That's what we did with our netbook.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Lonewolf666]

Your #4 may help, depending on the reason the user wants to keep the old Windows version around.

-No money for upgrading, and you just want to do some web surfing:
  By all means, switch to Linux. Firefox on Linux works as well as on Windows :-)

-No money for upgrading, and you have some applications for Windows that you really need:
  WINE on Linux may help you, but it is not guaranteed. IMHO WINE will need a few more years to become a reliable (as in everything runs) Windows replacement.

-You have some applications for Windows that you really need and those applications rely on some strange quirk of XP that is no longer present in Vista or Win7:
  Again, you can try Linux & WINE, but I guess your chances are not so good, as you are starting out with an application that is known to be problematic.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[cornjones]

IMHO WINE will need a few more years to become a reliable (as in everything runs) Windows replacement

i feel like i have been hearing exactly that sentence since i started building linux systems in 96.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Lonewolf666]

Oh, I would agree that most applications seem to run these days. But if I look at the app database (filtered for fairly new WINE releases) I still see a bunch of "silver" and "bronze" ratings. Which means "minor issues" (silver) or "runs, but poorly" (bronze).

Maybe I should have written "as in everything runs well"

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[drinkypoo]

XP is getting 14 years total of support.

Not if you're one of the many people who bought a netbook or "nettop" with XP on it in the last few years.

This is nothing more than companies whining because they want to be lazy. They don't want to take the effort to upgrade to a new version of Windows, don't want to take the effort to increase security, and just think that MS should patch shit forever to support their laziness.

Actually, they don't want to pay two hundred bucks to go to an operating system that doesn't run their software. Or at least, that's my situation. Windows XP runs stuff that doesn't run on Wine or on Windows 7.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[rsmith-mac]

Not if you're one of the many people who bought a netbook or "nettop" with XP on it in the last few years.

Not to sound unsympathetic, but you bought a disposable computer that was outdated the day it was manufactured. Netbooks were meant to be frequently replaced; making them underpowered and easy to break is how they got the costs so low in the first place.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

"Direct OEM and retail sales of Windows XP ceased on June 30, 2008" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP)

10 years of support actually sounds pretty reasonable to me, so that would make it mid-2018.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[drinkypoo]

Netbooks were meant to be frequently replaced; making them underpowered and easy to break is how they got the costs so low in the first place.

When you show me an ad from a major OEM (like Acer, ASUS or Gateway — I own netbooks from all three companies) that positions a netbook as intended to be frequently replaced, I'll cede this point, but not until.

You are unsympathetic, and what's more, Microsoft is simply lying about how many years of support many people who bought XP are getting, and slashdotters are helping them do it. There's nothing good about that.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget, they were selling laptops and netbooks with XP on them instead of Vista, until 7 came out. When you consider that, the timing is a little short.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[rjstanford]

And when Microsoft puts terms in its contracts with PC manufacturers that specify that they can't sell XP any more, many (including the /. community) jump up and cry foul. You can't have it both ways.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[drinkypoo]

And when Microsoft puts terms in its contracts with PC manufacturers that specify that they can't sell XP any more, many (including the /. community) jump up and cry foul. You can't have it both ways.

Well, I'm not that person, so I'm not trying to have it both ways. They can stop selling XP any time they want and as far as I'm concerned they can stop supporting it too, but claiming that XP EOL support has a huge lifespan is disingenous when they were selling it two years ago.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

A: We pay a yearly licensing fee where I work. In fact, all businesses do or the BSA may come in and hold them up for cash at bookpoint. It's $120 per processor. And they also charge the same for server for the old and the new versions. Old company I was at; we had 50+ Win2k3 Enterprise installs billed out at 2k apiece.

B: NT4, 2k and XP had excellent driver support for getting apps to the point where they could communicate with hardware in binary. Vista and Win7 have an additional layer in the MPAA/RIAA forced them to add (they threatened not to allow any apps that use blueray or dvd keys to work with windows). Now with WDM 2.0 Microsoft has to secure their OS against exploits haxxors might inject at the driver level to, say, intercept that blueray stream and rip it to disk and that means if the driver isn't WHQL certified the OS turns off specific driver features. There have been articles about this. This is a major pitb for industrial control software mainly because, and I'll put this in nice terms you can understand, THEY DO NOT WANT TO CHANGE ANYTHING AS THOSE SYSTEMS RUN EQUIPMENT THAT COULD KILL PEOPLE OR DESTROY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT OR MANHOURS AND IT TOOK A MAJOR AMOUNT OF CASH FOR THE DEVELOPEMENT CYCLE TO GET THEM TO THAT POINT!

C: You're out in the field, the power is down in an area, and you need to console into a transformer to see what the error code it's setting is. Or you're running airplanes across the US and you want to monitor where your planes are and the health status of each system remotely. Or you administer a telecoms system and have switchboxes in the field and have to console into those systems. Or you want to send reports to a central location of how much material is being used, in real time, to build cars or trucks or engine blocks There are lots of applications where even if you have the system behind VPN, and a Bastion Host, and a bunch of other stuff, you're going to run into problems.

Man up and realize there are serious problems from an implementation standpoint for upgrading especially from a financial and design standpoint; we're at the point now where from a design perspective it may not even make sense to use windows on some of those systems. Isolating those systems completely from the internet is not always feasible and using VM's isn't a solution for SCADA because you DO NOT want an extra layer of emulation in there that !$!@#!@#'s itself when the proc usage gets too high or a memory leak happens.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[ColdWetDog]

The developers are waiting for holographic storage. Or fusion.

But there is progress - Duke Nukem was finally released!

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Billly Gates]

Personally syscraft I am with you %100. I want XP, Ie 6/7, and a bunch of crappy windows 3.0 software to die a horrible death!

But how does that help a companys main goal of raising its shareprice? You are asking beancounters and CEOs to spend millions for something they already have?

IT Guy: Hey boss! You know that great intranet app that works fine that we blew too much money on when our old AS/400 worked fine?
Boss: Yeah
IT Guy: I think we should replace it and spend more money on a solution that may just work as well as what we have now.
Boss: What?
IT Guy" You see MS will cancel security updates and IE 6 SUCKS
Boss: Wait a minute? IE 6 is so bad that employees now have to get work done and can't use facebook anymore? :-)
IT Guy: Yeah. We need Windows 7 because its more secure and I am sure our +10,000 users who run 30 different apps that all communicate with each other, in 4 continents could easily install it and wouldn't mind the change. After all we can save $250,000 now by not having to pay MS for advanced support, by just spending $6,000,000 instead for something that may work as well and is oh so shiny.
Boss: ... Syscraft, don't you have something else better to do like help Susy wonder why internets are slow after trying out Bonzi Buddy?

1,2,3 are not practical. These enterprises will simply continue to use XP until 2038 with advanced contracts from MS. Security is not important to the bottom line in these corporations as that shareprice needs to keep growing so the CEO can keep his job and we all can work to fullfil his dreams.

Clouds and things like Salesforce.com are growing because companies are tired of this and just want to use any platform to log in to get their work done. Paying more money can not guarantee it will work through a browser. They were told their IE 6 apps would work forever regardless of platform last decade and were burned. Its fosilize time.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[narcberry]

I can appreciate that you have no sympathy for people that don't think exactly like you do (and you say you work at a university? no...). However there are many thousands of SCADA systems locked into a combination of Windows XP and proprietary software. Why can't we pay for extended support? We're not just looking for freebies, we're customers and willing to keep paying.

