Microsoft can extend downgrade rights, but they cannot make the effort to release SP4.

In other news, Windows 2000 loses support today.

W3bbo said:

There won't be an SP4 because there's no real point. You're just confusing it with some kind of update rollup, which I do expect us to see some time in the coming year or so.

So what happens when XP SP3 reaches end-of-life in 2014? It wouldn't make sense for them to continue selling an unsupported operating system that no longer receives any security updates.

mstefan said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

So what happens when XP SP3 reaches end-of-life in 2014? It wouldn't make sense for them to continue selling an unsupported operating system that no longer receives any security updates.

If that happens, there will likely be some kind of lawsuit. People will not want to hear that they paid money for an OS that had no warranty and no support.

Shining Arcanine said:

mstefan said:

*snip*

If that happens, there will likely be some kind of lawsuit. People will not want to hear that they paid money for an OS that had no warranty and no support.

Hardly. Microsoft won't be selling XP at that point, just allowing customers prepared to take the risk the option of downgrade rights. Much the same happened with NT4, there were loads of businesses still using it long past the point security fixes had stopped.

Shining Arcanine said:

mstefan said:

*snip*

If that happens, there will likely be some kind of lawsuit. People will not want to hear that they paid money for an OS that had no warranty and no support.

What? Given that it's been no secret that the support will run out I don't think they'd have much of a case...

W3bbo said:

There won't be an SP4 because there's no real point. You're just confusing it with some kind of update rollup, which I do expect us to see some time in the coming year or so.

There won't be an SP4 because there's no real point. You're just confusing it with some kind of update rollup, which I do expect us to see some time in the coming year or so.

Forgive my ignorance -- what is the difference between a Service Pack and an Update Rollup?  If there was an SP4,  wouldn't it just be a collection of all the updates that were put out after SP3 up to the present?

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/xp-in-2020-not-even-close-read-the-fine-print/2270">http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/xp-in-2020-not-even-close-read-the-fine-print

Heywood_J said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

There won't be an SP4 because there's no real point. You're just confusing it with some kind of update rollup, which I do expect us to see some time in the coming year or so.

Forgive my ignorance -- what is the difference between a Service Pack and an Update Rollup?  If there was an SP4,  wouldn't it just be a collection of all the updates that were put out after SP3 up to the present?

 

 

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/xp-in-2020-not-even-close-read-the-fine-print/2270">http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/xp-in-2020-not-even-close-read-the-fine-print

Service Packs include all previous updates as well as often (but not always) featuring some kind of behavioural change to Windows (which is why you often see software requiring a specific SP level, as was especially the case with NT SP4 and SP6).

Update Rollups are just consolidated installers.

So a hypothetical UR for Windows XP would require you to:

* Install Windows XP

* Install SP3

* Install UR

as opposed to a hypothetical SP4:

* Install Windows XP

* Install SP4

Guess which one requires a lot more development work and testing?

And IBM can't keep the effort to release new version of 2.4 branch of Linux. XP and 2.4 were released at about the same time. Keep being stupid.  

GoddersUK said:

Shining Arcanine said:

*snip*

What? Given that it's been no secret that the support will run out I don't think they'd have much of a case...

1. You assume that human beings are rational creatures.
2. It is probably better to give people what they want.

W3bbo said:

Heywood_J said:

*snip*

Service Packs include all previous updates as well as often (but not always) featuring some kind of behavioural change to Windows (which is why you often see software requiring a specific SP level, as was especially the case with NT SP4 and SP6).

 

Update Rollups are just consolidated installers.

 

So a hypothetical UR for Windows XP would require you to:

 

* Install Windows XP

* Install SP3

* Install UR

 

as opposed to a hypothetical SP4:

 

* Install Windows XP

* Install SP4

 

Guess which one requires a lot more development work and testing?

But that's not entirely true.

I just installed a XP machine a week a go and I forgot my CD of XP with SP3, since I had the CD for SP3  I decided to install an old copy (no SP) and then install SP3, guess what, SP3 requires SP1, in the end I waste some time downloading the  damn thing anyway.

Juan Zamudio

jmzl666 said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

 

But that's not entirely true.

I just installed a XP machine a week a go and I forgot my CD of XP with SP3, since I had the CD for SP3  I decided to install an old copy (no SP) and then install SP3, guess what, SP3 requires SP1, in the end I waste some time downloading the  damn thing anyway.

 

Juan Zamudio

Slipstreaming can fix that, although it takes a great deal of time to determine which patches are needed and to download them. I think that alone is enough reason for Microsoft to make a SP4.

W3bbo said:

There won't be an SP4 because there's no real point. You're just confusing it with some kind of update rollup, which I do expect us to see some time in the coming year or so.

I suspect more to the point... if they release an SP4 then they would be locked into extending support by another 5 years.

elmer said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

I suspect more to the point... if they release an SP4 then they would be locked into extending support by another 5 years.

I can think of two things:

1. This is a good thing. It will keep Microsoft's customers happy.
2. Microsoft need not extend support every time they release a service pack. I think that they are the only software company in the world that does this and it has never made sense to me.

Shining Arcanine said:

GoddersUK said:

*snip*

1. You assume that human beings are rational creatures.
2. It is probably better to give people what they want.

You assume that they (the customers) know what's best for themselves

elmer said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

I suspect more to the point... if they release an SP4 then they would be locked into extending support by another 5 years.

They've already committed to making XP available via downgrade rights for another 10 years. I think a logical extension of that is the willingness to at least provide security updates and (paid) support for it. When large companies buy those droneware PCs, they (and Microsoft) know they're not really buying Windows 7. They're buying Windows XP and getting a Windows 7 license along for the ride. They can reframe and "spin" the discussion anyway that they like for marketing purposes, but that's the fundamental truth of the situation and we all know it. IT departments in most companies, particularly large ones, want to stay on the trailing edge of technology for as long as they possibly can.

The motto of virtually every IT department head is this: if it ain't completely broken, don't even think about fixing it. "Upgrade" is a four-letter word to them; say it only if you're looking to pick a fight.