IRS Misses XP Deadline, Pays Microsoft Millions For Patches

An anonymous reader writes "When Microsoft terminated official support for Windows XP on April 8th, many organizations had taken the six years of warnings to heart and migrated to another operating system. But not the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Only 52,000 of their 110,000 Windows-powered computers have been upgraded to Windows 7. They'll now be forced to pay Microsoft for Custom Support. How much? Using Microsoft's standard rate of $200 per PC, it'll be $11.6 million for one year. That leaves $18.4 million of their $30 million budget to finish the upgrades themselves, which works out to $317 per computer."

Comments

see where your taxes go

[Anonymous Coward]

right into the pocket of microsoft thanks to mismanagement

Re:see where your taxes go

[Joce640k]

Yep. It's a total waste of money.

Those machines aren't going to implode because they don't get updates.

Keep running them, keep on replacing them. Block all external web sites to employees (which they should be anyway).

Re:see where your taxes go

[Anonymous Coward]

Block all external web sites to employees (which they should be anyway).

Yeah, because it's totally inconceivable that an employee might need access to information that's not stored on the internal network.

Re:see where your taxes go

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Their custom distro will be called Red Ink Linux and its mascot will be Tux's evil twin, Tax.

Re:see where your taxes go

[BoRegardless]

But the IRS doesn't care. It just asks for more money from Congress to go after more citizens for more money. The IRS doesn't care about how inefficient it is. That is inherently what is wrong with a massively complex government system which is specifically designed to be complex.

There are solutions for this, but it means dismantling the IRS and firing a lot of people, so how do you think we are going to do this. Similar to the quasi-governmental Post Office.

Re:see where your taxes go

[LynnwoodRooster]

The sensible thing, of course, would be to run Linux, so in the event of another amazing display of incompetence like that (which is probably already in the pipeline), they could support an older version in-house for a tiny, tiny fraction of that cost.

This is the Federal Government we're talking about. Not only is "sensible" a negative thing, but the costs of internal maintenance of any IT project would most likely be multiples of just paying someone else for a proprietary solution. Consider the IRS is "only" paying $12 million for a year's support for its computers; doing that in-house would undoubtedly cost 4-5 times that amount and result in slower service as all requests need to be filed in triplicate with 3 different agencies, and cross-referenced with non-sequential numbers...

Re:see where your taxes go

[Teun]

It's probably worse.

Judging by news about a similar failure to timely update by Dutch government branches MS will have included a little gem in this contract, you get it so 'cheap' because a forced upgrade to Win7/8 is part of the deal.

They (MS) won't allow you to cancel the contracts and go with a non-lock in provider.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Nephandus]

Good luck with that. Aside from the being caught cheating even by their own rules, which is impressive given how circular they are, that guy who actually managed to get them in court for their policy being unconstitutional was explicitly rejected on the basis of IRS policy itself, as in the Constitution only matters if IRS policy says so. Not being a lawyer, I'm still not sure why the judge said he raised good points, while the case was found against him by some IRS guy and not the judge. Apparently by some special rules, they're functionally their own judge too. They'd have to agree to dismantle themselves now.

Re:see where your taxes go

[allaunjsilverfox2]

'cause it's not Year of the LIRSux Desktop

You got me there, I spent 5 minutes trying to research the word LIRSUX. Then it hit me! You must be referring to LIR6. Which is a fairly confusing, yet true statement. A leukocyte immunoglobulin-like receptor 6 desktop doesn't exist yet. I'm not sure why anyone would want to base a interface on a chemical, but I'm sure with enough work and determination, you will achieve this goal.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Opportunist]

Sure it's not going to be called Red Tape Linux?

Re:see where your taxes go

[Billly Gates]

Yep. It's a total waste of money.

Those machines aren't going to implode because they don't get updates.

Keep running them, keep on replacing them. Block all external web sites to employees (which they should be anyway).

Do you really want your personal information on a vulnerable system where a Russian hacker can make a killing selling your identity? Do you still back that up in such a case?

Re:see where your taxes go

[Darinbob]

So disconnect those XP boxes from any external access. Any information they need for their job can come from internal sites only, or they have special computers they can visit for the strange reason of needing to check the internet (this should be extremely rare). If they need to access the internet too much, then they put in a request for a better computer (this should be a tiny fraction of the staff). Remember, we've gone millenia without the internet.

Re:see where your taxes go

[ttucker]

If a business tried to handle the information that the IRS handles with Windows XP, someone would end up in jail.

Re:see where your taxes go

[BradMajors]

Virtually no computer than came installed with Windows XP can be upgraded to Windows 8 because Windows 8 has additional hardware requirements.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're at it, why are employees allowed to get out of their chairs? Hello? The work is at your desk. Chaining employees to their chairs is an obvious security enhancement, since they won't be able to physically access any unauthorized systems.

Re:see where your taxes go

[rsclient]

Specifically, the Republican mismanagement. Would it have been so hard to deliver the IT budget that the IRS asked for in order to mitigate this very problem?

Re:see where your taxes go

[lucm]

Yeah confidential data is never compromised in the private sector because companies are careful not to use XP, except Target. That includes Experian. Or Adobe. Or Sony. Or Apple. (etc.)

Re:see where your taxes go

[lucm]

Also the amount, 12 millions, is retail price. With the large number of computers they have, the IRS probably gets the Public Sector Discount, which means at least 3x the retail price (plus mysterious fees), and to make things easier they probably rounded up the number to an even 200,000 licenses.

At the moment the GAO can't even give a ballpark figure for the money wasted by the IRS. Therefore, the amount of money wasted on XP does not matter, at least it goes back to an American company so they can stash it in Ireland or Benelux.

Re:see where your taxes go

[rsclient]

That's a pretty strong accusation. Other than, "I don't know anything about this government department, so I'll throw around a random accusation", do you have any actual evidence?

For example, how well do they handle paperwork compared to a typical insurance company? Personally, I find the IRS documents more straightforward and less confusing.

How do they compare in cost to a typical payroll processor like ADP? They have about the same scale; according to because ADP is private and the IRS is public, ADP should have radically lower costs. Do they?

In short, just because they are big, that doesn't make them "inefficient".

Re:see where your taxes go

[Joce640k]

Block all external web sites to employees (which they should be anyway).

Yeah, because it's totally inconceivable that an employee might need access to information that's not stored on the internal network.

a) They'll be the minority.

b) Anybody who *needs* that can be upgraded first.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Joce640k]

a) No they're not.

b) There's adverts on the IRS internal websites?

Re:see where your taxes go

[hcs_$reboot]

Are you sure about that? What about all those big organizations CIOs who always chose the easiest/laziest strategy and blindly renew their pricey Microsoft yearly contract, neglecting any of the newest possible alternatives, cheaper and sometimes more adapted to the company needs?

Re:see where your taxes go

[distilate]

So you would be all for body cavity searches of all employees at beginning and end of shift as a security enhancement then? After all they could be hiding a cellphone.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Anomalyst]

I dont think there is much R&D done at the infernal Revenue. Isolate the XP machines to a quarrantine VLAN and lock the switch port to the MAC address. Not that I think that an IT staff that dug this hole is competent to ameliorate the consequences. I doubt they can even SPELL Network Access Control let alone deploy it.

Re:see where your taxes go

[red crab]

The linked article states that out of $30 million they have in hand, they would be paying 11.6m to M$, and the remaining 18.4m to upgrade the oldest of the PCs running XP. If they were to upgrade all 58,000 systems at once, $317 per PC will be needed on average, which equals to 18m anyway. The numbers are clearly wrong here.

Re:see where your taxes go

[jbolden]

The power to sue comes from congress. Congress has not granted the people broad tort powers over the government. Rather they have offered specific torts for specific types of relief. There is no special rule here. The special rule is when you can sue the federal government.

Re:see where your taxes go

[jbolden]

It is not exactly secret. The published dates are:

Windows 7 * January 14, 2020
Windows 8 January 10, 2023

Re:see where your taxes go

[dbIII]

The sad thing is almost nothing is coming back from that direction due to the practice of shuffling profits offshore into tax havens and pretending they don't exist. Completely illegal of course but laws are selectively enforced when you pay rent on people in politics.
So there you go guys - lots of representation without taxation.

Re:see where your taxes go

[unixisc]

right into the pocket of microsoft thanks to mismanagement

Couldn't they just waive all of Microsoft's taxes, and call it even? On a more serious note, they should go FreeBSD or Debian and make their tax compliance software FOSS

Re:see where your taxes go

[gtall]

Nice fairy tale. The IRS had their budget cut and the chances of being audited is the lowest it has been in years, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/....

Now, you probably think this is a good thing, except that the sainted American people will do anything to cheat on their taxes. Whether you like it or not, much of higher and lower education rely on taxes, as does most fundamental research. But Congress has been cutting that as well because research grows on trees, right.

And the problem isn't with the IRS, it is with the tax code. Congresses and Presidents have written that. The last simplification happened because Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan agreed to simplify it and rammed it through Congress, although it took them several years. The current crop of congresscritters cannot agree on where the sun rises, good luck in simplification.

Re:see where your taxes go

[gtall]

It isn't illegal, it is part of the tax code. And they cannot shuffle profits made in the U.S. to offshore accounts, especially given the current lack of funds in Washington and the political hay that could be made cracking down on them...except they cannot. A congressional committee had Apple's CEO in front of them to explain it to them. He did. They wrote it into the tax law and it became part of the playing field Apple and the rest must play on.

Congress is the problem. And don't even think to complain about lobbyists, it is congresscritters that have sold their own votes. They are to blame, companies compete wherever their competitors choose to compete.

Re:see where your taxes go

[eric_harris_76]

Well, that's it. If they're that incompetent, I'm just not going to give the IRS any more of my money.

