Microsoft Support for XP SP1 To End

[corkyg]

The following quote is from Microsoft's Newsletter:

"End of support for Windows XP Service Pack 1 Link1[/L] If you are running Windows XP Service Pack 1 or a previous version of Windows XP, you should upgrade to Service Pack 2. Starting October 10, 2006, Microsoft will end assisted support and security updates for Service Pack 1 as part of the life-cycle policy <http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=5010744> for all Microsoft software. If you currently use Windows XP, we recommend the free upgrade to Service Pack 2 Link2 to continue receiving the latest security updates."

 

[n0cmonkey]

Good, nobody should be running sp2-less anyhow.

 

[Stumps]

this is pretty much a good thing, sp1 is a thing of the past now

 

[gsellis]

SP2 will be 2 years old then. Sounds good to me.

 

[spherrod]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Good, nobody should be running sp2-less anyhow.

Yep, totally agree with Microsoft. No reason not to be running SP2.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

But, but, what about all the people that say SP2 broke their system. I deal with a guy like this on a dailey basis. He stead fastly refuses to install SP2 because it will "hose up his computer."

 

[Link19]

If they end support for XP SP1, thery miswell end support for Windows 2K SP4 and Windows Server 2003 RTM? After all, isn't Windows 2K SP4 just as unsafe as Windows XP SP1? Actualkly, it is not because SP4 for 2K was released after Windows XP SP1. But a fully patched Windows XP SP1 system isn't any less safe than a fully patched Windows 2K SP4 system is it?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
But, but, what about all the people that say SP2 broke their system. I deal with a guy like this on a dailey basis. He stead fastly refuses to install SP2 because it will "hose up his computer."

He's a tard. Life in general is going to be difficult for him at every turn; sp2 included.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Link19
If they end support for XP SP1, thery miswell end support for Windows 2K SP4 and Windows Server 2003 RTM? After all, isn't Windows 2K SP4 just as unsafe as Windows XP SP1? Actualkly, it is not because SP4 for 2K was released after Windows XP SP1. But a fully patched Windows XP SP1 system isn't any less safe than a fully patched Windows 2K SP4 system is it?

Windows 2000 sp3 has been out of support for a long time.
Windows 2003 rtm will be following shortly.


Service packs are not just about security updates either. One thing being more or less secure than something else has little to do with it. There are hundreds of bug fixes in those service packs. Trying to support something with a stack of known fixes is ridiculous. Patch your sh1t and if you still have a problem call tech support. Don't do it backwards.

 

[Link19]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Link19
If they end support for XP SP1, thery miswell end support for Windows 2K SP4 and Windows Server 2003 RTM? After all, isn't Windows 2K SP4 just as unsafe as Windows XP SP1? Actualkly, it is not because SP4 for 2K was released after Windows XP SP1. But a fully patched Windows XP SP1 system isn't any less safe than a fully patched Windows 2K SP4 system is it?

Windows 2000 sp3 has been out of support for a long time.
Windows 2003 rtm will be following shortly.


Service packs are not just about security updates either. One thing being more or less secure than something else has little to do with it. There are hundreds of bug fixes in those service packs. Trying to support something with a stack of known fixes is ridiculous. Patch your sh1t and if you still have a problem call tech support. Don't do it backwards.

Isn't the usual life cycle for a Microsoft service pack three years? I remember that Windows XP RTM was supported from Windows XP original release in October 2001 all the way until October 2004. Windows 2000 SP2 was supported from May 2001 to June 2004. Windows 2000 SP3 was supported from July 2002 to July 2005. Now how come Windows XP SP1 and Windows Server 2003 RTM have received longer support than the typical three years Microsoft was giving before for RTM and service packs?

 

[stash]

Isn't the usual life cycle for a Microsoft service pack three years?

No, the usual life cycle for service packs is generally 12 months after the release of the next service pack. That might work out to three years, but three years is not the policy.