I understand that after April 8 there won't be any new updates for Windows XP. My question is, if I install XP AFTER April 8 will it retrieve tha updates launched until April 8 or will Windows update stop working altogether?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 41
"The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
Windows Update for XP will work for years to come, just like Windows Update still works for Windows 98 and Windows 2000. But there will be no new updates or patches made.
Windows XP activation will also continue to work.
Thanks Vidd"The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
Windows 2000 no longer updates since support was pulled for it. That is that the update manager does not download anything at this point, even on a new install. I would assume the same goes for Windows XP after April 2014.
However don't take anybodies word for it. Get all the updates you want on a clean install of XP before April 2014, and then make a backup image of your drive for future installs.
Windows Update for Windows 2000 is still available.
If anyone can't download or gets an error, this page may help:
Last edited by Vidd; 17th Dec 2013 at 17:11.
Thanks for your reply Vidd. Thats good to know that updates can still be fixed for Windows 2000 with some tinkering (on new installs), it appears to function okay, for older installs.
I wouldn't depend on Microsoft to support their past updates forever. Still would be a good idea to make an image of a clean install/updated XP. On my old single core celeron, I got a nice speed bump when using Win2000, (as compared to XP which I mostly used on it). As long as people have older machines, those older operating systems will still be relevant.
No doubt there will be torrents of slipstreamed XP install discs with all the final updates.
I'd take DEAD's comments as your safest option: "don't take anybody's word for it - take care of it yourself". XP users will probably want a hard-copy of SP2 and SP3 - those two files. Plus, there are hundreds of minor updates after SP3. (Would it kill MS to create an SP4?!! They didn't for Win98 or Win2000 though. Darn.)
Of course MS won't release ans SP4. They view this as a great opportunity to make money off people upgrading to Win8.
Jag, oh yeah, absolutely. And stupidly, Microsoft thinks being unhelpful to their faithful users is GOOD for Microsoft's future. That rewarding someone for their years of long and expert-usage is now a weapon to be used against them.
Microsoft earns all the Hate and Flames they get, with attitudes like this. I certainly understand "We are no longer spending manpower hours on supporting old technology - we have to move forward".
But the fact is that they DO have all the files for after-support creation of some Final SP. Bundling them together only makes it easier for their long-time users AND would display a helpfulness that never seems to have crossed their tiny brains.
XP is fine for old systems but not as good for newer ones, especially those with a lot of memory installed. XP's 64-bit versions receive a lot of criticism for their flaws. XP was designed for 2001's technology not 2014's technology. The last systems that were designed with XP in mind are now 7 years old and many have already been taken out of service. It costs software developers a lot of money to create software that runs on 5 different Windows operating systems and test it for each one. It is time for XP to die
[Edit] Releasing a final SP only benefits the tech savvy, which is a small percentage of users, who will easily manage to keep using XP without any help from Microsoft if they need to. Average consumers don't re-install the operating system when a hard drive fails or the OS install is irreparably damaged. They get someone who is technically proficient to fix it or buy a new PC.
Last edited by usually_quiet; 18th Dec 2013 at 10:21.
Usually_Q, I'll argue the point that Microsoft's refusal to make tech-support easier (with a final SP) is an ongoing reason for any disloyalty that MS and Windows earns.
But I also discount the value of an OS entirely. It's the programs and the results that users get from their skill-set on those programs - that's what sells and keeps selling computers and gadgets. XP isn't being kept around because it's incredibly customizable, especially compared to Win7-8-8.1. It's still being used because the programs loaded do everything those users want. Those users have learned those programs, they are productive with them and they've seen "upgrades" to often be abrogation of their past learning and an enslavement to a treadmill of new learning skills - ONLY to produce the exact same results they always wnted.
"Why bother learning new ways to create the same end-result. Two and Two is still Four, regardless of a Ribbon or Toolbar. Why should I spend new money to simply do the same things I'll always need?"
Microsoft wants respect for their desire to get more profits.
Then they should respect every other business that wants THEIR profits, too - and one of those factors is to use their long-learned skills far into the future, without paying extra new expenses for no new results.
Microsoft scaremongering tactics of publicizing "New virus attacks await if you don't move to a new OS" is NOT respectful. This fear and risk has always been there - but never has Microsoft created publicity based on that alone. And that's what they're doing. This is NOT a respectful-to-other-business attitude by Ballmer and MS.
Users were given plenty of time to prepare for this. Businesses that couldn't prepare for some reason are likely doomed to low profitability or outright failure regardless of what Microsoft does. Those that just haven't bothered deserve to suffer the consequences of their stupidity, and there will be some beyond security issues. ...like the inability to run new commercial software or use new hardware. Software will be written to use OS features that XP doesn't support and soon most new hardware won't have XP drivers written for it.