So I can:
1. Upgrade? No, I can't. My proprietary software distributor has upgraded their software to use the newer OS, but it has no backward compatibility with the hardware in use. Sure, I could spend a couple grand upgrading software. How do I tell my boss we need to spend $500K upgrading hardware?
2. Isolate? No. We have many physically isolated sites that need to communicate. We can isolate with some radio telemetry, but ultimately we need to use the inet to keep the sites synchronized. We have several workers that maintain the hardware and migrate site to site which also breaks isolation. Also, the air gap doesn't work, ask Iran.
3. Protect? Yeah, we're trying. Sounds like you've got it all figured out, we'll just apply a perfect security solution. I'm sure we can have that spec'd out in a week.

Sounds like the unni guy has it all figured out. You probably have real customers that need real solutions or else you don't get paid real money...

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[sgtrock]

A good list, but you forgot one:

4) Abandon the old platform and migrate to a new one. (Granted, not always a feasible option. It is, however, a real one that more governmental agencies are beginning to take seriously.)

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Sycraft-fu]

Sorry, again no sympathy because you KNEW THIS WAS COMING. This has been documented, for a long time. MS lists the EOL of their software to the day upon release. You had time to plan, and budget. You still do. Sounds like you stuck your head in the sand hoping MS would just keep supporting an old solution forever. Now you are going to get bit by that.

This really isn't hard and it is how it goes with anything. There are defined support lifecycles. Find out what they are and be ready to deal with the problem in the end. Yes that may cost money, well since you are making "real money" then perhaps you can really spend some. Upgrade to a Windows 7 based solution and you've 8 years to budget for the next upgrade (that's how long it has on support). Or find something else, nobody says you have to use Windows. Find someone that is willing to upgrade and patch an old OS forever. That is going to involve a yearly support contract, probably a very, very expensive one, but you can get that. Call IBM, they'll do that for some things.

For that matter, MS will probably offer you a paid extended support plan, if you really need that. Call them up. They do have retired support options but it is on a case by case basis and it costs money.

Just don't think people should be sympathetic because you ignored a known deadline and don't want to spend money. Sometimes, you don't have a choice, have to spend money to modernize. That is life. If your vendors are fucking you in terms of not letting you just upgrade software, well maybe you should find a new vendor. If you can't because they are the only one who does something, sucks, but budget for it.

This support lifecycle shit is not new, it has been well documented and consistent since NT4. You should be aware of this and have a plan for it more than just whining and looking down on someone who supports a university, rather than a company.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

XP is getting 14 years total of support.

Not if you're one of the many people who bought a netbook or "nettop" with XP on it in the last few years.

This is nothing more than companies whining because they want to be lazy. They don't want to take the effort to upgrade to a new version of Windows, don't want to take the effort to increase security, and just think that MS should patch shit forever to support their laziness.

Actually, they don't want to pay two hundred bucks to go to an operating system that doesn't run their software. Or at least, that's my situation. Windows XP runs stuff that doesn't run on Wine or on Windows 7.

So in other words, MS should support an outdated OS simply because companies that use it make shitty software choices for the apps they run?

How about this - if you invest in a program that never gets updated, you should consider A) new software, or B) hiring your own damn programmers. This expectation that the whole tech world should halt or support shitty outdated code for lazy companies is asinine. It's part of your operating costs - suck it up and deal with it!

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

The EOL dates aren't exactly hidden. What the GP said is true: XP gets 14 years of support, not the people who bought underpowered crap with an outdated OS.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[cyberchondriac]

I really can't complain that XP support is ending, it is quite old, but, it's still my favorite Windows of all time. I'm using 7 on a work laptop, and I'm not more fond of it, but less. I don't care for the subtle changes in the interface, the way they made it more convoluted to get to your network properties or to the various display settings- it seems less direct. Frankly it reminds me of Vista still a little too much in that respect. And oddly, Word totally broke on it, I had to reinstall it (Word, not the OS). No idea why, and event viewer and system logs told me nothing useful. I got the laptop (Dell) preconfigured/installed and slightly used though, maybe the previous owner did something wonky. I prefer to set up an OS myself.
So just what is it that's so much better about 7 over XP: is it the security, or under the hood performance..? Something else? Maybe I should invest in it before they force us to Windows 8 -now that just looks plain horrible to me.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[halcyon1234]

In MS's case, it is also because bills need to be paid.

I wonder if they can't make some money off of this, then. Put up a Kickstarter. If x% of existing businesses agree to kick in $20 - $100 each, we'll focus our R&D on maintenance and patches for XP instead of developing Windows 8."

Companies pay a pittance compared to an upgrade path, Microsoft gets paid a good chunk of change, XP lives on.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[u64]

More choices.

4) When possible, download and install Linux.

5) If possible, download and install ReactOS. May eventually be safer than XP.

6) When possible, pay and install MacOS ?

I'm thinking, paying for something from the Vista family, Windows7/8/9. Is the very last resort.

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

......
3) Protect. If it really is an issue, you can lock down and protect the systems. Put them all on a private network that can only be accessed via a controller system that is bitchy about what is and is not allowed in and out. Then internally have each system run a locked down firewall and set of services. Disallow any web access, only access to internal systems. Lock everything down tight, with multiple levels of security, and even lacking patches you can likely keep it secure.

You left out the most suitable choice.... 4) Put Linux on the netbook, and forget about Windows anymore....

Re:Pretty long EOL too

[Anonymous Coward]

Fair enough I suppose, for corporate systems.

This is nothing more than companies whining because they want to be lazy.

There are plenty of home users with personal systems that were shipped with WinXP at least as recently as 2006, and IIRC it was available from OEMs until sometime in 2008. Many of those people only need e-mail and a web browser, maybe basic office tools as well. Why should they be forced to upgrade? Your option #1 is expensive for many of them; #2 is impossible (web browser, e-mail); #3 is infeasible to DIY for most of them, so unless they have a "friend who knows computers", it's roughly as expensive as #1.

Now, users with older hardware and simple needs could probably migrate to one of the friendlier Linux distros, but most of them are definitely going to need that "friend who knows computers", and he better be one of the minority who are at least familiar with Linux.

No sympathy here.

I'm not saying MS should be required (or even expected) to support WinXP longer, but I think having sympathy for these home users is not unreasonable.

- T

Windows 95?

[Black Parrot]

Does anyone know what *actually* happened when everybody was saying the same thing about the end of support for Windows 95 a few years back?

Big problem, little problem, no problem?

Re:First?

[Black Parrot]

Slashdot needs a button that says "Submit, if this is going to be the FP; otherwise cancel".

Re:And they do it 100 yrs after Titanic sinks, hmm

[Black Parrot]

You just have to wonder if its more than coincidence that this gets announced on the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic. Coincidence??? Hmmm...

And 2012, no less!

Oh, wait... two more years. We'll have to find something else to blame for the end of the world.

Yes it really is

[Sycraft-fu]

Microsoft has a very well known, documented, life cycle for their software. Go look it up on their site. When you buy Windows part of that price is service and support. You get patches at no additional charge for the life of the software. However at the end of the life, that stops, you have to buy it again. The life of the software is 10 years from release minimum. That's longer than I see elsewhere, even Ubutnu is only 5 for their LTS. Redhat may be willing to go longer, I don't know, but of course you pay yearly, quite a lot in fact, for a service contract.

It isn't unreasonable for them to want some money once a decade to have patches developed. It also is plenty of time to plan for upgrades. It isn't as though they jump out of the closet and announce an EOL at random times, it is known years (actually a decade) in advance. Like Windows 7, it ends support January 14, 2020. They may extend that date, if there's a reason, but they won't shorten it. So upgrade, and you don't have to worry for 8 years.

Re:Yes it really is

[Anonymous Coward]

With Linux, you can be supported as long as you like. If you want to run Debian 1.0, you can get support if you're willing to pay enough for it. With Windows XP, you don't have that option - as long as no one but Microsoft has the source code, no one but Microsoft can provide support.

One possible solution to this is to amend copyright law to require software authors to provide source code along with binaries (at least, if they want it to be covered by copyright). Actually, we probably should have done this when compilers were first developed: copyright law was never intended to allow authors to distribute their works in a locked-down, unmodifiable form.