That'll teach 'em.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Ol Olsoc]

That's a pretty strong accusation. Other than, "I don't know anything about this government department, so I'll throw around a random accusation", do you have any actual evidence?

They don't need no stinkin evidence! They have truthieness

For example, how well do they handle paperwork compared to a typical insurance company? Personally, I find the IRS documents more straightforward and less confusing.

Bingo. I figure my taxes by myself every year, and the only confusing part to me is how some folks can't figure the paperwork out.And the same people who can't figure out the paperwork seem to be the biggest IRS haters.

How do they compare in cost to a typical payroll processor like ADP? They have about the same scale; according to because ADP is private and the IRS is public, ADP should have radically lower costs. Do they?

In short, just because they are big, that doesn't make them "inefficient".

Anyone who thinks that private industry is efficient, or at all ethical compared to the Government, has severe cognitive dissonance. Cites are in the daily news.

Re:see where your taxes go

[CanEHdian]

The fun part is that both the UK and The Netherlands governments are doing the same; thus each patch is now paid 3 times over! The sad part is that none of the taxpayers will be able to get their hands on these patches.

Re:see where your taxes go

[toddestan]

Windows 8 requires the CPU supports the NX-bit, which rules out almost all of the 32-bit chips (no Socket 478 or Socket A system can run retail Windows 8). That means that the oldest systems that can run Windows 8 date back to late 2003 or so (for the very first Athlon 64 systems) and just about anything past 2006 (when most Intel chips had finally implemented the NX bit) will run Windows 8.

Re:see where your taxes go

[toddestan]

Vista is still supported by security and bug fix patches until sometime in 2017, so to say it was not supported as long as XP is simply false.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Sciath]

Please enlighten everyone as to the other solutions. Let's start with the very real premise that the IRS did not make the tax laws, merely charged with carrying them out. Then realize that Congress purposely makes the laws so complicated and full of legalese that few can understand the law. Then consider the fact that Congress made more laws to catch the "cheaters" which requires an enforcement arm of the bureau. Couple that with favoritism and special interest concerns that treat individuals and businesses differently (which adds to the complexity) and you have a Congress that has run amok. Then Congress (conservatives in particular, who favored collecting taxes as much as liberals in the first place) can sit back and point fingers at those nasty bureaucrats for being so draconian. It's a shell game on Congress' part. Create the problem then blame everyone else for the problem. The only fair, understandable and equitable tax structure is a flat tax. Congress has had countless opportunities to address the "problem" but most of them get into office by making promises to small and/or powerful groups without taking everyone's interests into consideration. Blame Congress for the problems, not the agencies they created in the first place.

Re:see where your taxes go

[dbIII]

And they cannot shuffle profits made in the U.S. to offshore accounts

Well in Apple's case they pretend that the US profits are made in Ireland by Apple US buying iPhones from Apple Ireland who bought them from China via Holland in some way - so the US profits are theoretically very small while in practice it's all Apple dodging tax. Google "double dutch irish sandwich apple" (safe for work even though it sounds like a rule 34 thing) if you want to read about this blatant tax evasion.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Kalriath]

The USPS? You mean the organisation that would be completely self-sustaining if they weren't bound by law to account for the lifetime costs of pensions for their entire workforce in their annual budget rather than as they go? Something no other employer in existence has to?

Re:see where your taxes go

[Kalriath]

Truth be told, if they're anything like our tax department they likely need internet access to investigate potential tax fraud (i.e. someone claiming social security and running a business selling things on eBay). Something which literally requires the internet.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Talderas]

Personally, I find the IRS documents more straightforward and less confusing.

Not surprising. They don't need to CYA to the same extent that private industry needs to due to the public being unable to sue them.

Re:see where your taxes go

[Kalriath]

Actually, I think you'll find that 99% of what their job related software would be masses of custom software which won't even run in Linux (or anything bar Windows, and you're lucky if it works in Windows 7).

Paid for with the public's money

[grasshoppa]

Shouldn't that result in the patches being released for anyone to use?

AHAHAHAHA, sorry. Had to make the joke.

Re:Paid for with the public's money

[drinkypoo]

Shouldn't that result in the patches being released for anyone to use?

Arguably, there oughta be a consumer protection law stating that any and all tested security patches delivered to any customer are freely redistributable. Not requiring their distribution, nor their support, nor a source release. Simply that if a patch has been packaged, those who paid for the OS may redistribute them. This would fix this whole nasty problem with Oracle and Sun, for example, and save many machines from landfills.

Re:Paid for with the public's money

[scarboni888]

What would make you think that isn't exacty what's going to happen anyway?

Audit time

[Anonymous Coward]

So the IRS missed a deadline they knew was coming... I wonder what they would do to any of us in a similar but different situation?

Re:Audit time

[Vinegar Joe]

Indeed. The IRS has its priorities.

Re:Audit time

[Savage-Rabbit]

So the IRS missed a deadline they knew was coming... I wonder what they would do to any of us in a similar but different situation?

he IRS isn't the only SNAFU out there by any stretch of the imagination. They are in good company along with many members of the much vaunted and ever efficient private sector when it comes to missing this particular deadline.

Re:Audit time

[bruce_the_loon]

Well, they are being fined $11 mil for this missing of the deadline.

Well, they should have upgraded

[ComputersKai]

Considering that they handle a lot of our money, they probably shouldn't be using an operating system that, while originally may have been impressive, is now probably soon to be riddled with security hole.
I find it funny though, that essentially Microsoft is "fining" the IRS for not upgrading.

Re:Well, they should have upgraded

[LordLimecat]

Theyre doing what everyone else does with EOL'd products. The only reason this is newsworthy is because the submitter knows that slashdot loves to harp on microsoft on anything, real or imaginary.

Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe April 8

[Futurepower(R)]

Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe on April 8, 2014, the date Microsoft calls the "end of life" for Windows XP.

Governments and big corporations are often influenced by people with no technical knowledge. Because of their ignorance, governments have already paid Microsoft probably more than it costs to fix the few security defects found each year. However, the taxpayers of those governments will not be allowed to have the fixes. "End of life" is a way for Microsoft to make more money.

It's like Toyota told all owners of older Toyota vehicles that the vehicles are unsafe now and owners must buy new vehicles or pay millions of dollars to keep them. Except its worse: Software doesn't have mechanical wear.

This article contains tips about how to use any version of Microsoft Windows safely that can be shared with people you want to help. Unnecessary computer maintenance is an ugly way to make money.

The goal is providing service

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at a large public organization that runs multiple large hospitals and a throng of clinics. We have not completed the XP -> 7 transition in time and are paying Microsoft for this extended support. Upgrading tens of thousands of systems with a myriad of specialized software isn't as easy as upgrading your home computer.

We must wait for vendors to upgrade their applications, ensure the updates work, and train users; this delayed us deploying new systems. Since medical applications aren't sexy nor cheap to make (HIPPA compliance being one of the reasons) Linux isn't an option.

Our goal is healthcare, this is the price for ensuring you have the best. Likewise the I.R.S' goal is collecting taxes, this is the price for them to implement that in the best manner they can.

Re:The goal is providing service

[Anonymous Coward]

isn't as easy as upgrading your home computer.

Upgrading your home computer isn't easy anymore either, with the abomination of an in-place upgrade process between 7 and 8 or between 8 and 8.1. The upgrade between Vista and 7 was a piece of cake by comparison. These past few years, I fully expect to spend at least 12 hours on any upgrade between versions of Windows.

Tax time.

[Rod Beauvex]

Someone's taxes are going to be looked at with a fine tooth comb.... :D

Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[wisnoskij]

Every corporation and agency is independently paying millions and millions to have them continue to patch their computers. I would not wager a guess at how much it costs to continue producing patches, but I cannot imagine it is more than a handful of full time devs.

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[gerddie]

Indeed, and it's a real shame since with this money they could have paid some developers full-time to bring ReactOS to speed and make it a viable replacement for XP.

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[jonwil]

I think the parent was referring to the IRS paying to make ReactOS a replacement for Windows and not Microsoft doing it.

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[Mr_Silver]

Every corporation and agency is independently paying millions and millions to have them continue to patch their computers. I would not wager a guess at how much it costs to continue producing patches, but I cannot imagine it is more than a handful of full time devs.

You appear to have overlooked a testing team in your planning! The regression testing on the various h/w, s/w and language variants won't be small either.

Unfortunately on large scale projects, it's not good enough to fix the bug, check if it seems to run okay on the developers own computer and then call it a day.

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[wisnoskij]

And you would expect hundreds of QA engineers to be employed for this task? (lets not forget they already have everything in place to continue patching and testing)

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[Anonymous Coward]

paying millions, yes. but not anywhere close to what this submitter claiming... submitter is so far off base, they're not even in the ballpark anymore. what they're paying is closer to $13-14 dollars per computer, not $200... example: http://news.slashdot.org/story... (9 million dollars for 680000 computers) anyone with a large deployment of winxp would gladly pay $13.25 per computer a year to postpone software upgrades for a year if they're running stuff that won't migrate over to windows 7 or 8.

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[jbolden]

Most corporation and agency made the date. Most aren't paying the punitive fine. And absolutely this is likely profitable this year for Microsoft. I think it is a good thing that the Windows XP customers who didn't upgrade when they were supposed to fund things like Windows Mobile that run at a loss.

Re:Sounds like Microsoft is making a pretty penny.

[Mr_Silver]

And you would expect hundreds of QA engineers to be employed for this task? (lets not forget they already have everything in place to continue patching and testing)

Certainly not "hundreds", but slightly more than the zero that the OP currently thinks are required.

Windows 7 will no longer be sold at end of 2014.

[Futurepower(R)]

"... until they can get Windoze 7 deployed by probably the end of the year..."

By the end of the year, Microsoft will have already stopped selling Windows 7.

At this point

[Vinegar Joe]

What does it matter?

