Have your XP updated ...

[Theo Gottwald]

Use this ".reg"-File.

Code Select Expand

Um den Eingriff in die Registrierungsdatenbank vorzunehmen, muss man lediglich eine Textdatei erstellen und in ihr folgenden Text unterbingen:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\WPA\PosReady]
"Installed"=dword:00000001

Source: WinFuture

[Rod Macia]

Registry hack enables continued updates for Windows XP
http://www.zdnet.com/registry-hack-enables-continued-updates-for-windows-xp-7000029851/

Extract from site.

  [UPDATE:] Late Monday we received a statement from a Microsoft spokesperson:

    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. The best way for Windows XP customers to protect their systems is to upgrade to a more modern operating system, like Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.

[Mike Stefanik]

It's clever, but this is not a good idea for a production system that is still using Windows XP. Those updates are not being regression tested on XP SP3 and I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft ends up adding checks to prevent this from working in the future. XP is almost 15 years old. It's time to move on.

[Mike Stefanik]

Or just upgrade to Windows 7 or 8.1U1 and keep running all of your Windows software.

Yes, I know. There's WINE (in which case your software might possibly work, or it may not and spontaneously combust when you least expect it) and there's alternatives like LibreOffice (which doesn't really hold a candle to Word, Excel and Outlook and the millions of lines of VBA code that businesses depend on). The problem with the whole "just switch to Linux" thing is that the vast majority of the cost to businesses is not upgrading the operating system. It's all of that expensive LOB software that they've grown to depend on over the years, most of which is non-functional in a Linux environment.

And then there's the whole issue of training users on how to use Linux, and getting all of your admins (you know, the ones who went through Microsoft certification, etc.) and telling them "hey, guess what? You know all of that experience you have maintaining the Windows servers and desktops in our organization? Well, that knowledge is now largely useless to us because this really is the year of the Linux desktop! Seriously, that's just awesome, isn't it guys? Guys? Where are you going?"

[Brice Manuel]

Most non-Unity versions of Linux are not much different than XP or 7 in "average" use.  The same can't be said for Windows 8 which videos show has a much steeper learning curve than Linux.

On another note "The best way for Windows XP customers to protect their systems is to upgrade to a more modern operating system, like" Linux Mint 17 or Zorin OS 8.1 or Kweezy or Debian or CentOS or PCBSD or Manjaro/Evo/Arch or Linux-Lite or RoboLinux or OpenMandrivaLx-2014.0 or openSUSE-13.1 or PClinuxOS or Pinguy/Deepin/ElementaryOS/Ubuntu!!!

Indeed.  I have been moving XP users over to Zorin and they love it and nobody has run into any issues.

[Mike Stefanik]

Windows 8 was it's own mess, but at least with 8.1U1 they made the smart move of having the system boot to the desktop by default if it's not running on a system with a touch display (if they had done that from the beginning, and kept the Start menu, it would have eliminated 99% of the complaints from users). And internally, there's been a lot of improvements to the Windows 8 kernel in terms of performance. But it's gotten such a bad reputation, a lot of folks are just sitting on their hands until Windows 9 comes out. Vista redux.

And just to be clear, I'm not anti-Linux at all. But the reality in the business world is that there's a lot of very expensive and complex LOB software (along with custom code galore) out there that does not run on Linux and it's completely impractical to say "Hey, XP is dead, just move on over to Linux". For large companies who haven't completed their transition off the platform, overall it's actually cheaper for them to pay Microsoft to continue to support XP while they complete the move to Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.

[Mike Stefanik]

I have been moving XP users over to Zorin and they love it and nobody has run into any issues.

Usually when people ask me about an easy-to-use Linux distro I point them towards LinuxMint, but Zorin looks interesting. One of the great things about Linux is there's a lot of different options to choose from. Unfortunately, it's also one of the not-so-great things, because there's a lot of proverbial chaff in the wheat of distros out there.

[Brice Manuel]

And just to be clear, I'm not anti-Linux at all. But the reality in the business world is that there's a lot of very expensive and complex LOB software (along with custom code galore) out there that does not run on Linux and it's completely impractical to say "Hey, XP is dead, just move on over to Linux". For large companies who haven't completed their transition off the platform, overall it's actually cheaper for them to pay Microsoft to continue to support XP while they complete the move to Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.

Last year, Johns Hopkins completed the move from Windows 2000 to Windows 7.  They never even bothered with XP.  If it wasn't for the increased paperwork and records requirements of Obamacare, I am not sure they would have made the move to 7.  In my area, Microsoft has been good about giving a lot of the non-profits Windows 8 for free in an effort to get them off of XP, but so far every one I have seen has exercised the downgrade options and installed Windows 7 instead of Windows 8.

It does look like MS has come to their senses and is quietly dropping RT.  However, based on Surface Pro 3, MS still has no understanding of the tablet market and what actually sells.

