Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Confirms It Is Dropping Windows 8.1 Support

snydeq (1272828) writes "Microsoft TechNet blog makes clear that Windows 8.1 will not be patched, and that users must get Windows 8.1 Update if they want security patches, InfoWorld's Woody Leonhard reports. 'In what is surely the most customer-antagonistic move of the new Windows regime, Steve Thomas at Microsoft posted a TechNet article on Saturday stating categorically that Microsoft will no longer issue security patches for Windows 8.1, starting in May,' Leonhard writes. 'Never mind that Windows 8.1 customers are still having multiple problems with errors when trying to install the Update. At this point, there are 300 posts on the Microsoft Answers forum thread 'Windows 8.1 Update 1 Failing to Install with errors 0x80070020, 80073712 and 800F081F.' The Answers forum is peppered with similar complaints and a wide range of errors, from 800F0092 to 80070003, for which there are no solutions from Microsoft. Never mind that Microsoft itself yanked Windows 8.1 Update from the corporate WSUS update server chute almost a week ago and still hasn't offered a replacement.'"

68 of 575 comments (clear)

  1. u wot m8 by Agent+ME · · Score: 5, Informative

    Windows 8.1 is no longer supported, so users must update to Windows 8.1?

    1. Re:u wot m8 by x0ra · · Score: 5, Informative

      As I understand it, they must update to "'Windows 8.1 Update 1". A new marketing name for the old "Service Pack" ?

    2. Re:u wot m8 by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just thank your lucky stars that you're not in Linux-land, or some other godawful free software environment, 'cause you would have to type

      >apt-get upgrade

      in a terminal. This is obviously way too difficult for any human being, so bless Gates and Ballmer and whoever came after him for letting us not have to type that

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    3. Re:u wot m8 by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just thank your lucky stars that you're not in Linux-land, or some other godawful free software environment, 'cause you would have to type

      >apt-get upgrade

      in a terminal. This is obviously way too difficult for any human being, ...

      Don't kid yourself, it would be: apt-get dist-upgrade

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    4. Re:u wot m8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know what's even more user-friendly?
      Just clicking the little update icon in the bottom right corner, entering your root password, and clicking OK.

      I know how your type likes to hate on everything Linux without having any clue what you're talking about, but seriously, upgrading your distro isn't rocket science.

    5. Re:u wot m8 by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      well they released an update that you must get to get updates!

      just another MS win8 era naming fail. how they can fuck up so badly is a miracle.

      (and nevermind that windows 8 is what.. under 2 years old?? and 8.1 is not getting security updates now?? )

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:u wot m8 by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

      But when will we finally get an update for the update of the update to the update?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:u wot m8 by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 2

      If you're a linux prophet, how do you know about windows and upgrading?

      I ask this because pert damn near everyone I've worked with over the past 15 years knows that when you move to a new Microsoft release, it's a wipe and reinstall.

      And just like Star Trek Movies, every second windows release sucks. XP was great, Vista sucked balls, win 7was ok, win 8 ran for goatse .

      (p.s. - never upgrade until the second service pack for the release)

      --
      _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    8. Re:u wot m8 by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 2

      Tsk Tsk. You made it too simple.
      You have to type
      apt-get update
      then
      apt-get upgrade
      then
      you have to wait for a prompt and type Y [RETURN]

    9. Re:u wot m8 by jopsen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know what's even more user-friendly? Just clicking the little update icon in the bottom right corner, entering your root password, and clicking OK.

      I know how your type likes to hate on everything Linux without having any clue what you're talking about, but seriously, upgrading your distro isn't rocket science.

      In all fairness, fixing a broken update can, however, be close to rocket science :)
      I use linux, and will continue to... But in this day and age, with all desktops going towards composite window managers, sucky nvidia drivers is a pain in the ass.
      But it's a matter of luck when buying a laptop...

    10. Re:u wot m8 by stooo · · Score: 5, Funny

      if rocket science was so easy as a "sudo apt-get install -f" and a "sudo dpkg --configure -a" , I would probably be building a moon base :)

      --
      aaaaaaa
    11. Re:u wot m8 by Yaur · · Score: 2

      It's all fun and games until libc needs an update.