Re:Avoided, Not Missed

[Roadstar]

XP Works. Vista, 7, and 8 really don't

Wow, this has got to be one of the most opinionated and/or misinformed things I've read in quite a while. XP was the last consumer Windows that was more or less designed for the "isn't everybody an admin?" mindset. Part of Vista's bad reputation was due to it being the messenger that got shot while delivering the "hey guys, the party's over. We really need to stop assuming every user can write to system locations. This time for real." message to developers and users. Naturally the ultra-paranoid UAC settings didn't help with that. In 7 and 8 the new security model was fine-tuned to actually work instead of bombarding users with multiple confirmations for the same operation and as a result the modern versions of Windows are reasonably secure, especially when compared to the security nightmare that XP was prior to SP2.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[__aanbvm4272]

The 30 day update schedule (same as it has been for years) means the last update on April 8th is good for at least May 8th right? The world will not collapse on April 9th in other words... Windows 7 is not a whole lot better... tired of the endless updates?? Tired of being held hostage to endless update priorities?? Shutting down to install, restarting to finish install etc. You didn't want to do anything with your computer for 30 minutes did you? really?? Install some media files and suddenly there is 90 updates to install. IS it just my machine, or is anybody else experiencing this lack of "productivity?" What Microscoffs touts "everyone has the 'right to be productive'." One day we will be spending more time updating our machines than using them.

Done on purpose

[eclectro]

It's cheaper for the IRS to pay the dime to continue to make patches so that they will be available to countless others who are caught with their pants down, costing far more in the economy and thus ultimately reducing revenue headed to the IRS.

They might actually make a profit off from doing this.

Re:Done on purpose

[gerddie]

It's cheaper for the IRS to pay the dime to continue to make patches so that they will be available to countless others who are caught with their pants down, [...]

What makes you think these patches will be made available for these countless others? Microsoft will bill very single entity out there for the very same patches, that's quite certain.

Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Futurepower(R)]

That's not my point. My point is that Microsoft is already calling Windows 7 an out-of-date product. See my article for more about that: Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe on April 8, 2014,

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[MightyMartian]

"Out of date" is meaningess marketing blather. "End of life/support" is what counts, and for that, Windows 7 falls out of extended support in January 2020, nearly six years from now.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Opportunist]

Well, they call Win7 an out of date product, but Win8 was one from the beginning. What now?

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Mr.CRC]

Which is just about when the IRS will manage to have upgraded most of its PCs to Windows 7.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[jbolden]

Windows 8 isn't out of date. Most of the people unhappy haven't used it on the right hardware i.e. capacitive touchscreen laptops or desktops with a drawing tablet.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Opportunist]

And most people who don't like rectal examinations are just not gay. Your point being?

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[jbolden]

Wow offensive and ignorant in one sentence.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Billly Gates]

LOL comparing an OS to a rectal examination. Only on Slashdot.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Opportunist]

Actually I pondered long and hard whether I should put the statement there, but it just fits like a glove (ok, that was the last bad pun). Your suggestion to my complaint about Win8 not working out was that I used it on the wrong device, that I should get a touchscreen or a touch device. But what if I don't care about either and want to use a desktop? Your answer to my complaint that the product does not fit my needs was that it's not the product that is wrong, it's my needs that are wrong?

How backwards is that?

And so yes, my statement fits. If you don't like prostate exams, it's not that the exam is uncomfortable, it's just that you fail to be in the right target group, so intstead of changing the exam, you'd simply have to get into the target group and you'd be fine.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Opportunist]

Well, you're right, they're hardly comparable. A rectal examination is over rather quickly and there is actually a good reason for it.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Billly Gates]

Well, you're right, they're hardly comparable. A rectal examination is over rather quickly and there is actually a good reason for it.

yeah I was wondering if they had to use the whole fist when I tried windows 8

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[jbolden]

Your answer to my complaint that the product does not fit my needs was that it's not the product that is wrong, it's my needs that are wrong?

First off I can't imagine any need set but very obscure ones where having modern hardware is a hinderance. But if you want to use old hardware, no my answer is the product is wrong. You shouldn't be using Windows 8 with that sort of device but rather Windows 7. Run appropriate operating systems on old hardware.

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[Opportunist]

It's not a matter of old, it's a matter of useless. A touch screen is absolutely useless to me in a desktop environment. Hell, even for a laptop it is usually no productivity gain, how is it supposedly increasing productivity if I have to lift my hand off keyboard and mouse to aim for a spot on the screen with my finger?

Re:Microsoft: Windows 7 is already out of date.

[jbolden]

how is it supposedly increasing productivity if I have to lift my hand off keyboard and mouse to aim for a spot on the screen with my finger?

You aren't supposed to be using a keyboard and mouse. That's just stupid. You would be using something resistive with a pen in place of a mouse. http://www.slashgear.com/wp-co.... If it is a desktop then you are using a tablet which miniaturizes the screen http://cdn2.digitalartsonline....

You don't use a hardware solution that makes no sense. Rather what Windows 8 allows for is hardware solution that makes sense being usable. The problem is, as I said you've probably never used proper Windows 8 hardware and so think that keyboard and mouse are the best solution while in reality that is very rarely the case.

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the hell are they using Windows? Government agencies should not be allowed to use proprietary software in the first place. Let stupid private companies throw themselves into any vendor's lock-in, but the people's data should not be subjected to it, ever!

At one of my previous gigs we tried to get Windows classified as "proprietary" to promote the use of Linux. Since you could buy Windows from multiple sources (Dell, HP, etc.) we were shot down.

Please don't feed the troll.

[mmell]

(n/t)

Re:Please don't feed the troll.

[Roadstar]

I should've noticed it was an AC. Point taken.

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[sumdumass]

You mean install the really good edition?

There is even a flash demo if you want to check it out. Just don't use that combo they made a few years ago which took what they thought was the best parts of Windows CE, Windows ME and Windows NT and created Windows CEMeNT (as hard as a rock and dumber than a brick).

Wow! If this is the way things work

[fustakrakich]

Just think how much money Microsoft would make by just shutting down. This is extortion, you know, extortion by copyright/patent

Re:Wow! If this is the way things work

[cbhacking]

If they prematurely (i.e. before they said they were going to) EOL their products, yet continue to have any meaningful funds, a lawsuit would almost certainly follow. Not a great way to make money.

Re:Wow! If this is the way things work

[mpe]

Or they could do the sane thing and move their employees off of decade-old hardware.

Presumably you won't be boarding a bus, train or commercial flight then :)

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[L4m3rthanyou]

It's like Toyota told all owners of older Toyota vehicles that the vehicles are unsafe now and owners must buy new vehicles or pay millions of dollars to keep them. Except its worse: Software doesn't have mechanical wear.

A better analogy would be for Toyota to stop manufacturing parts for very old cars, and most car manufacturers do just that. Aftermarket is more able to fill the void in that case, but it's the same concept. And let's be real, $200 scaled up to a car would be thousands, not millions. Software doesn't have "mechanical" wear, but it has ongoing discovery of security vulnerabilities that require maintenance from the vendor. Delivering that maintenance costs money.

Even the newest systems that shipped with XP are really old now. Hell, I still use one at work (not by choice), and it's a slow piece of shit by today's standards. It's nice that so many have been able to sit on similar rigs for this long, but it's time to move on. That kind of service life in commodity-level PCs was almost unheard of a decade ago. Upgrades are a part of life in the tech business, and I don't think it's fair to bitch this time just because you got a little extra mileage out of the last round.

The masses of now-unsupported XP users reflects badly on the users, not Microsoft. If you missed the boat on a Windows 7 upgrade, it's your own damn fault. On the upside, the ensuing clusterfucks at various large enterprises should teach yet another hard lesson about the perils of under-funding your IT department.

Nice plug, by the way, though it's amusing that "Futurepower" is so willing to cling to the past.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Anonymous Coward]

It is like if you buy a car from a Toyota dealership. It comes with a 3 year warranty, Toyota fix things that break on the car for 3 years. After 3 years they no longer provide free repairs, and you *gasp* must pay to have things fixed and replaced.

Microsoft is not forcing anyone to stop using XP, they just said that they are done providing free repairs.

This situation is similar to what the city I live in does with police cars, firetrucks, field mowers, etc. They sell them off once the warranty is up and buy the new version with a new warranty, aka upgrade to the new version so that they can get the free repairs. Or what many IT departments do, they get rid of equipment once the warranty is done. It is not that the companies are saying it is unsafe or bad to use these cars or laptops, just that they wont be providing anymore free repairs.

About XP . . .

[mmell]

I have many non-technically gifted friends. I've heard at least two of them state "XP is great - I can make it do whatever I want, better than any other version of Windows." Even among my (non-techie) friends, the prevalent attitude is "Why should I upgrade?" - several have made it clear to me that they don't care if their machines are botted, as long as their games run okay. As non-techies, they insist that they're not at risk for identity theft, often saying "I don't do banking/online shopping/anything involving money or credit", and in general refuse to change their minds (and yes - when I failed, I've tried bringing in other technically aware people to try their hand at convincing them. I only convinced my wife by force, not a very good way to go).

What makes XP so great to them? The ease with which software may be installed and configured. The stability of the platform to play Grand Theft Auto, et. al. What makes XP so terrible to technically knowledgeable people? The ease with which software may be installed and configured. The stability of the platform to provide elevated privileges and get an open connection on port 113 and run Sasser, et. al.

Re:About XP . . .

[Billly Gates]

Windows XP is the best Win OS ever made.

It works. It has the best gui. Windows explorer isn't crippled. Apps just work. Websites render just right. Updates do not break it unlike 7 or 8. It works well with 512 megs of ram.

If it aint broke DON"T FIX IT!

The reason they like XP is they had win98 and WinME and remember the crapola experiences, crashes, re-installing the OS, etc. XP was the first OS which just worked. Why change?