Re:Yes it really is

[jones_supa]

Redhat may be willing to go longer, I don't know, but of course you pay yearly, quite a lot in fact, for a service contract.

Red Hat Enterprise Linux has 10 years of support, and 3 more years of extended support. Fedora is kept alive only for 1 year, so for that there's really no long-term support (it's still a nice distro though).

Re:Yes it really is

[Sycraft-fu]

Well 10ish years seems reasonable to me. Not going to hate on RH for that at all (we use RHEL around here, but we upgrade it when new versions come out).

That's just my overall point: That you don't get forever support on OSes. At some point, if you want support, you have to upgrade. MS's 10 year long support is pretty good over all. Seems to be in line with other enterprise support is RHEL is 10 years.

Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[Aereus]

Am I the only one who has to ask why these critical SCADA systems are set up in such a way that they would be vulnerable to networked viruses? Shouldn't they be isolated and theoretically only updated by USB or something where you could insure the source media was clean before use? (And yes I know even that is a rather naive belief)

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[MadKeithV]

Because some of these systems might be mission-critical but in places that are NOT readily accessible to the support staff.

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[omglolbah]

Some reasons a major oil company requires networked access to the control system on oil rigs from onshore networks:

* Exporting backups. This is a big one.
* Exporting logging data, done through a 'data diode' luckily.
* Remote troubleshooting. ("Integrated Operations" is the new buzzword for having a team onshore to help offshore without flying out..)
* Remote auditing.

There is a theoretical network path (through about 6 layers of firewalls) from the internet to the controllers running the emergency shutdown system on most rigs these days. Getting there would be a monumental task due to the security in place. Several different vendor firewalls to avoid a security flaw in one allowing access. Very strict firewall rules. Temporary firewall allowances during certain time periods for exporting backups and such. Constant monitoring and flagging of suspicious activity. List goes on.

At the core though, the HMI runs on winxp sp2 workstations and the servers run server2003.

While it would be awesome to have isolated systems, they get just too cumbersome to use. As always functionality and usability versus security is the tradeoff :(

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[itsdapead]

Am I the only one who has to ask why these critical SCADA systems are set up in such a way that they would be vulnerable to networked viruses? Shouldn't they be isolated and theoretically only updated by USB or something where you could insure the source media was clean before use? (And yes I know even that is a rather naive belief)

Looking up SCADA on Wikipedia, a lot of those applications sound like they need remote access, but it is a no-brainer that they should be hiding on VPNs behind industrial-strength firewalls, with no unnecessary software or open ports.

However, given Windows XP's less-than-stellar security record combined with the apparent scarcity of hackers remotely blowing up factories, this is probably already the case.

Actually, Windows XP sounds a bit cutting-edge for this sort of application - how many are still running Windows 3.11?

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[Anonymous Coward]

I talked to a security researcher specialized in SCADA systems about this. The key reason for connecting the systems to the network seems to be integration with administrative systems (e.g. billing systems).

Also, student got its foothold in the SCADA systems by spreading on USB keys, so for a determined attacker, it doesn't really matter; and most attacks against SCADA systems to this date has been from determined attackers.

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that many, but I know several that do use 3.11 for local machine control - with an XP terminal nearby for more general supervision.

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of them are proprietary OS's, much like flight control and weapons systems.

That being said if your going to run these systems - fully isolated network. Just like the government does with highly sensitive stuff. Your logging, backup etc etc that was mentioned above - that doesnt actually require internet access. Internet != network. No public IP's, no nat'd ports and many many airgaps should be present to prevent an evil packet reaching these systems. It doesnt matter if it costs 4x, put together a slide show comparing that 4x vs the cost of a security breach resulting in the cooling system of a reactor failing. Management will pony up.

This is a core problem with most IT people - they dont speak to management except when doing the "pissy pants" routine about viruses and other nonsense that management does _not_ give a shit about. Talk to them in terms of risk, cost and business impact (with slides) and the wallets will fly open and light speed.

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[TheDarkMaster]

You simply do not put internet acess in a critical system, period. You can have a local network, just do not plug the damn thing on the internet. A shitfull scriptkiddie can't do anything against a isolated system

Re:Why are SCADA systems not offline?

[omglolbah]

There is no internet access on the critical system.

There is however a theoretical path between the secure system and the internet through several layers of individually firewalled networks.

Control network Server network Plant network Office network internet.

You would have to compromise a firewall and/or a machine on each network to get to the control network.
Be it that both operating system, vendor and configuration differs on all of them this is a fairly big task.

The risk is evaluated as acceptable by those with the responsibility.
Functionality and risk has to be weighted in the real world.

Hell, even IF you got that far into the system the most real harm you could do is shut down the plant into 'fail safe'. Shutdown controllers will not accept programming requests without a physical key being turned in the field cabinet ;)

Re:Well... Look on the bright side.

[Black Parrot]

I'll bet vast sums of money that the world won't end within the next two years.

If it doesn't, I win big; if it does, I won't have to pay.

When

[EvanGG]

When did /. become nonsensical fear mongering? So over this website. But... I loved you. :(

Spot on

[Viol8]

But then with a lot of supposed "realtime" and "safety critical" systems, those goals only apply so long as it doesn't affect potential profits. "Whats this? Writing our own kernel would cost $$$?? To hell with that , just grab a copy of Windows and we'll work from there!"

These days however with the linux kernel being easily modifiable they have no excuse unless they're simply afraid of the GPL.

Re:Spot on

[Anonymous Coward]

These days however with the linux kernel being easily modifiable they have no excuse unless they're simply afraid of the GPL.

There's a BSD for that.

That's what happens...

[Anonymous Coward]

When you build a highly customized system that: A) will be in use for many decades B) is nearly impossible to change or replace C) is maintained by a third party who has no incentive to continue maintaining it for the duration of your use

WHOAR XP and SCADA?

[thegarbz]

It's an amazing thought that people run Windows XP on SCADA machines.

I'm used to seeing massively outdated Windows NT4 machines.
One plant I was at last year ran a SCADA system on a version of DOS.

On the upside those aging NT4 and DOS machines were not physically network connected because they couldn't be. At best they often sported a MODBUS connection or proprietary MODBUS+ connection. That's one of our excuses for not upgrading one of out NT machines. XP doesn't support the 8bit ISA card we need to talk to the proprietary vendor crap, and the vendor won't provide an upgrade without upgrading the entire PLC, which we will have a window of opportunity to do in 3 years and god knows how much that is going to cost.

Re:WHOAR XP and SCADA?

[coder111]

Hmm, I think DOS is actually quite OK for embedded/control systems. Simple to program, simple to run, almost no complexity, low hardware requirements. Quite easy & direct hardware access. No multiple processes or congestion at CPU to worry much about so it's almost realtime. Ok there are interrupts...

Disclaimer- although I have never developed embedded control systems, I have developed software in C/C++ and assembly for DOS. I did know insides of DOS in and out. It's been more than a decade and I still do not know the insides of windows nor Linux well- these systems are just too complex to fit them in your brain and comprehend everything that is going on. OTOH I don't even bother with low level software development any more- and Java is good enough for enterprise & web.

--Coder

Re:WHOAR XP and SCADA?

[bwcbwc]

At which point they will just close your plant and move production to China, Mexico, or whereever costs are the "cheapest" at that time.

Re:WHOAR XP and SCADA?

[thegarbz]

Never said it wasn't. I fully support the idea. There are limited attack vectors due to limited support for external connectivity and it would require purpose built software. Not that this would prevent a targeted stuxnet style attack, but it's a layer of security all by itself. Best of all, no autorun, which is what malware brought in on external media would need to work since there's no reason to run an executable on such a machine other than at setup time.

Activation?