    12. Re:u wot m8 by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I feel that you were supposed to write 'Yo Dawg' somewhere in there.

    13. Re:u wot m8 by tiny69 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I use Slackware, you insensitive clod.

      --
      Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
    14. Re:u wot m8 by penix1 · · Score: 2

      emerge -uD world

      Do it right... ;-)

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
    15. Re:u wot m8 by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      This is MCSE's we are talking about, using the keyboard like that is not a part of their training.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    16. Re:u wot m8 by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Or just paying attention and buying a laptop with AMD instead of Nvidia. I know it's unacceptable to make people actually look beyond the color of the laptop when they buy it, but it really needs to be done.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    17. Re:u wot m8 by HJED · · Score: 3, Funny

      it's not rocket science that prevents that, it's the cost of building the rockets.

      --
      null
    18. Re:u wot m8 by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's turtles all the way down until you hit a tortoise and a SVN repository.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    19. Re:u wot m8 by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      I recently mangled yum by running out of RAM mid-updates. That was ugly. Really ugly. Fixed it, but more through luck than skill.

    20. Re:u wot m8 by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes basically the article is saying that any major patches for Windows 8.1 in future will have a dependency upon prior patches being installed. In other words how it's always been since the beginning of time.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    21. Re:u wot m8 by Thruen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Right? People should learn they're better off having their hardware choices severely limited by their OS... Honestly, comments like this highlight why most users will never switch to Linux: the things you consider basic knowledge are things the average user never wants to even consider learning about. People who are primarily concerned with the color of their laptop do not know or care to know about the difference between AMD and nVidia, they want whichever comes in the white laptop and they just want it to work when they turn it on. You say they need to look at more, the thing is they really don't and there's no good reason they should have to.

    22. Re:u wot m8 by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yo Dawg! I hear you like updates ... so I got you an update so you can update while you're updating.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. Wanna give up on these guys yet ? by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 2

    "a wide range of errors, from 800F0092 to 80070003, for which there are no solutions from Microsoft."

    Story of our Lives. Here we are.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Wanna give up on these guys yet ? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wonder what I'd prefer ... clean crash along with the info that there will never be a patch to it, or a segfault where I will no later than 3 days later have a patch delivered... Decisions, decisions...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Wanna give up on these guys yet ? by FireFury03 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At least it fails gracefully with a clean error code. In Linux world it would show up as a dialog with corrupted text and a mysterious "Invalid argument" error message written in some log. ;)

      Mostly under Linux the error messages are useful to someone technical. Increasingly other OSes (Windows, OS X, iOS, Android) consider useful error mesages to be not user friendly and just give you a generic "something broke" error that is no use to man nor beast - frequently I'm left digging out tcpdump to diagnose customer's problems because the application itself won't give me any information (yes, even in the system log) - I shouldn't need to tcpdump their IMAP traffic to discover that the server is telling them their password is wrong damnit!

    3. Re:Wanna give up on these guys yet ? by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How long did it take Ubuntu 12.10 to fix their "installing this OS bricks E1000 adapters" bug?

      Anyone claiming Linux doesnt have these sorts of issues is full of shit.

  3. It's OK for Apple but not Microsoft? by plover · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple doesn't support more than one version of iOS. If you want to fix a problem with 6.1.2, you get to go to whatever version is current (7.1). You don't get to go to 6.1.3, you don't get to go to 7.0.5 or 7.0.6, you go to 7.1. Your choice is "upgrade or don't."

    --
    John
    1. Re:It's OK for Apple but not Microsoft? by rsmith-mac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well you're comparing phones/appliances to computers, so yes.

      Windows has for many years now used a multiple-tier support strategy (the Windows Lifecycle policy). Microsoft supports an OS for 10 years, and during that period if they issue a service pack then they support the previous sub-version of Windows for 2 years. Windows 8.1 Update is about 30% of a service pack; the update contains a number of feature enhancements and on a code level it becomes a "base" OS that all future updates are built against. So unlike a normal security update, you can't skip Windows 8.1 Update and still get other security updates. This in turn can be interpreted as a violation of the Lifecycle Policy, as it's functionally a service pack and therefore Microsoft should continue providing security updates for Windows 8.1 (sans Update) for 2 years.

      iOS on the other hand offers no such policy. You are expected to use the most recent version of the OS and Apple has never said any differently, full stop.