People become conservative as a result. Our grandparents who grew up during World War II and the Great depression became conservative and AMERICA IS GREAT during the 1950's when good times hit. Same is true with XP. It came from an era of bad apples preceeding it. Now look at Windows 8 and Vista which came later?

Can you blame them of being afraid of change?

XP works just fine and they do not want a cell phone os and risk nightmares of getting things to work and performance problems. It finally works so leave it and they need a reason to change. There is no reason to change what works right?

Re:About XP . . .

[reikae]

It has the best gui.

I recall it being ridiculed as a Fisher Price GUI when it was new. Windows 8 will probably also be remembered as the Best Windows GUI Ever one day. :-)

Re:About XP . . .

[jbolden]

If having their system compromised wouldn't be that harmful then there isn't really a big problem. They will stick with XP for a few more years less and less will work and they'll migrate. They probably will get hacked and lose almost nothing.

Re:About XP . . .

[Uberbah]

Except that XP doesn't have a doubled buffered, GPU accelerated desktop.

Nobody cares. Your list is dominated by other small potatoes that simply don't matter to 99% of users out there.

Re:About XP . . .

[Uberbah]

Windows XP is the best Win OS ever made.

Windows 2000. All the user benefits of XP, except for instant-user switching. But in exchange for that, you don't have to screw around with activation or Windows Genuine Bullllllllshit.

I am in the wrong godamn business!

[jrq]

Damn it!

Re:I am in the wrong godamn business!

[Overzeetop]

Indeed - you should be in the business where you have hundreds of millions of installed users. That's the way to make the dime easily.

Yes, but don't you agree there is abuse?

[Futurepower(R)]

Microsoft is already planning to do with Windows 7 what it did with Windows XP. Five years and 9 months from now, Windows 7 users should pay more? Again?

Re:Yes, but don't you agree there is abuse?

[MightyMartian]

If you buy a product, find out the EOL date. If it is too soon for your liking, don't buy it.

Re:Yes, but don't you agree there is abuse?

[LordLimecat]

Thats how RHEL does it-- RHEL 5 (released in 2007) goes out of support in 2020. Apple doesnt provide support nearly that long for OSX-- they EOL'd Snow Leopard (2009) in 2013, so they have approximately 1/3 the product lifespan that MS or RH does.

Based on your other comments, though, you really just have a personal axe to grind against anything Microsoft for no real (that I can discern) reason.

Re:Yes, but don't you agree there is abuse?

[TapeCutter]

Yep, and by making their plans known MS allows it's customer's IT departments to plan. You can also bet that "MS partner" customers are pointing out which third party and in-house applications they want supported by, and tested with, new versions.

Five years and 9 months from now, Windows 7 users should pay more? Again?

If you expect them to keep servicing it then of course you should pay, and if you don't understand why then I'm assuming you have never been tasked with maintaining an active source tree in a commercial setting.

Re:Yes, but don't you agree there is abuse?

[jbolden]

Because those people aren't willing to buy a subscription mainly. They are cheap customers mostly who don't spend much on the IT. There aren't a huge collection of people willing to spend top dollar to stay on XP.

How many hospitals aren't HIPAA compliant?

[dicobalt]

let the lawsuits commence...

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[sumdumass]

There isn't really a viable alternative is why.

Sure linux and OSS is great on your home computer or web-server but it doesn't have the applications like windows does. Sometimes there are comparable applications available but for the most part, off the shelf programs with support is what is needed for most all government agencies larger then a city government.

I'm not saying that cannot change, open software can become just as polished and available but until it does or until the windows software has cross platform support, windows seems to be the only viable options for a working government.

Another reason to try and go open-source

[DNX Blandy]

That's just insane! Microsoft have bended them over a table and in a gimp suit and stuck the gobstopper up their arse. We are a medium sized company and we are seriously looking at moving, as much as possible, away from Microsoft and on to open-source. I think my company should pay me half of what it would have cost us in MS licenses ;)

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Mr_Silver]

Because of their ignorance, governments have already paid Microsoft probably more than it costs to fix the few security defects found each year.

Correction, it wasn't ignorance that caused Governments and other organisations to end up running late on project with a fixed delivery date at least five years in advance.

It was incompetence.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[am 2k]

Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe on April 8, 2014, the date Microsoft calls the "end of life" for Windows XP.

No, it has been unsafe for at least a few years already. Windows XP does not support any encryption that's still considered secure.

U.S. taxpayers pay, but don't get the fixes?

[Futurepower(R)]

MightyMartian, I want to be a MightyEarthman. It is my opinion that many of Microsoft's practices are abusive. There is a long history: Search for "Satan" in my article.

U.S. taxpayers should pay Microsoft to make fixes for the U.S. government, but not get those fixes themselves?

We must recognize and counteract abuse.

Re:U.S. taxpayers pay, but don't get the fixes?

[LordLimecat]

Find me another OS vendor that provides support for longer than 13 years. RedHat JUST started doing it; Apple is 1/3 that long.

If "industry leading product support timeline" counts as abusive in your book, then I guess Im not clear what you mean by abusive.

Re:U.S. taxpayers pay, but don't get the fixes?

[Billly Gates]

As much as I am a proponent of it aint broke do not fix it I have to bring up the costs it takes for Microsoft to man up a support command and control center, os kernel hackers, teams of security experts, and developers who know ancient code bases to keep the updates going year after year after year.

This aint free.

Ms should charge something for support and if only a slim number are willing to pay for it the associated costs is going to be high. If they charge $30 a pc (example) the neophytes and Grandma wouldn't even know about nor pay for it. It would be a money losing proposition.

IBM charges for 360 support still for 40 year old software! However, mainframes have not been sold for decades. They are rented with high fees to pay developers. XP is just like a mainframe where you pay through the nose for support as average Joes are not willing to pay $100 every 3 years to keep running it.

Re:U.S. taxpayers pay, but don't get the fixes?

[MightyMartian]

Yes Microsoft has done many nasty things, but shutting down support of a 13 year old OS isn't really one of them.

Re:U.S. taxpayers pay, but don't get the fixes?

[jbolden]

Bill

They have already picked the number for extended support $200 / yr. And mainframes are still being sold: http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/... IBM released a new Z-Series chip 2 months back.

Microsoft encryption has been EXTREMELY buggy.

[Futurepower(R)]

"Windows XP does not support any encryption that's still considered secure."

Not only is it not secure, it has been EXTREMELY buggy. People have lost their files to Microsoft's encryption bugs. Also, the U.S. government believes it can force executives to do anything it says, and keep that secret from taxpayers.

It is best to use only GPG and TrueCrypt for encryption, or other open source software. Open source software is much more difficult to manipulate.

Oh boy, a deluge of misrepresentation

[iamacat]

From the assumption that IRS will pay standard joe off the street rate to Microsoft, to impossibility of running XP without support, not much in this article passes the muster of common sense. Chrome and Thunderbird are still well supported and secure, and that's all IRS employees should need in terms of accessing Internet. Everything else would be in-house applications which can be secured on server side, so it should be Ok even if they still have run IE6.

As for employees that don't follow instructions, there is nothing to keep them from installing freepr0n.exe on Win7.

Re:Oh boy, a deluge of misrepresentation

[Lehk228]

both windows XP and windows 7 are more than capable of preventing the user from installing or running an unapproved application.

it's called active directory and it's been around for a really long time.

Re:Oh boy, a deluge of misrepresentation

[Anomalyst]

Anybody with physical access to a machine, essentially has absolute power over it. and how many employees can resist thesdirens call of dancing bunnies and weatherbug?

Re:Oh boy, a deluge of misrepresentation

[iamacat]

Not being a Windows guy, I am not sure if this would be practical for, say, unsigned 3rd party software with its own update mechanism. How would the system know if a given .exe is legit?

Re:Oh boy, a deluge of misrepresentation

[Lehk228]

a list of approved installed applications, it really is quite straightforward.

"Sorry," said the IRS

[smittyoneeach]

"way too busy thrashing Tea Party miscreants."

Funding

[Jodka]

So how could the IRS fund their Microsoft Custom Support? By seizing tax refunds.

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[Stormwatch]

Several governments around the world have moved to free software, or are in the process of doing so. If they think free software is viable...

Taxpayers now will now pay support + Microsoft.

[Futurepower(R)]

Security fixes are fixes to defects in software. Support is different, I agree. Now the U.S. government will be paying its support organizations and companies as it always has, and Microsoft, also, because only Microsoft has the original code.

Re:Fixing defects in sloppy coding is NOT "support

[LordLimecat]

Do you have any idea how many security patches have been issued since the release of Linux Kernel 2.4? Because 2.4 came out right about when XP did.

Bad math and assumptions

[gnasher719]

The amount mentioned is not what the IRS pays. It is what the article assumes, based on number of PCs running XP and an estimatd average price of $200 per PC. But contracts are negotiated individually. The British government pays less than $10 million for all their computers, which includes about 650,000 PCs running XP in the health service, more than 10 times as many as in the US IRS.

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[sumdumass]

I have not heard of any that have completely moved off though. I know a couple are trying and failing at the moment.

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[LordLimecat]

If we're making fun of 14 year old operating systems, is it OK if I start on about how screwed up Linux 2.2 and OSX 10.1 are?

Fantasyland

[jonnythan]

If the IRS does decide to pay Microsoft for continued support of XP, the chances of it paying the standard $200 per PC rate is effectively zero.

The numbers in the summary are total fantasy.

Re:Fantasyland

[Uberbah]

USG payed far more than that for a crap health care web site, which in itself is a drop in a bucket next to defense contracting pork. Odds are it will be far more than $11 odd million dollars, not less.

XP limited users cannot install software.

[Futurepower(R)]

"What makes XP so terrible to technically knowledgeable people? The ease with which software may be installed and configured."