[Anonymous Coward]

So what's going to happen after the cutoff, will it still be possible to activate installations? Will they release a final patch that removes the crap?

So what?

[fluch]

So what? Computers running Win98, Win95 etc. are already in this situation. Nobody complains about them...

spelling: student = stuxnet

[Anonymous Coward]

student = stuxnet, bloody autocorrect!

The answer is simple...

[Mistakill]

Upgrade your OS (and maybe your hardware)...

It isn't a question of sympathy

[reason]

The question isn't whether you have sympathy for the companies and individuals who will be directly affected. The question is: how much will YOU be affected by all the companies and individuals who are too lazy or ignorant to take steps 1,2 or 3? Might you have given your credit card details to one of those companies? Might you depend on another in some business sense? Might a few tens of thousands of those individuals have their computers turned into parts of botnets that will be used to attack your systems, or systems you rely on?

Cuts the "chord"?

[couchslug]

"English, motherfucker! Do you speak it?"

Re:Cuts the "chord"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, he certainly can't spell it. Normally I don't find gross spelling errors to be too confusing. But as they get worse and more plentiful I've had many instances where the error has interfered with the meaning of the sentence. I feel you pain, especially with something as stupid as "cord".

Give up. Slashdot, and the Young in general, are intellectually devolving. You can not stop it and your anger is injurious to your health.

Compute in peace.

Re:Cuts the "chord"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it english class? You've never misspelled a word I guess, right??

Re:Cuts the "chord"?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Homonym, motherfucker! Do you understand it?"

Re:Cuts the "chord"?

[Anonymous Coward]

"English, motherfucker! Do you speak it?"

I'm not English, I don't fuck my mother, and yes I speak IT.

No, that's typical M$ support.

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember back when Word 95 had major issues with file corruption. My publisher wanted all of their Word 5.1 for Mac upgraded to the more recent Word, and so I had to jump. I immediately purchased the support pack. Well, we got through the upgrade. ... using Quark for anything critical... but for three years M$ did nothing but deny that any corruption was happening, and refuse to accept copies of the before/after files. It cost my company about a quarter of its income, because getting through those corruption issues was a killer on labor.

Later, I learned that Microsoft had been fully aware of it, and had set an official policy of Deny Deny Deny. Company internal documents, and all that.

[Trial lawyers? You listening? Oh yes... Dept of Justice? You only need to deport an Australian, and then put him on trial for exposing corporate corruption. You have a precedent too, with Julian Assange and all those people who exposed torture and murder.]

After that, I also learned that these were the same corruption issues that WordPerfect had been having, and that Microsoft had hired a top bigwig from Wordperfect to make Word more like WordPerfect. Read between the lines, if you will.

Point being, that your experience with Microsoft was rather typical.

Oh... BTW... I do believe I'm giving a free pass to Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Apple in this post. Taco, could we have more articles about how certain companies are overly bashed in the media? I'm loosing the slashdot feel.

ReactOS

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe by the time this happens ReactOS will be ready for prime time. This sure sounds like a sales pitch to me. Still running XP systems, no more MS support no problem we at React... have you covered. Mind you I have no connection to said project and only a little knowledge of it, But it sure comes to mind after reading this. Maybe its their big chance?

So take back the copyrights.

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft aren't losing any money by other people making "Joe Bloggs Windows XP Rebadge" and with the source code out there, the holes can be fixed.

And, since the copyrighted work has to be put in the public domain anyway, this is merely what is required to be done in about 80 years time anyway. If you're given an easement on land to place, for example, a toll road, that land cannot be held on to if you decide, after making enough money off the toll, that nobody is allowed to use that road any more. So why should the less restricted *intellectual* property be allowed to do this when *real* property isn't?

Eminent Domain. And, since Microsoft do not think it is worth anything (else they would be selling it, and not pursuing copyright infringement of it), the "fair value" for this "property", even for Microsoft, is zilch.

As long as they hold copyrights, YES.

[Anonymous Coward]

Since they are the only ones "allowed", and the only ones who *can*, then yes, they SHOULD be required to continually support a platform they hold sole control over.

If they don't want to do that, they CAN release the source code to the public domain (heck, use BSD, they love the BSD, right?)

Re:As long as they hold copyrights, YES.

[glwtta]

Since they are the only ones "allowed", and the only ones who *can*, then yes, they SHOULD be required to continually support a platform they hold sole control over.

What a ridiculous thing to say. It's their product, they can do, or not do, anything to it that they want.

Nope, they get full support

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, they get full support. If you're willing to pay someone to put fixes in, it's supported.

Now, try and find someone to pay to fix that Windows XP bug when Microsoft won't...

Who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft have double-triple-heptuple dipped for that code.

How much is that code "worth"?

I.e. code that does the IP stack.

Bugger all.

Just because you used the word "and" in your previous books doesn't mean you extend the copyrights by writing another book with "and" in there.

You DO get an update. The next kernel

[Anonymous Coward]

And, like with the service packs for XP et al, they're free. Some software may require rebuying because it's not compatible with this "Service Pack" (just like in Windows) and other software won't work unless you have this "Service Pack" included (just like Windows).

Re:You DO get an update. The next kernel

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh yes can see it now. Multi million dollar piece of industrial machinary.
Engineer : Hey guys we need a patch for RHEL 3 for Vulnerability X
community : Sure go here Y, You can download the latest version for free
Enginner : NO, I said I need a patch for this version. You know the one that is tested, works and is certified for THIS peice of hardware.
community : it is supported you just need to upgrade
Engineer : FUCK YOU ARSEHOLE.

this is it.

[Gravis Zero]

this is your real Microsoft Windows Genuine Advantage: an ultimatum to upgrade or be abandoned with no way to fix future issues.

long live linux.

security: another reason to get rid of microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Another reason to get rid of microsoft OSes if you needed one. As if anyone with any sanity would be using win XP or ANY windows OS for anything security critical.

Did you know that there are statistically only a few days per year average when windows is NOT vulnerable to an unpatched zero day administrator level remote exploit (which includes equivalently unpatched user exploit + privilege escalation)... seriously you have to be very stupid to use windows of any version in industrial control of anything, or serving anything; well to use it period for anything more critical than playing computer games or well backed up kids homework!

Switch to linux, cut off the evil monopoly. And dont go to apple either they are just as bad as microsoft as evil monopolies go they just dont have quite enough users yet.

Chord??

[Trailrunner7]

"cuts the chord"? Are they dissecting sheet music now? Cripes.

So why didn't you say 4 years was enough

[Anonymous Coward]

So why didn't you say 4 years was enough the first time? The FIRST time, you were all "they're keeping it going for 14 years! That's good!" whereas what you SHOULD have said was "They kept it for more than 4 years, which is plenty long enough".

Because what you're doing is whipping away the goalposts when your earlier contention is proven wrong.

Re:So why didn't you say 4 years was enough

[kyrio]

The OS was likely completely subsidized by the crapware that came with it. They got their OS and 4 years of support for free. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

If we chip in together, that's $30/hr

[Anonymous Coward]

And that kernel developer may spend 100 hours working the fix in, but that gets to ALL licenses. If you buy the new windows for $100, all you get is the one copy. If you have or want another computer fixed too, you'll have to pay again.

Now, if you're all alone in your basement, this $100 may be a bargain.

But most people know several hundred people and businesses, each of which may be willing to part with, say, $3, to get the bug fix in.

If you're going to say that not all of them want the bugfix, then why would the next version of windows have the bug fix if so few people wanted it fixed? You'd spend $100 to get the same problem, as opposed to spending $600 and getting a working product. Spending less on something that doesn't work isn't "penny wise" at all.

Just how long is Microsoft supposed to support XP?

