Are you going to keep using windows XP?

:-) almost sounds like we're saying you cant run XP anymore, coz its so old, and security 'might' be compromised,... similar to how we cant drive an old car anymore, coz theres no ABS, or airbags....
a lot of us grew up with cars without these things, and if it still works, especially our classics, we still enjoy driving them as much.

thing is.... if you can afford to buy a new version, do so, you're likely going to appreciate the benefits, if not... just be careful with the old if it still works.

IMO i'm guessing XP may now be even safer than before... most hackers and virus creators do so to p1ss off Microsoft... put microsoft in a bad light, if they continue to attack XP, all they'll do is force more people to buy new Windows, favouring MS.
 
This thread is a good example of why virus writers make money.

An example of this would be the new bug in IE. They are not going to release a patch for XP. Which means you can hack a XP users desktop just by getting them to visit a website. This is just one example, there are going to be a bunch more. I guess if you never use the internet, or have absolutely nothing of value and do not mind maintaining a PC with a virus ecosystem..... then dont upgrade.

I remember when XP came out, a lot of older people struggled to leave Windows 98. This is just history repeating itself. Some people cant manage change well.
 
I have a p3 laptop with win98, a pM laptop with xp and a core2duo pc with win7... not all of us simply throw away old hardware because it's better to have the "newest thing". It's bad to be wastefull if nothing else.
 
Microsoft has stopped rolling out updates for XP. As far as I know the updates only fixed security patches and very few stability improvements. According to Microsoft you will now be at risk of hackers and viruses. But my question is will you still use XP?
Yes. I haven't installed any updates on one of my two XP boxes since SP3. The other, actually XP MCE 2005, is still on SP2.
 
Last edited:
This thread is a good example of why virus writers make money.
What does this have to do with viruses? Anti-virus software will continue to get updates. Even Microsoft Security Essentials on XP is going to get updates for at least another year.

An example of this would be the new bug in IE. They are not going to release a patch for XP. Which means you can hack a XP users desktop just by getting them to visit a website.
Surely only if they are using IE?
 
Last edited:
Microsoft has stopped rolling out updates for XP. As far as I know the updates only fixed security patches and very few stability improvements. According to Microsoft you will now be at risk of hackers and viruses. But my question is will you still use XP? But how about you?

How many security/stability problems can be left in XP? This reminds me of the y2k hysteria. I run MSE on my XP machine and it has NEVER EVER detected anything of consequence. Be careful what you do on the Internet and do regular backups (which you should be doing anyway), and you won't have a problem. My hardware is an old Core 2 Duo with a SSD drive, and it is faster than just about any of the the modern Win7/8 desktops and (especially) laptops I come across. I can actually dual boot to Windows 7 if I want, but I don't bother. I will continue to use XP until Jesus comes or my PC breaks, whichever occurs first. Then I will use Ubuntu or maybe Windows 9 (if Microsoft has fixed 8).
 
Businesses are the ones most likely to run old software.

Cape Town's almost brand new MyCity bus system seems to be using it. It has serious problems. Slow to realize that Linux could be an option. The contractor apparently messed up and the City refuses to pay them some R240-odd million. This is what happens when BEE takes preference over actual skills. We need a technocratic approach when we issue tenders like this, get EXPERTS regardless of what their race or creed might be. We need efficiency and functionality, not social adjustments, when it comes to making informed IT decisions.
 
I remember when XP came out, a lot of older people struggled to leave Windows 98. This is just history repeating itself. Some people cant manage change well.
I dropped Windows '98 the day XP came out, because it really was good. Its not about change, its about how rubbish an OS is.
I still use XP, because Windows Vista and onwards are crap.
 
Nothing beats the "lightness" of WinXP or Win2000 in a VMWare image - would not be an issue if MS wouldn't release crappy versions of their IE and having to support a handful at the moment.
 
What does this have to do with viruses? Anti-virus software will continue to get updates. Even Microsoft Security Essentials on XP is going to get updates for at least another year.
If there is a hole that someone can exploit in your system. That hole will always be there to be exploited. No antivirus in the world is going to plug that hole. They are just going to be able to remove a tiny portion of what comes through that hole. I say tiny portion because once someone is on machine and if they are even a tiny bit competent, they will quickly know what AV you are running and crypt their trojans so your AV wont pick up the infection.

To put it into an analogy. There is a hole in your dam wall (the operating system) and instead of patching the hole to stop water (the viruses) coming through, you are using a bucket (the AV) to remove some of the water that is coming through. No matter how many times you use that bucket, unless you sort out the hole, the water will keep coming through.

Surely only if they are using IE?
It was just an example of one exploit. There will be many more to come and there are existing ones out there already. Ive seen exploits for java, chrome, flash, IE, firefox, word, adobe pdf, etc etc. If they OS is not supported, dont expect timely security patches. There are exploits coming out all the time.

I would also like to take time in this post to warn people about the dangers of just replying on antivirus software. If you go to any hacker forum you can purchase crypting services for as little as $5. So for $5, I can get any trojan/virus and crypt it. This means for two weeks no antivirus will pick up the virus. If the person spreading the infection is cheap or a noob they will crypt and spread the same crypted stub many times. These get picked up quickly and antivirus vendors release updated definitions that can stop those viruses in a week or two.

If you are against someone focused on your systems and whom have a little savvy, they can crypt the stub (thats what they call the virus/trojan they are crypting) for much longer. Since there are not many copies of that crypted stub out there chances of an AV vendor picking it up are minimal.

Lastly, only 3% of viruses are traditional "**** up your computer" viruses. The majority of the viruses today are written for commercial gain by organized cartels. They are either spam or ddos bots or they steal your personal data.

Having an unpatched Microsoft system that relies on just an antivirus for security is terrible. I would not hire an IT person who thinks like that.
 
Last edited:
Not recommended. Reasons for it are cited online, just google.
Links please? The top search results I visited all seemed quite positive.

The only negative response I saw was from Microsoft (to be expected, of course)
We recently became aware of a hack that purportedly aims to provide security updates to Windows XP customers. The security updates that could be installed are intended for Windows Embedded and Windows Server 2003 customers and do not fully protect Windows XP customers. Windows XP customers also run a significant risk of functionality issues with their machines if they install these updates, as they are not tested against Windows XP.
 
Links please? The top search results I visited all seemed quite positive.

The only negative response I saw was from Microsoft (to be expected, of course)

Yeah that's it. Functionality issues.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X