I have never seen an XP limited user be able to install software. The problem is that the default user has administrator privileges, as I explain in the section One of Microsoft's methods of making money: Provide safety methods only professionals are likely to know. I regard that as intentional abuse by Microsoft.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[mpe]

Software doesn't have "mechanical" wear, but it has ongoing discovery of security vulnerabilities that require maintenance from the vendor. Delivering that maintenance costs money.

Such vulnerabilities can also be introduced by "maintenance". Also they can't be easily related to some metric of usage or time, unlike mechanical "wear".

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[L4m3rthanyou]

All software has defects, it's the nature of the beast. If vendors were liable for every last bug in their software, the commercial software industry would not exist. (I'm sure there are freetards who feel that would be a good thing, but let's not go there.)

It's not like Microsoft deliberately released XP with 2,722 flaws with the intent to fix them gradually over the next ~12.5 years. That's the problem with security vulnerabilities- they need to be discovered. Odds are, there are plenty more in Windows XP that have yet to be found. XP EOL isn't going to make your XP machine explode and kill your family. Before long, though, unpatched XP systems will be rife with exposed vulerabilities. Browser updates will drop support for XP. It will become unsafe to use any XP machine in any capacity that involves internet connectivity. Advising your clients to continue using XP is irresponsible at best.

Really, since you're so convinced that MS is outright evil, I'm surprised you're not trying to push some linux-based XP replacement. Though, for what it's worth, even free operating systems often have an end of support life, absent any profit motive.

To what power is.

[just_a_monkey]

Hoho! I can see it before me. The tech guys entering the meeting, thinking they're so clever. And one of the managers saying that. And a short pause and then the techies going "Eh, what? But... But... That's not right. That's not even wrong. Your words does not... mean... anything..."

And on that day, the tech guys were enlightened.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[FlyHelicopters]

Yes, GM does... for 10 years generally...

Also keep in mind that GM will pay for SAFETY DEFECTS, not just ANY defects...

That is an important point, no one is going to die because Windows XP Home stops working (and no, you can't use it for your nuclear power station, the EULA specifically forbids its use in any critical situations like that) Windows XP Embedded is for that and has different licencing.

Windows XP is 13 years old this year, I think the timeframe they are required to provide updates has passed, Vista came out 2006, 7 came out 2009, 8 came out 2012... 9 should be out next year...

Really, at some point, this is just insane, do everyone really expect support for Windows 6 when Windows 9 is out? Really? That's nuts...

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[sumdumass]

If your funny bone is that screwed up, sure. But this story is about using an old outdated operating system still being used and having to pay extra for support because it is so old. So please relax before your panties get knotted so tight you have to buy new ones. It's just a joke- a joke about windows the good versions.

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[LordLimecat]

Did you have a real business reason for wanting linux, or are you just pushing an agenda for ideological reasons?

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[mpe]

It is like if you buy a car from a Toyota dealership. It comes with a 3 year warranty, Toyota fix things that break on the car for 3 years. After 3 years they no longer provide free repairs, and you *gasp* must pay to have things fixed and replaced.

Plenty of places have laws that require goods to be of "reasonable quality".
In the case of a manufacturing defect these can be applicable for considerably longer than 3 years. (Possibly with seller, rather than maker, having to pay.)
A problem with software is that it can fall outside the scope of such laws. Even if it's sold as a "widget".

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[L4m3rthanyou]

True on both points. However, It doesn't change the fact that software still "ages" in a way, and that software that works acceptably at one point in time may become unsafe to continue using at a later date. GP seems to think that the intangible nature of software means that its utility can't diminish over time.

Microsoft has a virtual monopoly. Linux, no.

[Futurepower(R)]

RHEL, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, is a very different situation. A new version of Linux does not obsolete old versions, it is an upgrade to old versions. Also, there are free versions of Linux, and many organizations support many versions.

That is VERY different from the situation with Microsoft. Microsoft has a virtual monopoly. There is no monopoly involving Linux.

I wonder why it is so difficult for people to recognize and deal with abuse.

Re:Microsoft has a virtual monopoly. Linux, no.

[LordLimecat]

Youre using the term obsolete ambiguously. What exactly do you mean? Linux 2.4 and RHEL 3 are both very much "obsolete".

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[mpe]

Windows 7 has been hands-down more solid and stable. In the 4.5 years I have been running it, on 5 PCs, I can count the number of BSODs I've had on one hand -- and those are typically attributable to unstable, unsigned device drivers.

5 PCs is no kind of "enterprise" setup. There's also no way to directly upgrade from XP to 7. The only way is a reinstall then finding out which applications still work with 7. Worst case senario being applications which install without any obvious issues, start up apparently fine, but certain functionional is either missing or different. Or maybe applications need to be "upgraded" with the new version being functionally different.

Anybody wish to wager with me

[goldcd]

that's that the IRS will actually be paying? Yes XP is being deprecated (good thing), yes MS is putting a price on the support of those unable to do so (good thing), no the IRS isn't going to be paying that.

It makes perfect sense

[plopez]

Hypothetical situation. I am an IT director. I track trillions in revenues and hundreds of billions in taxes. Do I 1)
switch to a new system with unknown security risks and associated costs in upgrading in house systems and applications?
or
2) Do I stick with a true and tried system for a few tens of millions more?

No brainer. Stick with the devil you know. This is not some happy little mobile app like the "Annoyed Nematode" you are dealing with the financial futures of both the US government and each and every person who must file taxes.

Re:It makes perfect sense

[broken_chaos]

The problem there is that it's not actually a solution. All it does is delays the need to find a real solution, which will cost roughly as much then as it does now.

Re:It makes perfect sense

[Wulfrunner]

"...switch to a new system with unknown security risks..."

Yeah, that Windows 7 has only been out since 2009 and practically nobody uses it.

Re:It makes perfect sense

[someoneOtherThanMe]

No solution is permanently "real" and the later you switch, the better. Should they have switched to Vista when it came out, since they knew XP will not be there forever?

Re:It makes perfect sense

[vandamme]

Run XP in a VM on Linux. Sooner or later people will discover they don't need XP that much.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[TapeCutter]

It's just your machine.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[TapeCutter]

Almost all vulnerabilities are caused by sloppy application coding. - ftfy.

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[joe_frisch]

Even if in a particular application the total cost of using the proprietary software is lower because it makes workers more productive? Remember that the cost of the person using a computer is far higher than the cost of the computer and software installed on it. A full time person costs ~$100K. A 10% efficiency change dwarfs most software costs.

Old versions of Linux were stable and finished.

[Futurepower(R)]

The situation with Red Hat is very different. Old versions of Linux were stable and finished.

When Windows XP was first released, it was extremely sloppy. It seems to me that it is reasonable to say that Service Pack 3 for Windows XP finally made the OS a somewhat finished product. Service Pack 3 of Windows XP was released on May 6, 2008. By that measure, Windows XP is 6 years old.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[Futurepower(R)]

"Also keep in mind that GM will pay for SAFETY DEFECTS, not just ANY defects..."

That's what we are discussing, the defects in Windows XP that cause safety vulnerabilities.

I said this in my article: When Windows XP was first released, it was extremely sloppy. It seems to me that it is reasonable to say that Service Pack 3 for Windows XP finally made the OS a somewhat finished product. Service Pack 3 of Windows XP was released on May 6, 2008. By that measure, Windows XP is 6 years old.

Re:Discrimination

[turp182]

Get an account, takes about a minute. Use a fake name if you would like.

Guess who's due for an audit!

[Opportunist]

Purely chosen randomly, of course.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Billly Gates]

Let me flip this?

What can you do on a nice shiny new i5core Dell box that your XP system can not?

Can you type faster? Can you think faster? Do webpages load up faster? Do pie charts in excel pop up quicker?

Where are the productivity enhancements to pay for this investment?? ... I am waiting. That's right there is none. So it is not an asset. It is a cost center and an expense. This is why XP is still around.

It works and the cost is already set. Instead of blowing millions like my employer is upgrading how about the millions be used to raise the share price higher? Isn't that the goal of business? Or hire new salespeople? Or buy new factories? Or upgrade trucks to lower costs? All those bring in more revenue than the cost so therefore they are a profit center and an asset.

Look you like technology like many of us and that is great. But at some point it is trivial eye candy. If security wasn't an issue no one would bother upgrading except enthusiasts.

 

Taxpayers pay. They should get the fixes.

[Futurepower(R)]

That misses the point. Taxpayers are paying for the fixes. Everyone should be allowed to have them.

Re:Taxpayers pay. They should get the fixes.

[Billly Gates]

Well things cost money. Yes we pay for them. That is life as you would be pissed of one person paid you for something and I took it for free and gave your work away to others right?

That amount wont cover the cost for a whole year. It is the combined total.

Re:Taxpayers pay. They should get the fixes.

[Mr.CRC]

No. No. No! It is not Microsoft's fault that it is the "taxpayers" paying for this. It is the IRSs fault. And the punishment should be the immediate firing of the entirety of it. But that won't happen because the government is not about serving taxpayers. It is a self serving emergent organism that seeks continued existence which is made more likely by continually enlarging itself. It will continue to do so until it destroys the now underlying society.

Re:For Microsoft, defects should be a profit cente

[Billly Gates]

Please

Yes I was for people keeping XP too if there was no reason to upgrade.

However software does need updating. Look at the openssl heartbeat bug? Linux and apache have many that Slashdot mysteriously never report and lazy unix admins never upgrade which are constantly hacked! Java has issues. .NET has issues. Windows has issues. Solaris has issues. Nuclear reactor software written in freaking cobol for Digital's pre-VMS OS is still being updated today and run on PDP-11's in Europe.

Sometimes things change like standards, new hardware, new currency rules, timezone changes in law, etc.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Billly Gates]

Software never ages. It can run forever.

However, yes updates do come into play depending on use. Citigroup has a 45 year old mainframe app to do its processing. There is no need to upgrade and the punchcards will lost many decades ago so it can never be updated.