[Eezy Bordone]

There's this thing people can buy called 'Extended Support' from Microsoft and you will continue to get security patches for their legacy OS's. If your company can't shell out a few bucks for this I don't see how it is Microsoft's fault. I'm sure there is other software in your environment that has similar support contracts why is Microsoft singled out? 10 years is a long time to support a product.

A catch-22

[nhat11]

MS can continue to support XP but that only encourages usage of an ever growing outdated OS or MS can stop (which they most likely will) and the corps/business/whatever will have to figure out a way to upgrade and they most likely won't upgrade since people's mentality is if it works, keep using it!

Just firewall 'em

[Anonymous Coward]

Keeping those pesky xp machines safe is pretty darn easy. Just isolate 'em behind firewall completely and control using tcp/ip-capable kvm switches. End of story.

Useless forum

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear geebus, this forum has been over run by a bunch of whining children. Useless now.

It's a driver issue for me

[Anonymous Coward]

We have a small family business in a city where much of our good manufacturing jobs have gone overseas. Everybody who walks in the front door is looking for a deal because they have no money, or perhaps because their new job at Wal-Mart doesn't pay like the old one.

        I don't have the customer base or cashflow to just upgrade at a whim. My major issue is we have several commercial duty printers that cost several thousand dollars each. We do some pretty customized printing, odd sized paper, etc. Under Win 7, NONE of these printers will do anything more than single sided sheet of paper, cannot even duplex. I've contacted HP directly, had the Xerox people in here, and in both cases, they refuse to provide new drivers that will make these printers work under Win 7 the same way they do under XP. Even simple things like duplexing cannot be done in some cases. The official response form these companies? But a new printer. That's it.

          I do run linux, but you know something, even though I can make these printers work under linux no problem, there is no good substitute for Pagemaker and/or Indesign in Linux. As long as Scribus does not or cannot import my Pagemaker and./or InDesign files, it is useless to me. I have a library of almost 20 years of Pagemaker and InDesign files that we created from the ground up, and untill I can import them, Scribus and therefore by extention I cannot use Linux.

      So I do not mind upgrading to Win 7 in itself, it's the fact that some of my high end printers and scanners do not work well with Win 7 because "They are too old".

      One more thing - some - well heck, many of these new printers are junk. My old, Made in Japan printers had heavy duty metal bearings and gears. Many of the new, brand name printers made in China use plastic gear and bears, or cheaper metal they physically breaks down more often than the old printers. A ten year duty cycle of heavy day to day use was not uncommon for a good HP, today I am told expect three years then toss it.

  Yeah, in an economy when money is tight everywhere, the upgrade to Win 7 is not doing me much good. For all you guys who say you have no sympathy for guys like me who don't want to upgrade, well sorry, money is tight, we have to keep a tight ship, and when I see perfectly good hardware unable to run under Win 7 simply because somebody will not make a driver for it, well, as Judge Judy would say "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining."

Re:It's a driver issue for me

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you not use Linux as a server with CUPS serving? Another options is to virtualize XP for the "special needs" situations.

None of them ideal, but in this economy I consult in the rust belt, and have to deal with his all of the time.

Re:It's a driver issue for me

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has free virtual pc software that will let you run xp in a sandbox on win7

The manufacturer has no power to stop you

[Anonymous Coward]

The manufacturer has no power to stop you from updating or getting someone else to update his Opel Astra.

Unlike Microsoft (or any CSS company) who DO have the right to demand you don't do this.

Oh, and if a safety issue were found out, even after 15 years, with a production vehicle, a recall and repair/replacement would be required from the manufacturer. If they were selling cars.

Not, apparently, if they're selling software, though...

helicopters

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't you now glad that there's an embeddedXP load running critical systems in your helicopters. What's the TCO/ROI on Microsoft now, genius?

Android

[Anonymous Coward]

For a lot of people it'll be cheaper for them to just buy an Android tablet than it will be to buy a new windows machine.

What Miller does not know...

[Anonymous Coward]

...he should refrain from speaking about.
You do NOT put your SCADA system on the Internet. Period. End of story.
You do NOT enable updates, because any one of them may break your system (this is not really Microsoft's fault. Some SCADA software gets a little too deep into the OS).

Just more fear-mongering. Remember Y2K!! The people who yelled the loudest about dire predicted problems were usually the same ones who could "fix" them for you...for a fee, of course. Same deal here.

Finally the year of Linux on the desktop!!

[Anonymous Coward]

All those XP owners will surely move to Linux now...

Scary article!

[stewbacca]

To the guy in yesterday's thread who couldn't be convinced that security firms are self-aggrandizing bastards who create their own realities and subsequently (over) charge people for their services...terms used in the summary alone: "nightmare, vulnerable, undeterred attacks, potential, appear, even scarier".

But hey, without all the scary hyperbole, the self-employed security "consultants" out there are deprived of income.

Sorry to not have anything positive to contribute this morning.

Re:Scary article!

[bwcbwc]

Yeah, where have these guys been since XP first came out? The security nightmare of XP has been going on for years, simply because it makes it too easy for users to make stupid decisions about securing their system.

Just saying it's ridiculous isn't enough.

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't, however, their product. "Their product" is the compiled Windows XP OS. Which they don't have to make any more. But they don't get to bin our public domain work. They don't get that right and that code IS NOT their product.

Re:Just saying it's ridiculous isn't enough.

[Richard_at_work]

You don't have any rights to the uncompiled code, and you shouldn't have any rights to it either. Live with it.

XP Mode

[Quick Reply]

XP Mode came out with Windows 7 and is a full copy of Windows XP, and therefore depends on Windows XP support to stay secure. My suggestion would be to continue updates for free only to XP mode users and everyone else can receive additional updates on a fee basis (up to the cost of what a Windows 7 license would be) to cover the additional costs of maintenance.

Yes I know my suggestion doesn't count for anything as it is just a Slashdot post.

Windows 7 is the new XP

[Joe_Dragon]

And from the looks of windows 8 it will be passed over. also based on how long it took for windows 7 to roll out on places loaded with windows XP systems they don't want to move to windows 8 right now The best thing that MS can do is to back port the new under the hood stuff to windows 7 or give windows 8 a full desktop with the windows 7 start menu and metro run in a window not full screen only.

XP is here to stay

[Foske]

For me it runs fine on my main system. Windows is nothing more to me than a way to start the applications I need. So Microsoft now forces me to pay E 90,- just so I can safely click my apps again ?

I also run it on a PIII 700 at home, which I use to program microcontrollers and play music for my Saxophone lessons. It is doing that job just fine and has a few ISA cards to support the programming. Wouldn't be surprised if Windows 7 refuses to install on that poor old machine. So now what ? Buy a new machine ? With ISA, Serial port and parallel port support ?

Re:XP is here to stay

[Golden_Rider]

For me it runs fine on my main system. Windows is nothing more to me than a way to start the applications I need. So Microsoft now forces me to pay E 90,- just so I can safely click my apps again ?

When you bought XP, you knew that Microsoft would stop support for it eventually, because they clearly stated that (and the date for it) on their website. In fact, they even extended that support by a few years. Still, you bought the OS, knowing that fact. So it's not as if Microsoft suddenly forces you to upgrade, you were aware of the need to eventually upgrade your OS if you want security updates and support for current hardware for it, and had several years to prepare for that and save up $5 or so every year for the next OS version.

No one cares though

[gelfling]

Security will always be abysmal no matter what.

Redbox

[Rie Beam]

Redbox runs on a modified version of XP...I wonder how they're handling the news currently...

Re:Redbox

[Golden_Rider]

Redbox runs on a modified version of XP...I wonder how they're handling the news currently...

What "news"? The fact that Microsoft will stop support for XP, which has been know for years? It's not as if that should be any surprise for anybody.