Last edited by usually_quiet; 18th Dec 2013 at 12:47. Reason: clarification
If anything, Microsoft having to support XP for so long was some form of penance for Vista, which was a dog of an OS nobody wanted to use. If logic plays a part, Vista hardware/driver support would be dropped by vendors before XP.
I look at XP as being two operating systems... pre and post service pack 3. Software/driver support is also generally divided into two categories.... pre SP3 and post SP3.
XP prior to SP3 is all but dead. XP SP3 wasn't released until 2008, so if you look at it that way, Vista is actually an older operating system. It was released late 2006. The original XP is an old, redundant OS, whereas XP SP3.... not so much.
The statistics vary according to where you look, but here for example, they state XP is still running on 12% of PCs, compared to less than 2% for Vista, and 10% for Win8. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
These two sites claim XP usage is still around 30%..... but whichever you go with, it seems XP is always going to be far more widely used than Vista and it's still more widely used than Win8... a year after that OS was released.
I agree with OllieTSB. If I'm going to upgrade my OS, pay for the privilege and spend (probably) days tweaking, installing software and sorting out problems etc, I want the end result to effectively be something more than being back where I started. There needs to be a tangible benefit, and mostly at the moment, that's not the case. A lack of vendor software/hardware support for my current OS would no doubt be a consideration.... when it actually happens, and not because it's going to happen eventually.
When I build my next PC I'll probably go with Win7, but for the PCs already running XP in this house I can't see any real benefit in upgrading Windows at the moment. The fact Microsoft support for it will end soon isn't a major consideration for me.
Last edited by hello_hello; 18th Dec 2013 at 13:13.
For most users, Windows 8 or 8.1 are not great on the desktop and most laptops without a makeover using third-party desktop customization software. ... but that segment of the PC market is stagnant or declining. Tablet use is growing. The success of Windows 8 or 8.1 will ultimately be determined by how many people replace their laptop with a Windows tablet or smart phone. In the next few years, a lot of people, particularly younger ones, will do just that at home. Some businesses with a workforce that is largely mobile may also find Windows tablets or Windows smart phones an attractive alternative to a small laptop.
No doubt XP support will go first, but the more people who keep using it, the longer that'll take.
I'm not arguing for continued support. I completely understand that. I'm arguing for a Final SP that provides all of the post-SP3 fixes and updates which MS continued to provide.
Mixed message? Well, to one person in this world. To the support folks, it'd be a good thing.
My two cents worth,
I would also like to have a stand alone version of the updates made available. I have just spent the better part of a week of frustration trying to reload XP Pro on a friends portable PC. Every time you do a download something gets messed up in Windows Update or Microsoft Update that kills updates. I also have two of my own machines that for some reason have decided to fail to do updates. Searching on the web produces a lot of hits on this issue. From some of the forums $MS was messing with IE 8 updates and in the process destroyed the ability to do updates on some updates to IE 8, or at the very least lead to an extremely frustrating process. The curent IE8 still seems to have problems. I'm beginning to suspect $MS engineered difficulty into doing updates as a means to discourage XP usage. I never allow $MS updates to auto update. There are some updates that I just don't want from them. I have several pages of notes on the steps needed to get a fully updated version of XP reinstalled. Which includes reinstall of IE8 multiple times. I sure hopes this works on my own two machines. The best suggestion I can make is to use a backup software package to back up a fully updated version of XP for reload if necessary, I screwed up in that both of my backups date back to 2012 thus don't have all the updates installed. I have yet to try to updates on the one of the machines that is running on the backed up version. I waited until I had succeeded in updating the friends PC.
Some older versions of the office suites for example do not work with newer versions of the OS, but are still very usable and get the job done under XP. Buying a new copy of Office every five years can get to be an expensive situation.
Yes I also have Win7 Pro 64 bit on my two machines and really like the performance with the software that I use on it (and runs on it). Unfortunately some of the free Video Software sometimes has issues with Win 7 32 bit emulation and only seems to run under XP.
I try to avoid buying $MS products when possible. Their five year plan of support for software and hardware really ticks me off (I'm being polite here). Not everyone has 100s of dollars available to update their $MS software products every five years. I do generally install the latest version of $MS's operating system when I update one of my machines. But so far I have always been able to install XP in addition.
I seek your tolerance to my rather long rant.
For what's worth my two cents worth.