Old versions of Linux: Still stable and safe.

[Futurepower(R)]

We are discussing vulnerabilities, not new features.

The reason the U.S. government is paying Microsoft to continue to fix defects in Windows XP is that somehow people have come to accept that Microsoft products will always have vulnerabilities.

It is my understanding that the "obsolete" version of Linux are still working very, very well, with few vulnerabilities, almost all of which could be fixed without changing versions, and all of which could be fixed without payment.

Re:Old versions of Linux: Still stable and safe.

[LordLimecat]

It is my understanding that the "obsolete" version of Linux are still working very, very well, with few vulnerabilities

You are suffering from confirmation bias. This is just not true.

http://www.cvedetails.com/vuln...
There are pages of medium and high priority vulnerabilties on that page. If you lump in the browser-- which would have to be a really ancient version of firefox or konqueror-- that number would skyrocket. You would have to be out of your mind to place a 2.4 server on the web or even to use it as a desktop web-browsing box.

I agree: If it works, nothing more is necessary.

[Futurepower(R)]

We are discussing vulnerabilities, not new features.

You said this, and I agree: "Nuclear reactor software written in freaking cobol for Digital's pre-VMS OS is still being updated today and run on PDP-11's in Europe."

There is no reason for hundreds of millions of customers of Microsoft Windows XP to buy new hardware. If XP is working for them, good, nothing new is necessary.

If the U.S. government pays for Microsoft to fix the defects in its software, then the taxpayers must be given those fixes without further payment.

A widely fixed OS is more secure than an new OS?

[Futurepower(R)]

"That amount wont cover the cost for a whole year."

Several governments are paying, not just the U.S. government. I give links in my article.

Others have said, and I agree, the amount the U.S. government is paying should be far more than enough to provide fixes for the few vulnerabilities that are found in the next year.

Remember, there have already been 2,722 fixes in Windows XP. It seems that eventually, no matter how sloppy the coding was in the beginning, Windows XP will have very few additional vulnerabilities. Perhaps a widely fixed OS is more secure than an new OS.

Why?

[gelfling]

Why not just say fuck it and not patch anything. What's the worse that happens? It's the IR fucking S for god's sake.

XP as bad IT test

[EmperorOfCanada]

I think that any organization still using XP has failed an IT test. This does not mean that the IT people suck but that some aspect of IT sucks. It could be that the IT people can't proactively spend money to avoid expenses such as this and can only spend money when they have to. This is broken. I wouldn't be surprised if some dolts in these organizations are now saying that the budget to upgrade from XP has been eaten by these licensing costs.

What I have seen before is that some minor OS upgrade comes along and the various parties say, "Hey we need a minor upgrade to our software to keep up." this is then refused so after the next OS update they say, "He we pretty desperately need a medium sized upgrade to catch up." this is refused. This goes on and on until basically they are screaming, "We MUST upgrade now and the upgrade is a major overhaul of how everything works." then the worst thing in the world happens, they agree. The problem being that some sleazy mega-sized consulting company comes in and starts throwing around "best-practices" and $50 million later a completely useless system that is actually far worse than the 12 year old pile of crap they have is born. Then another $50 million is spent getting it to barely work.

The probable cost to have had a continuous stream of upgrades in the first place? Maybe $500,000 per year.

Re:XP as bad IT test

[Billly Gates]

Or bad IT worker test.

Do not be surprised when management views you as incompetent when you suggest to spend millions to replace a perfectly good working platform that just works and generates hundreds of millions of dollars all because it isn't new?!

ATMs generate trillions in revenue for the banks! They are mission critical and work just fine. Why take risk with no ROI??!

If it aint broke DONT FIX IT. XP works and does the job as well as Windows 7. Sure you can name some kernel features to me and the cost accountants yada yada but our response will always be "How does this help raise the shareprice or boast productivity?" Can the receptionist type faster? Can our accountants put numbers faster? The answer is NO!

So it sounds like IT is doing the right thing with sticking with XP until MS forces us to change. Yes it is 13 years old but so are many pieces of equipment in a business. If they work you keep them. Windows needs to give us a productivity boast. If not the old os stays. Simple as that.

Re:XP as bad IT test

[EmperorOfCanada]

I agree with you that XP is fine and is a symptom of Microsoft's larger problems. If XP had been continuously updated there would have been no reason for Windows Vista, 7, and 8. I actually wonder how much money MS makes from upgrades and how much it make from licenses on new machines? The main reason most people have had to upgrade from XP is that some new version of the software doesn't work on XP (either a driver or actual software).

But the reality is that Windows has moved on many times since XP so any product that won't run on the newer Microsoft operating systems is going to be a problem. Minimally people within any organization have bought new machines that will only run a newer OS.

This is one of the advantages of going web based. At least then there is less OS dependency. But even here the same problem has arisen; a web product is developed that only works with certain versions of the browser, so you end up in the same loop as my original post.

My theory is quiet simple. When you deploy a critical bit of internal code there must be one of two plans made. One is that it is rock solid and will never be touched; which would be fine for some code that runs a single machine in a factory or something. Or you must think of the code as a garden; in need of weeding, watering, and fertilizing as conditions demand.

But what makes the latter hard is that many mega IT consultancies will gouge the crap out of their clients during the "maintenance" cycle so most CFOs are wary about hearing anything being "planned" for maintenance beyond fixing critical bugs.

IRS...late?

[Barbarian]

Microsoft should charge them triple, and propose confiscating all assets for such a mistake. After all, that's what the IRS would do.

What a waste of my tax payer dollars

[jzatopa]

Considering they had 6 years to get their act together I find this appalling. That is 11.6 million dollars that could have been left in tax payer pockets or put towards something actually useful.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[Teun]

WinXP might be 13 years old, WinXP SP3 came out in 2008.and was the only option until 2009.

The fact they now have releases with new names coming out every few years doesn't mean that's the norm and we should all follow.

Although I agree WinXP is compared to Win7 past its use-by date it is still the only Windows product running well on older systems.

Running a (near) desktop monopoly comes with certain duties and MS is tired of them.

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[ganjadude]

in 2009 this was an issue, it shouldnt be an issue 5 years after win 7 and another OS after it has come out. People have poor planning if they are still having issues with software that doesnt work on anything but XP*

* there are always exceptions to the rule, but in general people should have had plenty of time to work on replacements at this point

Microsoft: Not stopping support. Making taxes pay.

[Futurepower(R)]

"... shutting down support of a 13 year old OS..."

Microsoft is not stopping support. Microsoft is now charging huge amounts for support. And the arrangement is that those who pay for the support for government computers, the taxpayers, will not get the fixes for which they paid. That's the entire point of this Slashdot story.

"Yes Microsoft has done many nasty things..."

Isn't that arrangement one of them?

If a computer system is serving people or an organization in a manner considered sufficient, it is sensible to continue with that hardware and software. Software is not biological. It doesn't get "old".

A lot of corporate computing is data entry, which doesn't require fast hardware.

3 governments, at least.

[Futurepower(R)]

"And guess who's footing the bill??"

Lots of taxpayers and corporations. It is hugely profitable for Microsoft. Here are stories about 2 other governments, from an article I wrote:

Dutch government to pay Microsoft 'millions' to extend XP support (April 4, 2014)

(U.K.) Government signs 5.5m [pounds] Microsoft deal to extend Windows XP support (April 2, 2014)

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[Lehk228]

there are no safety vulnerabilities in windows XP, nobody is going to die or be injured because an old PC got pwned

Contracts and Negotiation

[nemoest]

I realize it may seem like Microsoft has the IRS over a barrel, but keep in mind that the US Government does have a bit of negotiating power on prices due to its sheer size and the common use of large comprehensive contracts. I'm sure they aren't paying the average price for support.

Analysts noted earlier this year that Microsoft had dramatically raised prices for Custom Support, which previously had been capped at $200,000 per customer for the first year. Instead, Microsoft negotiates each contract separately, asking for an average of $200 per PC for the first year of Custom Support.

Emphasis mine.

So they are paying $30 million to migrate to Windows 7. According to the article they have 58,000 PCs left to upgrade. That's $517.24 per machine. Licenses for Windows 7 Ultimate and Pro seem to be between $150 and $200 a pop on GSA Advantage. Throw in some CALs, software assurance, or other essential software, and it is probably leaving less than the $200 per machine average for the Custom Support.

Should they have dragged their feet this long to upgrade? Of course not. But I wonder if something set them back.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[DexterIsADog]

It seems to me that it is reasonable to say that Service Pack 3 for Windows XP finally made the OS a somewhat finished product. Service Pack 3 of Windows XP was released on May 6, 2008. By that measure, Windows XP is 6 years old.

This is just nutty. And please, tell us again about how your article makes all the crazy seem reasonable.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[FlyHelicopters]

That's what we are discussing, the defects in Windows XP that cause safety vulnerabilities.

Ahh, those aren't safety issues, they are just annoyances...

A safety issue is something that can kill you. Nothing that happens to your computer will kill you. That is not true with a car which is why cars are regulated and computers operating systems are not.

When Windows XP was first released, it was extremely sloppy.

Maybe it was, but that doesn't mean anything, the EULA clearly states that Microsoft made no warranties regarding the quality of their software.

These are not cars, they are not regulated that way...

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[FlyHelicopters]

WinXP SP3 came out in 2008.and was the only option until 2009.

WinXP SP2 was just fine, frankly that could have been a new OS and if it had a new coat of paint, MS could have gotten away with that.

WinXP wasn't the only option until 2009, Vista came out in 2006. Maybe you didn't like it, but it was an option and really by 2008 it was much improved, hardware and drivers had grown by leaps and bounds over the release situation.

The fact they now have releases with new names coming out every few years doesn't mean that's the norm and we should all follow.

Since when was keeping your computers for 10 years normal? It has never been normal... The EOL date of Windows XP has been known for 5 years, this isn't news or a surprise.