An alternative approach

[Anonymous Coward]

This really brings up a broader issue - what should the status of software products be that are "abandoned" by their rights holders. I would suggest that copyright law should be changed such that companies that refuse to support their product should give up rights to the product and release it to the public domain. This would give the rights holders incentive to continue to support these products for those customers that don't want to be forced to unwanted changes.

And if they do abandon their product, then it would be available to an open-source community to maintain it for security and other issues.

Re:An alternative approach

[Anonymous Coward]

This has to be one of the dumbest ideas ever.

What's really scary

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me add my voice to those saying that the idea of SCADA systems running XP and connected to the internet is what's really scary

Unnecessarily Alarmist

[ctrlshift]

This brief makes it sound like the second the timer hits zero and XP support ends, the lights will go out and planes will crash. That's not the way software support works. This will not suddenly render all XP machines inoperative. They will slowly become outdated, less functional, more vulnarable: exactly as you'd expect from not installing updates, no more. I agree that XP has had a good run, much more than most operating systems get, and it's time for it to die, but to say that Microsoft's discontinuing of OS updates will "leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks" is just misleading. I think the far more significant implication of this is the unspoken permission it gives web developers to stop supporting IE6. Which is probably cause for celebration.

What third party code?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or are you assuming there is so there's a reason not to release the code?

And if there IS third-party code in there, how do you know the license forbids release of the code?

Or are you presuming that so you can maintain the code can't be released?

In either case, the code is STILL OUR public domain. If the third parties want to maintain the code against the released windows code, then they can keep their souce secret. But if they don't want to do so, then they have NO REASON to demand that the source be kept hidden and controlled.

Just because a book contains many quoted passages from other books doesn't mean that I'm only allowed to read the book and see "the souce code" of English words they used because it contains quotes of other people's work.

Re:What third party code?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm amazed by this response. I really, truly am. You clearly don't work for a company which produces or manages large proprietary code bases.

They're licensing issues you retard. You can't just publicly release source code which uses closed API's you don't have a license to release the source to.

That would be like Naughty Dog releasing the source code to their PS3 games and telling Sony to piss off.

Support lifetime IP lifetime

[Aidtopia]

Fourteen years sounds like a long time to support a software product. Yet I find it interesting to point out that, in the U.S., any "inventions" that debuted with the release of Windows XP will still have 6 years of patent protection, and the code itself will have another 75 years of copyright protection. This is for a product that's already been unavailable commercially for a while and will be completely dead in two more years.

Overly long IP lifetimes hurt security, technological progress, innovation, and culture.

Digital baby boomer?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this the equivalent of the baby boomer era and its apparent catastrophic impact?

Didn't they already do this?

[argStyopa]

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but haven't we heard many previous times about "MS stopping XP support"...at least 2 or 3 times?

I still get patches nonetheless?

What's different about "this" end-of-support deadline?

Re:Didn't they already do this?

[xlsior]

The difference is that this is the end of the -secundary- support cycle, after which they will stop releasing patches. The previous one was the end of the primary cycle, after which they stopped the addition of new features, OEM installs, and phone support. Theack of security fixes is going to be an issue for companies that depend on the 'XP mode' fearure for some old must-have 3rd party app that wont work under windows 7. XP mode is essentially a complete VM install of windows XP (with full network access as well) This may vwry well become a big attack vector once xp patches stop being released.

NT4, W2k, now XP

[gstrickler]

A client ran an NT4 server (one out of about a dozen servers) until 2009, well past the end of support. They also had a couple W2k servers in that mix, also past the end of support. You know what happened? Nothing! The machines continued to perform just as well as they had for the previous 8-10 years. The reason those weren't upgraded is because they worked very well, and an upgrade simply wasn't necessary, and would have been very costly.

We did take precautions, including; making sure those machines weren't connected to the internet, were locked down as well as we could lock them down, and had anti-virus (for which we downloaded updates daily) software, etc. While the clients had internet access, they too were locked down (users were "users", restricted access to all directories except their own profile, couldn't install anything, etc), and had AV and anti-malware that were updated daily. Windows updates were pushed nightly from MS SUS.

This isn't a looming crisis. You've got 2 more years to prepare or upgrade. As long as you take actions to isolate and protect those systems as much as possible, they can run XP for another 10 or 20 years (as long as you can keep compatible hardware running)

Re:Windows 7 Market Share in US Passes XP

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, APK. You are the craziest. Come here and give your grandma a hug.

Also: "rampant shredding on the security-front." I think that's the name of my new punk band. It's AT LEAST an album title.

Symantec unintentionally tried that recently...

[techvet]

...with not so good results.

Seems a bit silly to me...

[idbeholda]

"When Microsoft cuts the chord on XP in two years it will effectively leave millions of existing Windows-based computers vulnerable to continued and undeterred cyberattacks, many of which hold the potential to find their way into consumer, enterprise and even industrial systems running the latest software"

When you get to the root of the problem, I fail to see how this is different from any other flavor of windows. The general security features of windows 7/8 is a little bit better by comparison (they make you click a few more dialog boxes), but it's still vulnerable to malware, just like any other OS. While the EOL support for windows XP might seem like an issue, until I come across hardware that refuses to work on XP, thus forcing my hand in either hacking the system to support the hardware, or buying a new OS to run said hardware, I don't plan on upgrading.

However, in all fairness, XP has been around for quite some time. Eventually, just like Windows 98SE, MS is *going* to stop making patches and/or supporting the product itself. It's not really that big of an issue, tbh.

As predicted: std. 'effete moddown'

[Anonymous Coward]

All via your reg'd 'luser' acct., & troll by AC, + call me 'crazy' too... how "original' (not) & 'effective' (again - not).

Yes, the "logical mind" (lol, NOT) of /. trolls NEVER ceases to amaze, off-topic ad hominema attacks & more (how boring & unoriginal).

All that, AND, minus your PhD & a valid license in the psychiatric sciences, as well as a formal examination of my "alleged mental state" from you, Dr. Quack, the "SiDeWaLk-ShRiNk of /."?

(LMAO - that's also libel you know minus those things to your name/credit (hence the ac trolling no doubt)).

* I mean, do you HONESTLY *THINK* that type of crap actually works? Guess again... in fact, I'll even cite others thoughts on it, & respected others + sources of like repute:

It's not even ORIGINAL thinking for Pete's sake, lol!

---

E.G.-> There's HBGary who got caught in the act doing it:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All

PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS:

"According to an embedded MS Word document found in one of the HBGary emails, it involves creating an army of sockpuppets, with sophisticated "persona management" software that allows a small team of only a few people to appear to be many, while keeping the personas from accidentally cross-contaminating each other. Then, to top it off, the team can actually automate some functions so one persona can appear to be an entire Brooks Brothers riot online... And all of this is for the purposes of infiltration, data mining, and (here's the one that really worries me) ganging up on bloggers, commenters and otherwise "real" people to smear enemies and distort the truth... "

---

"The Chinese Water Army"

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Chinese-Water-Army-Posts-Comments-For-Anyone-Who-Pays-236294.shtml

* Each doing the same bogus sockpuppet crap, & they're ALL/EACH scum too - just like trolls like you that do the same here...

---

However - the BEST source of evidence of that going on, especially on /., is probably the words of Mr. Bruce Perens on it:

"It just takes one Ubuntu sympathizer or PR flack to minus-moderate any comment. Unfortunately, once PR agencies and so on started paying people to moderate online communities, and to have hundreds of accounts each, things changed." - by Bruce Perens (3872) on Friday July 30, @03:55PM (#33089192) Homepage Journal

SOURCE -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1738364&cid=33089192

---

Above ALL else perhaps though? Think that doesn't go on here?? Ok - ASK tomhudson = Barbara, not Barbie, or clone53421=clone52431, & MichaelKristopeit (with his 500++ registered 'luser' accounts)

* So, ac troll: That "all said & aside"? "I rest my case"... since that says it all!