      Never mind the huge difference between an OS for a disposable device, and an OS for computers that is expected to last for a decade or more and is interfaced with massive amounts of custom hardware and software. Unsurprisingly, the type of device and the expected use case for it is a big factor in how long an OS is supported and how OS updates are handled.

    2. Re:It's OK for Apple but not Microsoft? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Informative

      I dare say it's a close call if you migrate from ME...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Jeez by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just patch windows 8.1 with the update. It makes the OS unequivocally better. Whining about it is just silly.

    1. Re:Jeez by x0ra · · Score: 5, Informative

      unless you *cannot* update because the update is broken...

    2. Re:Jeez by nhstar · · Score: 2

      If I read it right, the problem is that a number of users are having issues with installing Update 1 and have yet to find solutions... While that really is a problem, I feel that the headline here was meant more to get people bashing some more.

      $0.02

      --
      --- no sig to see here... move along.
  5. Nope, not okay for either by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 2

    You should be able to upgrade/downgrade/sidegrade to any version that suits your needs

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Nope, not okay for either by viperidaenz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and you should accept that down-grading will mean you are vulnerable to any issues later versions have fixed.

    2. Re:Nope, not okay for either by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 2

      Two errors her:

      WIndows 2012 R2 Standard is the server version of Windows 8.1. Windows Server 2012 is the server version of Windows 8.

      Windows 2012 (and 2012 R2) Datacenter is not a version, it is a licensing option for virtual environments. The Standard version contains all functionality. The price for the Standard version is $882 (list - two physical CPUs).

  6. Wow what idiots....can you make it more confusing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They make things so confusing, whoever makes these decisions are the ones that should be fired from Microsoft! Windows 8.1 and Windows 8.1 Update 1. Just name the damn thing 8.2 or Service Pack 1 that everyone is familiar with. Then to top it off Windows 8.1 isn't getting any more updates!!!

    Then you have a pro version, this version and that version!

    Sorry but life is much more simpler in the Mac world! 10.9.0.....10.9.1....10.9.2.......etc. Then you have Delta Updates that are the point releases and Combo updates that will update you from the 10.9.0 to the latest version say 10.9.9 in one download and one install. Then you don't have 200 updates to download and install.

    I think the Microsoft way is superior as you can install/uninstall individual updates incase of problems, but its too complicated!

  7. running 8.1 update 1 from wsus by Espectr0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    if you have wsus without ssl, it works fine after importing the update from the catalog.

    i don't see the need of ssl on an internal small server, anyway even with ssl you can enable tls 1.2 manually and it will work.

    this article is also misleading, since the update itself is a regular update and not labeled "update 1" or even a service pack, but on every windows version out there there are updates that depend on other updates, especially service packs, so nothing new here.

    1. Re:running 8.1 update 1 from wsus by Loki_1929 · · Score: 2

      i don't see the need of ssl on an internal small server

      The 1980s called and would like their "my firewall stops ALLLL the hackerz!" approach to security back.

      On the server providing updates to all your Windows systems? Thank goodness you have no authority over my network. All the guys on my team get regular reminders about the importance of defense in depth.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
  8. It's spelled out isn't it? 24 months support. by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

    Microsoft only support the current service pack level and all those less than 24 months old for Windows Client and Server.
    That's the agreement they've given to their customers.
    They will drop support for 8.1 in 24 months time.

    http://support.microsoft.com/l... .... wait a minute. They should at least update their support policy before cutting support.

  9. Upgrade, don't update. by edibobb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not upgrade from Windows 8.1 to Windows 7?

    1. Re:Upgrade, don't update. by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      Speak for yourself. I run both Windows 8 and Windows 7 machines, and my Windows 7 machines are demonstrably more stable and less buggy than my Windows 8 one.

      So do I. I actually haven't run across an OS quite as stable as this since Win2k, probably my favorite version of windows. My follow up would be XPx64. If it's taking *that* long on a fresh install, you've got something else going on wrong on your system, either ram timings, spread spectrum, or something esoterically weird going on. I've seen exactly that type of issue before in Win7 and XP, and each case it was something different anything between windows itself trying to remotely grab a driver and getting "hung" on trying to install/update a NIC driver. Or something else.