Now, back in the 80s and early 90s, keeping your DOS or Windows 3.1 machine past EOL date didn't really matter, those machines weren't online and didn't do nearly as much as modern machines do. After all, DOS and Windows 3.1 didn't get monthly patches downloaded on a regular basis, in fact they more or less NEVER got patches, what was released is what everyone used.

There is really no historical background before XP to look back on, the world has become connected and anything connected needs security and updates.

Although I agree WinXP is compared to Win7 past its use-by date it is still the only Windows product running well on older systems.

If those older machines are not connected to anything, then there is nothing wrong with using them in those limited applications. DOS machines today still run tons of stuff, nothing wrong there.

That being said, if you actually are connected to the Internet, upgrading is more or less required now. And that is going to continue to be the case, Windows 7 will need to be replaced in 2020, and so the cycle goes.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[FlyHelicopters]

Running a (near) desktop monopoly comes with certain duties and MS is tired of them.

What are those "duties", and can you please provide a link to them?

MS has provided free updates and support, including major new feature patches and hardware support to an old OS that isn't making them any money. At some point, they have the option to support it at a yearly charge, or provide no support at all.

Personally, I think they might have been better off offering another 5 years of support... for $50 per machine per year... many people would pay it, MS would make a bunch of money, and since they'll really have to support it anyway due to the various deals they are making, it is a win-win for them.

Keep in mind that if you stomp your feet hard enough and *demand* support, what you might get could be worse than what you have.

MS might well say, "ok fine, 3 years of patches and support from the date of purchase, beyond that, $49 a year for updates and support, or buy something new".

Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

It's the IRS.

[Z00L00K]

The IRS can get back the money by making sure that Microsoft and the executives there pay their taxes correctly. To some extent the IRS sets their own rules.

Re:Fixing defects in sloppy coding is NOT "support

[mitzampt]

So how long did XP without service pack have support? How about XP SP1? Linux kernel 2.4 has reached end of life, but with code available there might be patches made by individuals who need it. You are comparing a kernel with an operating system, if you wanted to beat the linux crowd ask them about any distribution individual release. I was pleased to find out that the last version of SuSE before being acquired by Novell still has some mirrors on the net.

Cavity searches for the IRS

[Anomalyst]

Seems only fair given how they treat the average citizen (i,e. non-politicians, non-moguls)

317 bucks?

[Osgeld]

im buying 3ghz 2 gig core 2 duo's with w7 installed for 99 bucks a pop (off lease IBM pizzaboxes)

they aint the fastest machine at the track, but more than enough for office and email

so whats the fucking problem?

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[bkmoore]

What can you do on a nice shiny new i5core Dell box that your XP system can not?

Access more than 4 GB of RAM which is necessary for most modern science and engineering applications. Same goes for video editing, graphics, etc. applications.

Where are the productivity enhancements to pay for this investment?? ... I am waiting. That's right there is none.

If all people did all day was word processing and spread sheets, a vintage 68040 Mac II running System 7 with WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 would still be adequate. But try supporting vintage Macs in a productivity environment, I would hope your supply of SCSI hard drives doesn't run out. Same goes for XP, spare parts are getting more and more scarce with time.

Look you like technology like many of us and that is great. But at some point it is trivial eye candy. If security wasn't an issue no one would bother upgrading except enthusiasts.

I think you're just a troll. Most people on /. would know that Win 7 or a modern 64-bit LINUX compared to XP is more than just eye candy.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[jbolden]

Did you read that article? Huge chunks of it are nonsense. For example that flaws aren't as bad... what hackers need is write access to the file system if they get that they get everything else. And those are still being found. He gives an example of FreeBSD as a place where these security flaws don't happen, which is of course nonsense as HeartBeat shows quite well.

Re:Fixing defects in sloppy coding is NOT "support

[jbolden]

Microsoft sells a limited lifetime product. They have never claimed that their products are defect free forever. They have always supported the idea that a customer should move from OS version to OS version. It is not a defect of Microsoft's that you don't want to use their product in the way intended.

Re:For Microsoft, defects should be a profit cente

[jbolden]

OpenBSD might very well have more defects. Moreover

a) the core OpenBSD code (i.e. what Theo actually fixes) is a tiny codebase compared to Microsoft something like 3 orders of magnitude smaller
b) the core OpenBSD codebase changes more slowly. While both Microsoft and OpenBSD are conservative over the last quarter century Microsoft has ripped out far more of their subsystems and added newer features to them.

Theo does a terrific job. But Theo also does a much smaller job.

Re:You haven't been reading articles about Microso

[jbolden]

Which is total nonsense. Under Balmer Microsofts earnings and sales exploded. http://venturebeat.files.wordp... The entire enterprise class software explosion (SQL Server, Dynamics, SharePoint...) happened under Balmer.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[jbolden]

When didn't they have new releases coming out every few years? During the time of XP, Vista came out. What happened was that netbooks created a need for lower hardware demand systems and so Microsoft extended XP's life to be competitive on lower end hardware. Otherwise XP would have been retired.

When XP came out the expectation was a 3 year life expectancy for computer and OS. That was the expectation at time of purchase. As far as only option Vista was released: January 2007.

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[jbolden]

I'm not sure why you would ever upgrade the same hardware from XP to 7. That's just being cheap. But besides that, Win 7 has a full Win XP subsystem applications which have problems with the minor changes of 7 can run in the subsystem.

As far as upgrading applications ... well yes that is the norm. You upgrade: hardware, OS, applications on a regular basis and their are improvements across the board. If you don't like the direction an application is going in you migrate to a competitor.

Re:Stupid to use Windows in the first place

[jbolden]

The client OS isn't what controls data standards for applications. You want to complain about proprietary data standards then the solution is to push for things like Libre office.

Logic

[Overzeetop]

Stop trying to use logic to discredit an article that gets these /. geeks in such a froth. These are people who use logic for a living, but ignore it when it suits their cause.

Re:Fixing defects in sloppy coding is NOT "support

[ericloewe]

They sold their product under a contract that clearly specified the support period, which was then repeatedly extended at no cost to anyone who bought XP.

Windows XP is archaic by modern standards. Yes, some people have to use it or buy new scientific/industrial/medical equipment, but that can hardly be blamed on Microsoft.

When you last bought any piece of electronics or machinery, did it come with implied free support for all eternity? No, you got a well defined warranty period and beyond that you are expected to pay up. Same here.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Billly Gates]

100% true and why corps love XP. 90% of staff run fine off a pentuimIV so the cost accountants will find a better use of the money

Concerns about Microsoft's business practices:

[Futurepower(R)]

I haven't been making the complex issues clear enough.

Concerns about Microsoft's business practices:
1) Security fixes that cost huge amounts of money. Linux: None.
2) Security fixes available only to some customers. Linux: None.
3) Business practices that create artificial profit-making arrangements. Linux: Difficult because there are so many suppliers.
4) New versions of software that deliberately and unnecessarily try to obsolete old software. Linux: None.
5) New versions of operating systems that try to be so resource-intensive that they cannot run well on old hardware. Linux: Find the oldest computer in your attic. Install Linux Mint.

Re:Concerns about Microsoft's business practices:

[LordLimecat]

You are just not correct.

At my (and Im sure, a LOT of) workplace, there are a few authorized Linux distros. RedHat is one. Redhat fixes require a subscription, and are under the same sort of product life structure that Microsoft is.

When you're dealing with a large organization, getting the patches for free is 1/100th of the issue. The issue is
A) who supports it
B) are the patches kept up to date
C) are they QA'd (can we be confident they wont break stuff)

If you think Linux patches dont break things, you just dont operate in a large scale environment. If you think Mint is in the same ballpark as RedHat, you're in a different world.

Can Microsoft prevent distribution to taxpayers?

[Futurepower(R)]

"Microsoft sells a limited lifetime product."

The question is, should Microsoft, a company with a virtual monopoly, be allowed to create anti-customer profit-making arrangements?

Microsoft is being PAID for continued fixes to Windows XP. Should governments allow Microsoft to prevent those fixes being given to taxpayers?

There is a better explanation in my article.

[Futurepower(R)]

I just added a better explanation of that to my article, Microsoft Windows XP "end of life": What to do?, which is written to explain the issues for people with little technical knowledge. See the section titled, Can Microsoft prevent distribution to taxpayers?

Taxpayers will pay. Will they get the fixes?

[Futurepower(R)]

As I said elsewhere here and in my article, the question is, should Microsoft, a company with a virtual monopoly, be allowed to create anti-customer profit-making arrangements?

Microsoft is being PAID by the U.S. government for continued fixes to Windows XP. Should governments allow Microsoft to prevent those fixes being given to taxpayers?

Should a company be allowed to manage software development in such a way that there are many defects, and then pressure customers to pay for new software with some of those defects fixed?

Windows XP: 1 version behind last accepted version

[Futurepower(R)]

Good point. I overstated my ideas. However, it is my understanding that it is possible to fix security defects in recent versions of Linux without paying more. I'm not talking about ancient versions.

It is important to understand that Windows Vista was so unfinished that it was rejected by customers. Windows 8 and 8.1 have also been rejected. So, Windows XP is just one accepted version behind the latest accepted version, Windows 7.

My main point is in response to this Slashdot story. Microsoft is being PAID for continued fixes to Windows XP. Should governments allow Microsoft to prevent those fixes being given to taxpayers?

The law: Financial loss is injury.

[Futurepower(R)]

"... nobody is going to die or be injured because an old PC got pwned."

Financial loss is considered legal injury.

Re:Can Microsoft prevent distribution to taxpayers

[jbolden]

The question is, should Microsoft, a company with a virtual monopoly, be allowed to create anti-customer profit-making arrangements?