APK

P.S.=> LASTLY? Hey - Keep on wasting your time trolling me to no good results on your part cowardly ac troll - lol, "it's noble work you're doing" (you know - instead of say, learning to code to BETTER your OS of choice from the *NIX world which you ought to be doing instead)...

... apkb

the problem with xp

[allo]

as advertised in the installer, xp is the best windows version of all times.

this means, any later version can only be worse. No wonder, that nobody wants to upgrade.

98, 95 and SE aren't activated.

[Anonymous Coward]

Therefore if you want to install them, you can.

XP When EOL'd won't.

Missing the Larger Issue.

[crhylove]

Most of the comments here are missing the larger issue(s):

Windows 7 and Windows Vista and (so far, certainly) Windows 8 are vastly inferior products.

Yes, I know on modern hardware that Windows 7 has some narrow performance advantages. Yes I know that XP x64 lacks drivers. Yes I know all the usual stupid arguments I hear about how Windows XP is not superior.

But I work in IT, EVERY DAY. Windows XP JUST WORKS, OUT OF THE BOX, with LITTLE OR NO TWEAKING, on ALMOST ALL HARDWARE.

Yes, I've been migrating my clients to Windows 7 for the last 5 years (reluctantly). But I don't have one that didn't prefer Windows XP for at least one critical reason or another.

I'm all for the latest and greatest. I'm a tech nerd for christ's sake! But Windows Vista was a total mess, and Windows 7 (Vista 2.0) isn't great either. Sure, once you disable Aero and tons of other cruft it's usable, but it's still not as usable or simple or intuitive as XP.

Re:Missing the Larger Issue.

[SpryGuy]

Bull. Shit.

Windows 7 is vastly superior. I use it every day. Every time I have to go back to using XP, it's like a nightmare... so backwards, obsolete, ancient, and awful.

And works superbly in 64-bit mode (unlike XP). And is VASTLY more secure and stable. And has VASTLY improved usability for a great many tasks in the UI.

Windows 7 *is* great, and I cannot fathom how you can assert otherwise. And most of the world disagrees wtih you on that point too. You're just utterly delusional, imho.

Re:Missing the Larger Issue.

[TheSkepticalOptimist]

LMOFA.

"I'm all for the latest and greatest. I'm a tech nerd",

what he really means "but after 5 years I still can't figure out this new newfangled OS and I haven't even used Windows 8 yet so the world should not bother with it and it sucks because I don't get it. My proof is that I know 4 people that I upgraded to Windows 7 because they couldn't figure out how to install an OS and because they didn't like it on day one I formed an unwavering opinion. I won't ask them how they like it on day 30 or day 120, or 4 years later when their BSODs have disappeared and enjoy significantly better security and stability because that doesn't matter, its only the out of box experience counts. I don't like something and that marks it as vastly inferior because I don't like change and unwilling to accept that something new could be better then something I have been using for 8 years...."

I've gotten Win7 to run on 512mb RAM

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahem: I've made Win7 (& XP/Server 2003/2000) run on 512mb RAM in the past + PRETTY WELL too - how?

System tweaking/tuning!

Easily too!

* Heck - reduction of services alone can get a GOOD CHUNK of that!

Am I alone in it? No:

How well does Windows 7 handle 512MB?

FROM -> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/how-well-does-windows-7-handle-512mb/672

PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS:

"Summary: Iâ(TM)ve been spending most of my time lately conducting in-depth research into how Windows 7 works, in preparation for my next book. In the process, Iâ(TM)m discovering stuff that simply doesnâ(TM)t become apparent during casual testing. My biggest surprise so far? I inadvertently installed the 64-bit beta version of Windows 7 in a virtual machine with only 512MB of RAM. How well did it work? I was amazed, and you will be too."

and, even more impressively?

"The x64 edition of Windows 7 Ultimate running on just over 200MB of RAM? That was a pleasant surprise."

APK

P.S.=> For example/in addition to the above? Also note that Windows 8 is only NOW starting to do what guys like myself have been doing manually for ages (myself since 1992 on Windows NT 3.51 & for a long time before that on Win9x/Win3.x + DOS)!

How? Ok - because Windows 8 now is being setup to "automagically" turn off unneeded/unnecessary services in its base configuration... &, why?

Well... because IT JUST WORKS!

... apk

APK

P.S.=> Man, you "penguins" will TRY ANYTHING in terms of "FUD" spreading, won't you? Unbelievable.. lol!

... apk

Re:I've gotten Win7 to run on 512mb RAM

[Anonymous Coward]

omfg not you again. fuck off with your spam you retarded troll fart. you have no friends here, and you use your own turds for sex toys.

Re:I've gotten Win7 to run on 512mb RAM

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone that depends on friends (sockpuppets) online is weak to begin with. You evidence that for us clearly in regards to yourself, what with your anonymous coward off topic illogical ad hominem attacks, troll.

To be fair

[nurb432]

Just to be fair, you have to stop support on legacy systems at some point. They have supported XP for a lot longer than i would have ever thought.

Sure, the 'upgrades' suck, but you cant expect them to shell money for a non-product forever...

ATMs

[oDDmON oUT]

I'll never forget sliding up to a Chase Bank ATM in the car and being greeted by an XP Desktop.

Wonder what the financial sector has done, or will do, between now and the EOL.

Take them off the net

[Billly Gates]

How about displaying a warning for 2 months after support ends that world wide web access will be disabled.

Afterwards port 80 is closed.

This will anger many users with torches but it is a threat to the internet itself and hurts innovation to keep supporting old technology and standards while botnets can cause servre financial damage. Its not like before with Windows 98.

Its time to move on and these corporations can manually renable port 80 or keep them running equipment. But home users should not be on a public infrastructure. We have safety rules for cars do we not?

Name the software

[Sycraft-fu]

Seriously. I know that such software exists, I've encountered it occasionally, but it is vanishingly rare. So name the critical software you have that only runs in XP, not 7. Also perhaps you should be asking your software vendor why they have not been able to update to a new OS in over 5 years? Vista launched a bit over 5 years ago. Anyone who can't get their stuff to support it in that amount of time has just been being lazy and again gets no sympathy.

So let's hear it then, what are the apps that you have that don't work?

Who cares

[Anonymous Coward]

Won't make any difference. My gripe is that when they end support, they'll stop allowing OEMs to write XP drivers - THAT is what will force people to Win7 and is why I jumped off this train.

I don't want to have to replace a perfectly working machine just because of driver support.

The Real Issue...It still works.

[faustism]

While I agree that Microsoft is reasonable in supporting a product for only 14 years, and people don't like their support cut, I don't think that is really the base problem. The real problem is that most XP users don't see any reason to upgrade. They have a computer that does what they need it to do. They don't need any of the new features that the newer versions of Windows have. My guess would be that most people would even be okay with replacing XP with Windows 7 if it would run on their hardware and Microsoft made a reasonable update utility (albeit at a price). People don't want to have to buy new hardware to do what their current hardware does perfectly well. To use Linux distributions as a comparison, as is customary, the reason that people don't mind upgrading their distribution is because they don't have to go purchase a new system. The new software just works on the computer they have. If software is a service/product, then it deserves to be paid for--like RHEL--but it should not require newer hardware. If Windows 7 would run at a decent speed where XP--even limited to the functionality of an updated XP--then there would be nowhere near this much commotion about the EOL of XP.

Year of the Linux Netbook!

[DarthVain]

Ha! Linux doesn't look so bad now eh?

Windows upgrade cost

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife keeps her Macbook Pro upgraded to the latest OS, and any in our house (if we had more) for a mere $30.

There is no way we are paying to upgrade all the old XP boxes in our house doing various tasks for $120 each machine.

If they want people to upgrade, they need a realistic path for consumers. Currently the upgrade pricing is set to push new sales.