      Anecdotes are just those.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:Upgrade, don't update. by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      But there is. They broke the integrity of the core packaging system by marrying it so deeply to .NET that there are multiple people out there who have to reinstall the OS from scratch because the update broke the package registry irreversibly.

      Funny, I didn't hear people bitching and moaning over that when they did the same thing with .net 3.5 in windows 7....which did exactly the same thing.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Upgrade, don't update. by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

      If it's taking *that* long on a fresh install, you've got something else going on wrong on your system, either ram timings, spread spectrum, or something esoterically weird going on.

      It sounds like a bad driver or hardware enumeration. But, yes, if windows takes more than a few seconds to get to a login on a SSD based machine (so, what 30-40 seconds on a spinner?) then it's a hardware problem. W8, once I restored the start menu, is no less stable or responsive than my W7 machine. Most of my complaints are over install of OEM versions of the OS that aren't auto-authorized by the bios (most of my machines are Dell, and the Dell OEM OS just installs; no games, no keys, no mess).

      FWIW, my favorite version was NT 3.51, and I go back to Win 1.02 days (on windows, at least); I still even have the install disks - though no 8086 or 720k floppy drive to read them.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  10. Re:Now I Know... by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tell him that M$ have done the same old, same old, attempted to correct their failures in the cheapest way possible by shoving the cost back on consumers. Can't get the upgrade to work, suck it up, format, re-install, repatch, re-upgrade and repatch and the restore you back up data, don't have backups, M$ answer to you, well, that's your fault for trusting their software.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  11. So? by Sable+Drakon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is this any different than MS stating in the past that updates required a certain Service Pack in order to be installed. It's worded very poorly, since everyone is going to assume the worst when you say 'Windows 8.1'. Mainly because they're not calling them service packs anymore or incrementing the updates. Windows 8.1 Update 1 would make more sense to people if they simply called it Windows 8.2.

    --
    The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
  12. Why not go back to the old SP system and stop this by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why not go back to the old SP system and stop this mess of a new update system where some stuff is in the windows store and others is in the windows update system.

    As for this not working for all does it have any thing to do with 8.0 to 8.1 being more like a full os upgrade then an SP? and why did make the 8.1 iso not take Windows 8 product keys?

    MS needs to go back to how it used to be with XP, vista, 7. Where it's not lot's of separate updates it is rolled up on to big install that has it all or least offer that as a choice not only for people who say have 2-4+ pc's and don't want to have re download the same updates on each pc but in some cases that combo updates work better.

  13. WTF? by bagman1673 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Windows 8.0 was installed on this machine, and it sucked immensely. Then a couple of months ago I got an upgrade to Windows 8.1 courtesy of Windows update, and it hardly sucked at all. Then, a couple of days ago I got my old Windows 8.1 upgraded to new Windows 8.1, and I know it is different because now apps have the big red "X" back in the right hand corner of the window and you can terminate them while they are running. Awesome! At this rate Windows 8.1 will turn into Windows XP around Labor Day. Maybe the boys will rediscover POP3 email at some point.

  14. Update worked! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    After four tries, the update finally worked. What does it do? I now have an App Store icon in the task bar. Only took some 880 Mbytes to do that.

  15. Broke for me... by Retron · · Score: 5, Informative

    I installed the update at work - it worked. I installed the update on my old PC - it worked. Tried to install it on my current PC - failed, after taking something like 20 minutes. It then took another half-hour to revert the changes. (On those machines where it worked, it took only 5 minutes or so to install).

    Digging around online showed that fiddling around on the command line with dism might help. The online image is corrupted but it's repairable... that is, until you try and use /restorehealth, at which point it moans that there are no sources. Of course there aren't, it was upgraded to 8.1 from 8.0 via the online store.

    So, after faffing around and grabbing an install.wim from an old 8.1 iso I had saved at work (not the 8.1 update 1 iso currently on the MS website) I find that dism won't use the image, even after mounting it.

    I couldn't then even attempt to reinstall the update, as it failed immediately. Dism was called upon again to remove the update package, then at least it would let me try again... only to fail. Another 45 minutes wasted.