[Brice Manuel]

Usually when people ask me about an easy-to-use Linux distro I point them towards LinuxMint, but Zorin looks interesting. One of the great things about Linux is there's a lot of different options to choose from. Unfortunately, it's also one of the not-so-great things, because there's a lot of proverbial chaff in the wheat of distros out there.

I loved Mint, but I had some graphical issues with the last version on my new laptop and I didn't have the time to figure it out, so I simply installed Xubuntu.  I am already running Ubuntu Studio on my work systems, so having the XFCE interface on all of my systems is handy, although I much preferred the look of Mint Cinnamon.

[Theo Gottwald]

It does look like MS has come to their senses and is quietly dropping RT.  However, based on Surface Pro 3, MS still has no understanding of the tablet market and what actually sells.

As long as they get their orders from NWO-Bill, the intelligent people at MS will not be able to get anything through.
Actually the MS Products are more a way of repelling customers then of getting new customers.
They are soo lucky that there are strong copyright laws, or else somebody would just make a Win 2000 Clone and beat them into the Ground.

Looking at Win 8, and even 8.1 its hard to understand how somebody can bring this stupidity on a market and hope to sell it.

[Mike Stefanik]

They are soo lucky that there are strong copyright laws, or else somebody would just make a Win 2000 Clone and beat them into the Ground.

That's been attempted with ReactOS, where the idea was to do for Windows what Linux did for UNIX. It's been over 15 years, and they're a long way from their goal of full functionality and compatibility. And frankly, people would not want Windows 2000 as their desktop platform today. Internally, there were significant improvements to the kernel in Windows XP, and again in Windows 7 and (yes, even) Windows 8. And people kind of like the idea of using large (terabyte) hard drives, SSDs, systems with more than 4G of memory, video cards with 1+ GB of memory and burning DVDs and BR discs. And then there's other practical issues like Windows 2000 not supporting 64-bit hardware or IPv6 networking.

Windows 2000 is 15 years old. It's the past. Time to move along now.

[Keith D. Shelton]

The biggest problem I face, is customers that don't want to replace their 5 year old machines.  You cat't run win8 on them.

[Mike Stefanik]

The biggest problem I face, is customers that don't want to replace their 5 year old machines.  You cat't run win8 on them.

That really depends on the system. A system that was reasonably good in 2009 should be able to run Windows 8.1. Windows 7 was released in 2009, and overall Windows 8 is more efficient with system resources than Windows 7 was. I suppose drivers could be a potential problem if the hardware vendor doesn't support an older device they're using. Now, if you're talking about some bargain basement PC that had something like a Core 2 Duo with low-end DDR2 memory, then what operating system they're running is the least of their issues.

[Brice Manuel]

That really depends on the system. A system that was reasonably good in 2009 should be able to run Windows 8.1. Windows 7 was released in 2009, and overall Windows 8 is more efficient with system resources than Windows 7 was. I suppose drivers could be a potential problem if the hardware vendor doesn't support an older device they're using. Now, if you're talking about some bargain basement PC that had something like a Core 2 Duo with low-end DDR2 memory, then what operating system they're running is the least of their issues.

Windows 7 had lower system requirements than Vista.  Windows 8 has higher system requirements than Windows 7.  Other than the laptop I bought a couple of months ago that had Windows 8 preinstalled (and it ran like a slug), I don't have anything capable of running Windows 8, even though everything I have will run Windows 7 fine.

Keith is pointing out a major issue with the adoption of Windows 8.  XP was the last true desktop version of Windows that was made for normal home users.  Vista-Windows 8 require SM2-SM3 capable gaming rigs to properly run the OS.  Five years ago, all of those people who bought SM2 capable rigs with Windows 7 on it, now find themselves unable to properly run Windows 8 because of its increased requirements.  Part of the reason Windows 7 saw such a slow adoption in the professional sector was the IT departments trying to convince the boards they now needed to invest in gaming rigs to properly run the desktop business software they have been able to run for years on low-spec machines.

With Microsoft committed to releasing two OS versions per year, the hardware and software compatibility issues will only skyrocket.  Heck, Windows 8.1 is already not being supported anymore.  8.1 Update 1 is a mandatory upgrade if you want support and patches.

[Mike Stefanik]

Windows 7 had lower system requirements than Vista.  Windows 8 has higher system requirements than Windows 7.

Windows 8 Even More Resource Efficient Than Windows 7

I had forgot about it, but reading that article it reminded me that at the Build event where they were showing Windows 8, they had pulled out an old Lenovo netbook from 2008 with an Atom processor and just 1GB memory that they installed Windows 8 on. I understand everyone's in a different situation, and I don't doubt people when they say they have performance problems with specific configurations. But I have some older test systems with Windows 8 and 8.1 on them here and they most definitely are not gaming rigs (some flavor of Core i3 with 4GB), and their performance is acceptable.

That said, I'll continue to use Windows 7 SP1 as my primary development system for now. I'm waiting to see what 8.1U2 looks like this fall, and then I'll decide whether to make the move then or just wait for Windows 9 next year.