Nice rant, however

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to have failed epically in terms of having anything to say about XP and its imminent(?) abandonment by Microsoft.

Other than that, you seem to have avoided the vast scale of malware present across all varieties of Microsoft wares, including stuff that boinks a range of versions up to 7. So, please, do go spasm a little less loudly and get a grip on something like reality.

Actually it is Microsoft's fault

[Anonymous Coward]

They marketed the crap out of XP with regard to netbooks, and not once in any of the documentation that went with them did it say anything like, "btw, you're screwed if you want support past approx 2 years." Neither did any of their pocket bloggers who raved about them. The only people who complained/whined were promptly labelled as Linux whiners who couldn't compete with the quality products of Redmond.

I wish I did make it up

[dbIII]

I'm not making it up, I wish I was. Next time I'm in the office I'll take a look and see who now owns that 16 bit USB "security" abandonware. It changed hands several times but I think originated with Aladdin in 1996 from a quick web search and remembering things from the MSDOS mode licence key entry program I had to run in June 2011. The vendor will need to change their third party "security" software before their application will work on MS Windows 7. It's astonishing that somebody had to go to the trouble to write a 16 bit USB driver to get it to work but nobody has bothered to update it to a 32bit environment.
Please note that I'm not blaming Microsoft for this, simply idiots that think a paticular environoment is going to last forever and do not retain enough developers to update and support their software while charging their clients for support and updates. It could happen on any platform (and does to an extent), but since MS had the marketshare there's a lot of it there. Think of all the dodgy VB stuff out there which is too fragile to survive outside of the exact environment it was written for (ie. newer libraries kill it). The stuff that relies on hardware dongles still has technical (ie. usually won't run) and legal problems if you try to shift it to a virtual machine, but most other stuff I've run into will run with XP in a virtual machine.

Re:I wish I did make it up

[tibit]

That 16 bit DOS thing probably wants an OHCI USB interface. Have you tried running it in vmware? It may just run. Vmware provides an emulated OHCI USB host. I'm still at loss why would anyone keep using such a hack. But anyway, it would not run under XP either...

I've come to install all dongle-requiring development environments in a dedicated virtual machine, that way they will be usable as long as we have to support the hardware the dev env is for -- it's usually 2-3x longer than support for any particular Windows version. Sometimes, I install the crack as well, and forget the whole dongle hassle. I've paid for the damn thing anyway, and there's just one copy of the vm running.

Android & MacOS X show folks what's-what

[Anonymous Coward]

How'd I fail? I merely used verifiable facts.

Imminent? It's 2 yrs. away! Some "imminent" (do you know what that word means??)

You also missed my point of fact on Android.

I.E.-> It is making it more obvious than ever that even Linux based Operating Systems can be assaulted, just like MacOS X has been, once more folks started using it, especially folks lacking "computer technical backgrounds"...

Lack of usage allowed for the concept of "security-by-obscurity" by *NIX on PC's, especially desktops.

(Not as many users, & today's malware maker targets the most used operating systems, for the "best 'ROI' possible" on time invested in their malware creation!)

They avoided systems often used by "technogeeks" which is mostly the linux crowd as far as general usership - it is NOT a big item on the desktop for most "non-geek" end users... period.

HOWEVER?

Not on Android though.

That's out there for the masses and is "king of the smartphone" and also the "king of exploits" on that computing/communications platform because of mass usage and especially by non-technical users.

The malware maker of today is a criminal, and behaves just like one - I like to use pickpockets in fact: He goes where crowds are, like malls/bus &/or train stations/city streets etc./et al... why? Because MOST folks there are not THAT 'security conscious' & are "easy marks/targets"...

* Don't even TRY to say that *NIX on PC's &/or Servers in general isn't being "hit" nowadays... that was my MAIN point - especially vs. the YEARS OF "FUD" around this website most of all, of "Linux = Secure" & "Windows != Secure" b.s. (& yes, people here are WELL AWARE of the "Pro-*NIX" bias around here...).

Too bad that UTTER LINE OF B.S. is "falling apart around your ears" here Penguins... it was coming eventually!

APK

P.S.=> You can stop trolling/harassing me via ac replies too, it gets old fast... & you never get the best of me, so basically do your usual: "Mod down" my initial post via your reg'd 'luser' account, troll me by ac replies etc. but, it does you no good (others can still see it you know)... apk

Gentoo in production?

[bigtrike]

Isn't Gentoo designed to always be bleeding edge and not built for any sort of long term support?

That there is a license violation

[Anonymous Coward]

And your account can be killed for that and the BSA or whatever copyright cartel enforcement arm is applicable can turn up and confiscate all your stuff.

You're amazed but don't know why either.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why am I not surprised?

Truly, the driver is not what the hardware manufacturer is selling.

Truly, that code too is OUR PUBLIC DOMAIN.

And there's absolutely no reason to allow them to destroy property because they can't be arsed.

You too are also begging the question.

Here's one for you: what if there ISN'T any third-party licensing that stops microsoft from freeing their code?

XP - stands for Extra Process

[JTW]

XP (like many operating systems) is (a) an installer (b) a boot loader (c) a device detection and driver loading system (d) a gui file management systems (c) a socket based network system, and a collection of well know precompiled libraries

It fits nicely in a virtual machine and can boot off a cdrom iso image direct into memory

Its evolved over the years into a tool or a widget, its odd that over years there has been more and better documentation written and indexed about it on the web than by its parent vendor.

If you trim off the legacy subsystems or let them plug into a virtual machine, like KVM it becomes less dependent on hardware and more stable.

Consider Windows 7 and Windows 8 merely the latest "Hypervisor" from Microsoft and be done with it.

If you need XP for the GUI to support legacy staff, then use the Windows 8 metro tiles to launch an XP desktop (ditto for Win 7).

XP is becoming more like Unix "X" in that its becoming a "window manager" with a complement of features, its more the job of the hypervisor to secure its communciations. That's the best explaination I can come up with for Snofsky's Microsoft abandoning selling "eXPerience" for function.

XP, 2K, whatever

[Anonymous Coward]

When I showed a large corporate account our industrial software products, they were very eager until they saw we "only" supported XP, Vista and 7. Apparently they are standardized still on Windows 2000 with no plans to upgrade. A $500M a year company. I reluctantly had to tell them we were going to drop XP and Vista sales soon so they needed to buy soon if they needed "legacy" OS support. We've since decided to deemphasize even Win 7 and push primarily the Linux versions instead.

Re: comparing them is like

[neonsignal]

I think you meant like comparing apples and lemons.

GUI Changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the XP percent used in corp? Still over 50%? The Vista was a mess and changed GUI. Windows 7 went back to more under the hood XP SP3 but yet another GUI. And now Windows 8 is going to have yet another GUI! Corps have to train many employees so this is not good. Corps have been looking for a solid OS to go to. Is Windows 7 it??? Windows XP SP3 is MS's best current OS. Apple did a very good job of not being too disruptive as it evolved it's GUI, but corps are "buy IBM" still.

Time for the great Linux migration to start!

[madhi19]

Don't fill the landfill with those old box that are still working perfectly fine get some slick up to date and secure Linux distro. Since it old hardware maybe a slim Xfce flavour.

What the ...

[Cherubim1]

XP was a security disaster even *before* it was released. No elevated privilege security model An unstable registry No Firewall Weak permissions handling A malware magnet Need I go on ? Some of these issues have been addressed but others like no privilege esacalation are design flaws.

Another bogus moddown?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, that won't hide my posts w/ facts in them -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2800343&cid=39750263

APK

P.S.=> I know "the Penguins" around here can't handle truths/facts, but to mod my posts down that have facts/truths in them only makes me bring them back into view, like so... apk

Off-topic as usual troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

We're not here 2 win popularity contests & quit projecting ur fantasies + issues also.