    It looks as though the only way to "fix" it is to nuke Windows entirely, then go through the painful 8.0 > 8.1 > 8.1 with Media Center route. Except, of course, to get Media Center reinstalled you have to buy it again - there's no option I can see to re-enter your Meda Center key again because, guess what, when you upgrade to Media Center your Windows product key is changed. And a Windows 8.1 with Media Center key isn't accepted by the 8.1 iso (or at least wasn't when I tried earlier)...

    Looks like a long and boring Easter weekend coming up.

    On the other hand, I might just reinstall Windows 7 instead.

    1. RE: Broke for me... by IceFreak2000 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Just a heads up; I recently rebuilt my home development machine using Windows 8.1, and the Media Center key that I had registered with Windows 8.0 worked without a hitch.

      --
      Life is like a sewer; what you get out of it depends on what you put into it...
  16. Magic upgrade sequence solved! by BlazingATrail · · Score: 5, Funny

    You can upgrade by installing Windows Me, then Vista Ultimate, then enable start menu, disable start menu, 8.0 SP1, Windows ME again but holding ALT-F5 until BSOD appears, then quickly insert the 3.5 floppy with 8.1 patch on it (if you didn't keep a floppy drive.. oh you're so screwed!).

  17. Bullet, meet foot by Camael · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A timely reminder why users should stick with a stable, proven OS such as Win7 (and to a lesser extent, WinXP).

    Less fancy unnecessary features like Metro also means less chances for cock-ups to happen.

    If MS' intention is to migrate users of older OSes to Win8.1, it is not doing itself any favors here.

    1. Re:Bullet, meet foot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I recently bought a Windows 7 for my old computer along with an SSD (which alone makes a massive difference). That should tide me over until Windows 9. Not going to bother with any Windows 8 version. I may not be a huge gamer, but until Linux is the default platform for developers, I do need a Windows somewhere.

    2. Re:Bullet, meet foot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      OSX9? Remember: X goes to 11!

    3. Re:Bullet, meet foot by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A timely reminder why users should stick with a stable, proven OS such as Win7 (and to a lesser extent, WinXP).

      ???

      A lot of their Windows XP stuff requires SP3. Is this any different?

      --
      No sig today...
    4. Re:Bullet, meet foot by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Only because it checks for it. you can install a lot of the MS updates and add ons without SP3 if you break open their installers and get at the delicious gooey insides.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:Bullet, meet foot by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or linux.

    6. Re:Bullet, meet foot by DrXym · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Windows 8.x is stable and in many regards is better than Windows 7. It's just that stupid metro front end which scuppers the experience and consequently people hate on it.

      8.1 and the SR1 makes it just about tolerable but the most glaring omission is still the lack of a start menu. They could and should have a mini-metro popup that offers functionality analogous to the old start menu. Rumours suggest that one is being worked on but its not in this release.

    7. Re:Bullet, meet foot by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not a rumor, they showed a start menu + live tiles demo at BUILD this year.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    8. Re:Bullet, meet foot by Sipper · · Score: 2

      Or linux.

      I wish that were so... unfortunately Windows still has the Desktop userbase majority by a wide margin, and that doesn't seem to be changing despite Microsoft's many steps towards making computer owners' lives more difficult. "Windows Genuine Advantage" that limits your ability to change hardware in a computer running Windows, licensing confusion concerning running Windows in a Virtual Machine, version confusion ("home", "professional", "enterprise", "ultimate", etc), UI confusion with Metro and the Office "banner"... and so on.

      I wish Linux were "the answer" to this, but I've been running it on the Desktop since 1998 and I know it's not. A user trying to switch first has to go through a painful process of figuring out what programs they can use to do their daily tasks -- because they're not going to be running Internet Explorer or Outlook anymore, and the new programs have a different menu layout and (for the most part) different shortcut keys. If you've been working with a Linux desktop you've probably forgotten just how painful this transition was -- and it's not trivial. For people that are "stuck in their ways" and get anxious when they feel lost, this in itself is sometimes an insurmountable challenge.