Yes. Anti-monopoly rules don't prevent profits they prevent things like spreading to other industries. So for example it would be unreasonable to prevent them from using an OS monopoly to try and lock people into their office suite. It is perfectly reasonable for them to make excess profit from their OS (though I'd disagree that's what's going on) because that is likely to encourage more marketplace diversity.

That's all besides with the rise of Android, OSX now having more market share, Linux being viable (though rarely used), and a 1/2 dozen minor systems becoming much cheaper I'm not even sure it is reasonable to classify Microsoft as having a monopoly anymore.

Microsoft is being PAID for continued fixes to Windows XP. Should governments allow Microsoft to prevent those fixes being given to taxpayers?

Of course. What you are talking about is nationalization not anti-monopoly provisions. The government if it considers Microsoft be a critical utility could pay Microsoft share and bond holders off and nationalize it if they want Microsoft run completely in the public interest.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[dbIII]

Correct - it's been unsafe for many years but third party stuff helps to make it usable.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[dbIII]

What can you do on a nice shiny new i5core Dell box that your XP system can not?

Anything that requires more memory than the artificial memory ceiling on XP. Something as trivial as editing a few photos from a camera on a phone can use all that up these days.
And it's not a Microsoft problem it's an XP problem - I've got an old Win2k system at work that gets fired up every year or two with more memory than XP can use. XP is a toy that got used long enough that people got used to it but it's still a toy made to run computer games at home.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Billly Gates]

A typical office latchkey can do office work fine with 512 megs of ram on XP. Yes it will boot slowly and he will have to come in 5 minutes early. But only the engineers, developers, and servers need anything more for light office work.

You can edit photos fine with 512 megs of ram if you use Adobe CS2 which is free and what XP users would be using. IE 8 runs fine with 512 megs of ram too. So why change if people can still get work done just as well?

Sure a new $600 computer sounds trivial for a user but when you are complex you have +20 GPOs (some are not win 7 compatible), apps, fussy apps, OU changes, and many many other issues it gets expensive and a pain in the butt requiring consultants, +20 temps, and production impacts as bugs arise.

XP is not just a toy. It is the pillar upon all business processes and software rest upon. Quite a big under taking.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Billly Gates]

You are right. I can't tell the difference between a reception typing a letter in word 2003 on a p4 vs an i5. She can work just as fast and albeit slower on Windows 7/office 2010 as she may not be familiar with the ribbon yet.

People at work use older IE so that issue of 20 tabs is mute as Chrome is a pig and not a good example of a well written app.

Excel will work just as fast on a pIV unless the finance guru runs a custom VBA application running calculus in excel that number crunches (very rare I may add unless it is a niche app). But for light excel pie charts a 386 can display things as fast for 95% of spreadsheet work as computers today are very very very fast.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[dbIII]

It is a limited toy compared with Microsoft's own products available at the same time.
Your suggested workflow is also available on an Atari ST or first generation Mac, but people expect more than those or a ten year old PC can offer.

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[Billly Gates]

At work we use i5's which are brand new with 8 gigs of ram and put XP on them.

When the time is right we will re-image them. We are still upgrading Pentium IV's.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[Billly Gates]

Such as ...?

FYI I am typing this on a Windows 7 system I have at home. I use more yes I use VMware workstation with my 16 gigs of ram to simulate domains and do testing and lab work to sharpen my IT skills. But I am not typical. So I am not a 50 year old who hates change at all and wanted to clear that up first.

Security wise excluded XP works for business except in niche cases I see and it is very very expensive to switch and gpos, app certification, and many other steps are needed for something that is not required does not make sense.

I do not know of any use a typical office worker could not do on a Windows 3.11 486? The only except is poorly written javascript ajax websites but that is considered off task on the job anyway.

XP works for 1/3 of the users on the internet. Windows hit the maturity point with XP and now there is no reason to ever change. As the years go by when 2019 hits and Windows 7 goes EOL anyone needing more than 16 gigs of ram and a non raid SSD will be even a much smaller niche. Again no need to change unless MS wants more money.

Yes you like technology and some newer graphical effects and kernel features are cool. But HR does not utilize 4 cpu cores to write a report, check email, and go to taleo to screen an applicant. This is a new age and yes post PC era. Phones need upgrading hell of a lot more than desktops as the benefits go down each new release.

Re:Microsoft wants more money again

[jbolden]

At work we use i5's which are brand new with 8 gigs of ram and put XP on them.

Which is a clearly dysfunctional setup.

When the time is right we will re-image them. We are still upgrading Pentium IV's.

Upgrading to what?

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[Teun]

Ah yes Vista, I forgot and wonder why...

A good point about the netbooks, MS wanted to keep the de-facto monopoly and were prepared to give up on/delay newer products.

I see room for legislature to enforce an X year support of systems that include software like an OS.
Let's see what that does to the present near-impossibility to buy a computer without an OS.

All they need to do is file an extension...

[Taed]

That gives them until 15 October!

Playing into Microsoft's playbook

[guruevi]

For years, Microsoft has been attempting to rent out their software instead of selling it outright. Having a yearly cost for an OS or Office suite is what they've been attempting to do for years.

It started with their Enterprise licensing where they started charging "Software Update Assurance", basically for a yearly cost per computer you 'rent' any version of their software (usually a Windows/Office/CAL combo). Then they went to Office365 where you paid for both storage, server and the desktop software on a yearly basis outright, no more buying the Office suite, no more buying Exchange and also, you're locked in because you can't get your data out anymore. Now they've come full circle where you rent their OS suite. Since they've tested the waters over the last 2 decades and know that large companies rather remain locked in because it's a cheaper solution for the next quarter, they can now keep raising their prices as they're doing with Software Update Assurance (it went up 30% last year), Office365 and now Windows ($200/year). Expect the next Windows to cost a pretty penny on a yearly basis as well.

Re:Taxpayers pay, but not allowed to have updates.

[scarboni888]

Forcing people to purchase new hardware and throw out perfectly good hardware because an unneccessary & new operating system wont run on their current XP hardware is at the very least environmentally abusive. Also it is disruptive to users because a forced hardware and operating system migration creates all kinds of problems that don't exist if Microsoft would simply offer XP security updates as a subscription service.

Re:Cars: Manufacturers pay for defects.

[jbolden]

Let's see what that does to the present near-impossibility to buy a computer without an OS.

The near-impossibility mainly came from OEMs getting discounts for Windows if they shipped windows with every system. IMHO one of the worst aspects of the Microsoft settlement was not banning this practice as it was unquestionably monopolistic. But... you can get a computer without an OS rather easily you just go to an OEM that doesn't have a strong relationship with Microsoft. And of course with Android systems at this point you can get a Linux which is configurable fairly easily as well on many low end systems.

In any case Europe has rules about years of support. It is something like 2-4 depending on country. Microsoft easily makes it.

Your tax dollars at work.

[bjoswald]

You would think that, by now, we would have some compnay like Red Hat or Google contracting out Linux-based systems and support for critical infrastructure. Since *nix/*BSD is the backbone of the Internet, why do they depend on Windows?

Step up to the plate

[CmdrTamale]

OK, FOSS, step up to the plate.

Get me a VM host image that can boot underneath XP and secure it. Make a world where XP is safe. I am pretty sure you have the tools.

Where is the torrent?
--
There's a big difference between the right answer and the correct answer - Scott Myer, Basic Instructions

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[dbIII]

I disagree. A lot of recent software is stupidly resource hungry and workflows have changed to require it. A lot of webpages demand frankly insane amounts of resources to display, and some very popular ones (eg. Facebook) are major culprits so there is no getting away from it without banning web browsing.
A old system good enough for typing up reports is going to be seen to be inadequate the second someone sends something to it in a new format or the second someone sends an amusing cat video. Telling the user that it's good enough for work purposes and they should ask for things in an old format and tell their friends to stop sending the amusing cat videos tends to put you in Bastard Operator From Hell territory or Dilbert's denier of information services. Memory, low end systems that can take a decent amount of memory and a modern OS is so cheap now that it looks insulting if you deny them something as good as the home computer they got for a low price three years ago. If they've used a decent system they probably are used to leaving programs open so they'll bring XP to it's knees if they don't learn to only have one thing running at a time. XP isn't designed to be used like a workstation, it's a toy to run one game at a time full screen with a side benefit of being able to run a word processor so you can bring the games machine into an office.

Windows hit the maturity point with XP and now there is no reason to ever change

It's got that step backwards into a low memory ceiling which is now a very major reason to change for anyone that likes to have more than one window open at a time.

I do not know of any use a typical office worker could not do on a Windows 3.11 486

Put even simple images in a document and such a system is unusable - I know that from plenty of frustrating experience back in the day.

But HR does not utilize 4 cpu cores

If they want to burn a CDROM they need at least two unless they just want to stare at the screen until it is finished. I've still got a single core machine around that proves that point from time to time, although now it's just doing good duty as an X terminal for a guy who does all his real work on a cluster so the single core and low memory does not matter.

Now while I have some XP systems for users that don't need anything else, or on hardware that can't cope with anything newer (Dell laptop with a 1600x1200 screen and can't justify $5k to get something newer with as good a screen), it appears to me that the average user is getting up to stuff that needs more memory than XP can provide.

Also your HR strawman would be on Facebook most of the time and sharing silly cat videos a lot of the rest of the time so needs a powerful PC even if it is not for work purposes :) While they probably could do their work related tasks with "ed" on a dumb terminal connected to Xenix running on a 286 the workflow would annoy the crap out of them - the same with a less extreme suggestion of yours that they would consider as antiquated as my Xenix example. Giving a new employee a slow XP box is a way to get rid of them even if the older employees like XP.

Re:Windows XP did not instantly become unsafe Apri

[david_thornley]

The newest systems sold with XP are netbooks. I think production of netbooks with XP stopped around 2010, and that really isn't that long ago. So Microsoft can't support something five years after issuing the license and selling it?