Last edited by rcubed; 19th Dec 2013 at 18:41. Reason: typo
The safest thing is to keep XP off the net, if you are going to continue to use it after the cutoff. You could use it in a virtual machine if you wanted, but I would not use it on the net.Believing yourself to be secure only takes one cracker to dispel your belief.
Last edited by usually_quiet; 22nd Dec 2013 at 13:41. Reason: spelling
Five years doesn't seem like it is an overly short support window to me, so I'm curious as to what commercial consumer software you have used that has a longer term of support than Microsoft provides?[/QUOTE]
I don't want to get into a protracted discussion but Winpatrol, SuperAntiSoftware and others, some of it is even free ImgBurn for example which I have supplied donation to on multiple occasions. Most of these have a stand alone install package that includes all the latest update included.
In the class of getting things I don't want include, but are not limited to Bing, Siverlight, Bing toolbar. The updater insists on turning on those even though I have indicated I want them hidden (for good).
You missed my point. Apparently your and my definition of support differ. I am not interested in perpetual support in fixing new problems, I am simply interested in being able to get a stand alone copy of all the updates (final version) that I can keep on the media of my choice in my possession so that IF I decide I need to reinstall XP for example, I am not at the mercy of $MS in the future. Implicit in my purchasing the product was the understanding that I would be able to have a working, bug free piece of software, with the understanding that as problems occur they would correctly be fixed (for the support period).
I agree that I don't expect $MS to supply support forever. The same thing applies to some of other programs I use. $MS (and other companies) used to supply the updates (or the most recent version as a complete stand alone installer) as a stand alone file. Lately some have opted for a download of an installer program that accesses the web site and pulls down the actual files to do the update. There are perhaps technical reasons why they have done this, but I don't think it is a large burden on $MS to consolidate all the updates in one or more stand alone package(s) at the time they decide to end "support" for a product and make that available. I used to keep copies of all the updates but that has become nearly impossible for the reason just mentioned above.
As I pointed out, in lieu of a complete offline (stand alone) updates package apparently the only viable option is to build a basic complete image of XP with all available updates at that point and back that up on the media of your choice. As I admitted shame on me for not keeping more recent on my backups. As for a subsequent service pack I can tolerate additional things in a update package as long as there is an uninstall option (method) for that update included (I'm thinking mostly of software issues (i.e. Bing - not security issues).
My main point of contention in my original post was the fact (and my opinion) is that for whatever reason they have indirectly or intentionally made that process very difficult, i.e the updater stops working after having installed the first or second, or third..... set (or all three or more) of updates, and these are problems that have been going on for years before they decided to end support and they should have been addressed (and fixed) years ago. I believe it is intentional and part of their business plan. Others may disagree, everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter. Only $MS knows and they aren't disclosing anything nor would I expect them to.
Last edited by rcubed; 22nd Dec 2013 at 17:10. Reason: typo, additional explanation
Yes, Microsoft wants all XP users to move on and a lot of software publishers and hardware manufacturers would like to see that happen as well. I'll agree that Microsoft is deliberately devoting fewer and fewer resources to providing updates for XP as its user base erodes. I sure they know doing this will encourage some customers to stop using XP.
As a side note MS has already stopped selling Windows 7, so those XP users who prefer Windows 7 to Windows 8.1 for a new PC build or upgrading once XP support stops might want to buy a copy before the existing supply dries up.
If I had a machine running xp (I use linux with one lonely remaining windows 7 partition) what I'd do is:
Install linux (for older hardware I'd use xubuntu or, probably, mint with the Mate desktop) alongside xp.
Never go online with xp and run it in a vm. In linux virtualbox is probably the best choice.
Use linux to go online. BTW, while you can get hacked in linux, there are no known linux viruses.
We had another thread recently on this same subject. I mentioned something there that I will say here. I work in IT and I read IT security news on a regular basis. There is a fear among some IT security experts that the "bad guys" are sitting on known exploits for XP that have never been used and Microsoft does not know are a problem, so there are no fixes for them. These are called "Zero day exploits" meaning that they appear with no warning and there is no defense for them because they were not known to be possible. These security experts expect these exploits to become active after Microsoft officially stops support. With no more support, Microsoft will not fix these problems. XP will not really be safe once Microsoft stops making security updates and I would not recommend that people use it, although many will continue to do so anyway. Whether using XP after April 8, 2014 really is a problem or not is something we will have to wait and see about. Many users foolishly think that their PCs are too insignificant for the "bad guys" to be interested in. This is not true, but there is no way to convince these users that they are wrong, so some people will willingly use XP after that date because they just believe that nothing bad can ever happen to them if they continue to do so.