      Also the Linux ecosystem is very different, mostly relying on volunteer efforts with a few paid developers on the side. Being that this ecosystem represents less than 5% of the market, it's not an ecosystem that would be able to cope with the other 95%+ of the market suddenly needing support. And because it's mostly volunteers that help, users first need to figure out where to report issues (which isn't always easy), then there are issues concerning user demads vs helper pushback, sometimes leading to rudeness and communication breakdown, occasional elitism or ignoring problems, etc. It's "a different world" than Windows users are used to in that respect too.

      And when you say "Or Linux", if the users given that advice knew to they'd ask "which one?" (i.e. which distribution?) Yeah... that problem too. Which window manager / desktop environment? That too. Etc.

  18. No, not quite true. by Myria · · Score: 2

    Yes, apple want you to upgrade to iOS 7, but if you don't want to (or can't because your hardware is too old) they still provide security patches for iOS 6.

    The last update was iOS 6.1.6 in Feb:

    6.1.6 was only released for devices that cannot run iOS 7. If you have a device that can run iOS 7, you had to upgrade to iOS 7 in order to get the important security fix, even if the device had iOS 6.x at the time. There was never an iOS 6.1.6 released for iPad 2 or 3, for example.

    If they had released an iOS 6.1.6 for iPad 2/3, it would've allowed downgrading from iOS 7.x to iOS 6.x then jailbreaking, something Apple hates with a passion.

    --
    "Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
  19. Re:Wow what idiots....can you make it more confusi by oobayly · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's because you're programming against it. If you go easy on .Net and only program alongside it, then it'll start throwing it weight around like an unruly child.

  20. Slashdot is ridiculous by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This whole thread is absurd, as are all the people jumping on the "bash MS" bandwagon.

      * Microsoft will continue to support 8.1, and everyone here KNOWS that.
      * Everyone knows that because Microsoft has a bigger problem with having to support old platforms than any other vendor out there. Many posters here generally know this, too, but are being obtuse so that they can harp about Microsoft ending support for a new platform (which isnt even remotely believable).
      * The author of the blog even knows that! The Microsoft technet entry says almost the opposite of what the blogger does-- that 8.1 WILL recieve updates. All he got right is that you do need to install a prereq to get them, like we've seen with countless other OSes. The venerable XP does this, too.
      * Half the people gloating over the "bugginess of Windows" are fans of an OS that is experiencing one of the biggest internet vulnerabilties in about a decade in its SSL stack, but thats OK in their eyes somehow because its not packaged with the OS and therefore theyre allowed to be buggy.
      * Some people are taking the time to smirk about the confusing version numbering of Win8-- which is doubly hillarious given how ridiculous Linux's versioning was until about a year ago.
      * And if I had to guess, the aforementioned problems could possibly be related to the aforementioned heartbleed bug, as we dont know what all was leaked and Microsoft is almost certainly not going to want to go into it.

    But yea, dont let that stop the fun.

    1. Re:Slashdot is ridiculous by Spliffster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The SSL flaw has been fixed and rolled out very quickly, it was not the first and will not be the last. How many known Security flaws for windows, IE and many other Microsoft products are out there, unfixed?

      Could you explain why "Microsoft has a bigger problem with having to support old platforms" than anyone else? They seem to have vast resources and should actually be able to react quicker than others.

      Best
      -S

    2. Re:Slashdot is ridiculous by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Arguing that Microsoft is "bad" because theyre not FOSS (which is really what you are driving at) is irrelevant. Everyone knows they ship proprietary software, but that has no relevance either to this story or to the quality of their code. As we've seen, OpenSSL has a bug that has been hemorrhaging private keys and passwords for days while the closed-source Schannel has not seen such a bug.

      Ideological spiels about how Windows sucks simply because its proprietary are really getting kind of old. If you dont like closed-source software, dont use it, but dont pretend that the license has an impact on code quality; there are a number of FOSS vs proprietary examples where FOSS is horribly deficient.

    3. Re:Slashdot is ridiculous by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      It is karmawhoring because Firefox is a far bigger problem these days than IE10 / 11 / soon-to-be-12, and at the moment the single biggest security vulnerability out there is a FOSS one.

  21. Re:Now I Know... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Informative

    Winows 8.1 update 1.

    It's just an awkward versioning scheme. If this was the unix world, they'd be talking about no longer updating 8.1.0 and requiring customers update to 8.1.1.