Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Preparing For Windows XP EOL?
An anonymous reader writes "As most of us working in IT may know, Microsoft will stop supporting Windows XP on April 8th, 2014. Although this fact has been known for quite some time, XP is still relatively popular in companies and also enjoys noticeable marketshare for home users. Even ATMs are running XP and will continue to do so for some time. A lot of companies/users don't want to change because they see no additional benefit to do a costly upgrade, no reason to change a running system, and they may in some cases be right with their assumptions. So what is the best way to secure this remaining Windows XP systems? Installing the latest security patches, checking firewall status and user permissions etc. should be fairly obvious, as Microsoft Security Essentials may also not receive updates anymore, changing antivirus programs seems a sensible thing to do."
So what's your plan going forward? Will you use XP ten or twenty years from now? If not then you should start a migration now rather than later.
stupid AC. I'll tell you why: some people have expensive hardware that only works with xp and its NOT practical to rebuy working hardware just to run a more modern os. the os only exists to run apps and if the value of the apps and hardware are high enough, you will stay with the older os.
of course, AC's think that only linux matters. they can't see that in the real world, you need TOOLS to do your job and if those tools are only running on an older os, you keep that older os!
this should not have to be explained. maybe I got trolled, but figured if he was serious, I'll at least explain WHY you need to continue to run older systems.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
For many of my clients that run milling machines that still run XP, I am just making sure that they are not connected any longer. In that scenario, continuing XP is sensible and cost effective, with little to no risk. I'm sure most of the IT world is going to see the flare up of exploits that people have been hanging on to waiting for MS to no longer be willing to patch. Anyone of my other clients - law firms, non profits etc. - I am forcing the upgrade. No need to be so tied to such a clunky and difficult to recover OS anymore. Embrace the already 4 year old future, get on the update bandwagon and move on. None of my clients are seeing this as the end of the world like the media and others are describing it.
The other option is allow something to break irreparably at some point, and everyone will go into meltdown crisis mode. *Then* it'll get fixed.
You have to weigh the cost of doing it now vs. doing it then. If your company thinks "then" will be in 10 years, then don't bother now. But be prepared for the meltdown. Either way you have perfectly stated the case that you do not have to "Must keep running XP". You have made a risk-based assessment that it will be cheaper to continue running XP.
I finally updated my sig, but now it's lame.
Depends on the device and the support you get for the device. Just think about it: Microsoft never did give any real "support" to you, most of the time they told you to go to your manufacturer for that. If the manufacturer of the $50,000 device still gives you support in the sense that he will fix any problems that occur with the device, including replacing the hardware that still runs Win98, that is more support that you have ever gotten and will ever get from Microsoft.
It's not stupid. It's quite common for specialised equipment to rely on drivers written for a particular OS. We have a 3 year old transmission dynamometer that cost us $180,000 that is controlled by redundant commodity x86 hardware running XP. There is no need to keep the OS up to date as it serves only one purpose.
Stupid lusers these days think all "PCs" are to be connected to the Internet and used for browsing file sharing sites.
The logical counter to that is:
YOU HAVE SOMEONE RUNNING A $50,000 ON Win98? Holy crap that is stupid.
Why? These types of systems are in a lot of industries. None of those systems are on the internet. And probably not even on a network at all. It may cost $10K to upgrade the controlling computer. And for what? So you can play a game on it? Or iTunes, or surf the web? No one in thier right fucking mind is going to do this. These are very specific use systems. They don't' need to do anything more than what they are doing and spending a pile of money to upgrade them to a modern OS will gain nothing.
Here's a car analogy for you. You own a red 1500 lb. Ferrari with a 500 HP carbureted single cam pushrod engine that gets 15 mpg. Are you going to buy another one for $150K that looks and weighs exactly the same and has 500 HP and gets 15 mph too but the engine is a dual overhead cam with a turbocharged EFI engine and maybe some LCD touch screen gauges and a DVD player? It's a more modern vehicle, but you gain nothing of any value. Seems like a waste of money to me.
How much have roads changed in the last 20 years? Do we now drive on a surface completely un-fathomable just 20 years ago? Have cars increased in power/efficiency by orders of magnitude? Did cars run for 20 years in 1914?
Did you know that my paper cup from my morning coffee is already soaked through and unusable? Why can't they make paper cups to last 20 years like a car?
My dog died last year. He was only 13. Why can't dogs simply live as long as humans?
Do you have any more stupid propositions?
I finally updated my sig, but now it's lame.
And there is nothing wrong with using XP for that machine for the next 20 years...
So long as it isn't online, isn't used for anything else, etc...
It doesn't even have to know what decade it is in, just run the transmission dynaometer and that's it...
Your only real issue is that at some point, spare parts for the computer itself may become hard to get, I personally would invest in 1 or 2 spare computers, clone the current one, set them in storage, and have them for backups. It shouldn't cost much, a few hundred dollars, and you'll have backups to the one part that is least likely to get support.
How about this one. All of your software options are better on 7 than XP. Firefox and Chrome are moving away from supporting it. Microsoft is moving away from supporting it too. You know what that means, Mr. Super Conservative Executive/IT guy? It means your threat vectors are now starting to approach "everything installed on this workstation" instead of just the OS.
You've never worked with specialized equipment that costs hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars have you? Either that or you work for a DoE lab with deep pockets. Businesses, universities and private research labs usually don't get to replace equipment costing that much on a four to five year cycle. They get the equipment and use it until it just flat out doesn't work anymore then they spend the money to get something new. If the machine that interfaces with the equipment requires a 16-bit DOS or older version of Windows and has a proprietary dongle or need for some 16-bit ISA card then that's what stays. You buy replacement computers that will support the equipment at auction or on eBay and you keep the thing running. If the equipment can still be used, you use it. Like was said above, the computer's only job is to interface with the equipment. It's not networked, doesn't need to be. Modern malware can't effect it because it won't run on it, dummies! You can't run 32-/64-bit malware on a 16-bit machine! XP maybe, but there are very good ways around the security issues. You don't obsolete $250,000 plus machine that still gets used because the OS needed to interface with it is "old". Why is this so hard for some people to understand? You just don't treat capital expenses like that unless you have a ridiculous amount of money to burn. There really isn't a good analogy for this. It is what it is. I am sure you know the common euphemism, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." That saying isn't just a saying, just like stereotypes exist because there are people that fit them.