Well now it looks like Windows XP will not meet its doom until at least June 30 next year. Microsoft, which had planned to kill off XP in January 2008 has apparently changed its plans due to the slow uptake of Windows Vista -- something that is hardly surprising given the feedback I've been getting from Network World readers.
Mike Nash, corporate vice president of Windows Product Management, is quoted on Ars Technica as saying "Maybe we were a little ambitious to think that we would need to make Windows XP available for only a year after the release of Windows Vista." Do you think so Mike?
I keep wondering where we'd be had Microsoft not had such hubris to think they could foist a (sort of) new operating system with all sorts of unnecessary chrome, bells, and whistles on the world and instead invested time and money in fixing and improving XP?
This points up a serious problem of the 21st century commercial computing complex: The endless upgrade mania. The majority of software vendors see upgrades as a way of generating revenue and despite the fact that those upgrades add little or nothing to the product's functionality they are in a position to "recommend" the upgrades and, using all of the marketing tricks at their command, make it difficult if not impossible for users to stick at a version they are comfortable with. Nope, make ‘em upgrade and make ‘em pay.
This is also a key issue of the soft underbelly of the commercial computing complex that consumers are mostly unaware of (see this week's Backspin). What it amounts to is a vast and unspoken conspiracy that makes all other market fixing in the computer business pale into insignificance.
|
|
Not just Vista
Microsoft is not just forcing Vista upgrades. Look at this article that states "From now on, a new development regime called the Software Reengineering Initiative will ensure that releases ship every two years whether new features are ready or not, said Mark Souza, who heads the SRI team."
http://www.builderau.com.au/news/soa/Microsoft-No-more-five-year-waits-for-SQL-Server/0,339028227,339219480,00.htm
Unneeded and incomplete upgrades do not seem like a good way to keep customers happy. To my knowledge SQL 2000 is still running on a majority of servers with little technical need to upgrade. Forced upgrade cycles are just a way to keep Microsoft profitable and increase operating costs for businesses.
SQL 2000 is around because it HAS to be around
We have to keep MSSQL 2000 servers running because very many MAJOR enterprise software platforms are not yet compatible with MSSQL 2005 (and isn't 2008 just around the corner?). This is also true of some major Microsoft products like Sharepoint (?!?!?). Don't even get me started on SQL2k8 support.
trust me, we aren't keeping SQL2k around because of it's technical merits. If we could have, we'd have gotten rid of it years ago.
I Won't Say "I Told You So", but...
I saw this one coming some time ago -- back when it was announced that XP's sp3 was going to extend the product keys and little else. Micro$oft is going to end up supporting XP for some time, now that they have admitted there is strong demand for XP over Vista. Don't be surprised if the June date doesn't slip further.
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols on eWEEK wrote:
I used to call XP "the new ME, the operating system Micro$oft would most like to forget". I've changed my mind. That title now belongs to Vista.
Assumptions
"The soft underbelly" that I see is the assumptions made by most vendors.
- High speed Internet: everyone has it - they must have or Windows XP wouldn't ship with XP2, requiring close to 100 patches out of the box. Web pages wouldn't be written so that a mb of data has to pass before the page would display. Unfortunately, we don't all have high speed Internet & a modem connection is every bit as vulnerable to many of the exploits running in the wild. Exploits are often well written, lean, mean code. Update & Banking sites are generally poorly written kludges. With my modem connection I can get a virus easier than I can get an update or pay a bill. The latter time out far too often.
- All software vendors write code to keep up with the latest Windows Operating System & Intel Chips. I had a vendor tell me the other day to buy a second hand PIII with Win2K so I could use his proprietary cards for a test program. It happens to be one of the better ones, but they don't support PCI or XP yet.
- Everyone uses Microsoft, so it must be good. Sorry, but most use it because of good marketing & their propensity for ripping out every soft underbelly it could find & hammering down or buying out the rest. The fact that any idiot could set up a Microsoft network years ago while Novell & SCO had crappy marketing, no desktop & tried to make networking too expensive & arcane made it easier. IBM & Apple made huge errors at key times (OK, IBM did it constantly) so their desktops never got a good chance, either.
- Newer must be better. Is anyone still ignorant enough of computer history to believe this? Does anyone buy in before a .1 or SP release? I can name a dozen!
- We need more! More bells & whistles, levels, controls... Does anyone use or even know half of those they have already? I'm sure I don't & I do it for a living. I quit playing Tomb Raider when I couldn't spend enough time to get through a level. (OK, my kids think I'm a lame gamer too, but I can't devote an entire evening to a game.)
Since when did some glitz justify such crappy workmanship? OK, it always has, but today it has become a plague. Vendors are polishing t**ds & then foisting them on us as 'needed'. Conspicuous consumption by idiots. I'd like to think it will stop sometime soon, but only a major crash will do it & I hope not to see that.
dose anyone have a code to
dose anyone have a code to keep xp running if it crashes and microsoft wont give you a code again?