Extended support for Windows XP?

[dagroves]

I know most of us on here are not fans of Windows, we prefer Linux and what it has to offer, but I had an idea and was wondering what everyone thought about it, not that Microsoft would ever do this, just something I thought of.

A lot of businesses still use Windows XP, mostly because they cannot afford to upgrade to Windows 7 or 8, or because the software they use is not compatible with a newer version of Windows (which is the case with the company I work for, but they still use Windows 2000...). Microsoft knows this and has tried to coerce them into upgrading either with cheap upgrades to Windows 8, or specialized versions such as WinFLP or Windows Thin PC and the like, but that has mostly not worked. So why not keep support for Windows XP alive and keep it as an operating system for businesses only. Have them buy a Windows License to use it and upgrade it and periodically improve, add new technologies but keep Windows XP alive and something that they can use instead of upgrade. Keep it alive as a specialized OS for corporations and such that like it, its ease of use, its compatibility. What would be the issue with that, does anyone think the could be a good idea?

[pqwoerituytrueiwoq]

not for MS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

wine may be able to run there program and it can simulate win 2000

[Wolfgange]

That would be ok, except for the fact that soon simple web pages alone will be incompatable with Windows XP, it wouldn't work with the new 24 Gb RAM low end computers in 20 years, and what software vendor would keep support that long? Instead, the company should just entirly swith to something like Ubuntu, where there are no major update (and none you have to pay for) and all the programs get updated with ubuntu (except the ones who's development has halted...).

[dagroves]

That would be ok, except for the fact that soon simple web pages alone will be incompatable with Windows XP, it wouldn't work with the new 24 Gb RAM low end computers in 20 years, and what software vendor would keep support that long? Instead, the company should just entirly swith to something like Ubuntu, where there are no major update (and none you have to pay for) and all the programs get updated with ubuntu (except the ones who's development has halted...).

I agree but I would like to keep this away from Linux, I do not want Linux involved with this conversation, I just want some opinions on why this is a good or a bad idea.

[TheMTtakeover]

I agree but I would like to keep this away from Linux, I do not want Linux involved with this conversation, I just want some opinions on why this is a good or a bad idea.

I say bad idea because as someone who needs to support computer I hate dealing with XP. its a nightmare compared to Win 7/ Win 8. Everything on it is outdated. It can't even current versions of IE.

[MadmanRB]

When XP goes down its just best to go over to a linux solution as a windows 7 install on a older machine would be too bulky and windows 8 is made for tablets.

[llanitedave]

If one Must use Windows, Windows 7 is a far superior OS to XP, in almost every way, from the user standpoint. (I can't speak for developers). Thing is, there's no reason to keep Linux out of the discussion. Because as XP obsoletes and the newer Windows are both unaffordable and annoying, there's no reason other than inertia for existing systems NOT to switch over to Linux.

There are a very few specialized businesses with apps that only work on Windows, but I'll bet those have already moved to Windows 7. The great majority of business apps work perfectly fine on Linux systems -- even better in the case of that travesty that is Word/Excel/Powerpoint 2007+

[dagroves]

If one Must use Windows, Windows 7 is a far superior OS to XP, in almost every way, from the user standpoint. (I can't speak for developers). Thing is, there's no reason to keep Linux out of the discussion. Because as XP obsoletes and the newer Windows are both unaffordable and annoying, there's no reason other than inertia for existing systems NOT to switch over to Linux.

There are a very few specialized businesses with apps that only work on Windows, but I'll bet those have already moved to Windows 7. The great majority of business apps work perfectly fine on Linux systems -- even better in the case of that travesty that is Word/Excel/Powerpoint 2007+

Okay take the company I work for for example, I work for Gilligan Oil Company who franchises Shell Gas Stations, I am a cashier there. We get our Point Of Sale terminals from a company called Gilbarco, they also make our gas pumps, the POS Terminals run on Windows 2000. I was actually curious as to why. (Our terminal that runs our Lottery software runs on Linux and some of our other stores do to, but not us) They told me when I asked our Representative for Gilbarco it was because the POS software was not compatible with any other version of Windows except 2000, they have tested it on XP, Vista, god forbid, and 7 and it does not work, we would have to get new equipment. So I guess for us we are one of the companies who have not moved on...

[3rdalbum]

Having to maintain compatibility with Windows XP is holding the computer industry back from making the best of today's technology. Wouldn't you be annoyed if nice features were removed from a software or hardware product before release because they couldn't be made to work on an ancient operating system that is only used for slow-moving businesses?

Your internet access speeds would be faster if not for malware-infested XP machines.

You shouldn't give enterprise any more encouragement to continue inflicting Windows XP on users.

Those are my reasons for opposing your idea. Lets kill XP. Kill it with fire.

[Paqman]

At some point they have to draw a line under supporting old versions. Past a certain point it's uneconomical to support a system.

Businesses keep making the same mistake over and over: they develop in-house tools that are platfrom-specific. That ties them to that platform and leaves them unable to upgrade.

[dagroves]

At some point they have to draw a line under supporting old versions. Past a certain point it's uneconomical to support a system.

Businesses keep making the same mistake over and over: they develop in-house tools that are platfrom-specific. That ties them to that platform and leaves them unable to upgrade.

Actually with the company I work for, the problem is is that the Gas Pumps hooked to the system will not work with any other version of Windows but 2000... they just simply refuse to work with XP or anything younger. If we were to replace the system, all 4 gas pumps would have to be removed and our tanks would as well. The credit card readers would have to go to. Since our company is pretty small I doubt we have the money laying around to just upgrade an entire store like that just for the sake of newer technology. Our registers are not hooked up to the internet but rather an internal Intranet so viruses from the web are a no go, but there is still other risks. Basically the whole point of this post is what would you guys recommend I do to try to coerce the company and the IT department to upgrade to Windows 7 or 8, or even Linux? I mean ultimately its up to them but I would like to help out, it needs to be done very badly.

[Paqman]

Actually with the company I work for, the problem is is that the Gas Pumps hooked to the system will not work with any other version of Windows but 2000... they just simply refuse to work with XP or anything younger.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. If the system had been designed to be compatible with a platform-independent spec instead of a particular platform then they wouldn't have this problem. However SCADA and industrial control is stuck in the dark ages, and that won't change any time soon. The people who design these things think ethernet is weird and hi-tech.

A really common mistake is businesses building big complex parts of their workflow in Excel spreadsheets. It would be much better off building them as web apps, as that no longer ties you in to Excel for getting to the data.

[Dutchmaster]

I work for two healthcare companies - one a huge health system and one a midsize one. Both use almost total XP still. All the Elect Health Record, accounting, and other software i know iof with both are Windows dependent.

Business budgets are at rock bottom and being squeezed more every day. XP will live on for the forseeable future - long after Microsoft has quit supporting it. After all, it' paid for.

[Artemis3]

Try using windows 98 today in a modern pc, the experience might give you some answers.

The community can do very little to improve abandoned proprietary software (no code!). Some people do try crazy things, completely unsupported or even in breach of eulas and such (big no-noes for business):


As of fall 2012, a couple of projects by several members of the MSFN.org community have been undergoing development to extend Windows 2000's core kernel functions allowing newer programs such as Windows Media Player 10, Windows Movie Maker 2.6 for Windows Vista, and even DirectX 9.0c June 2010 build to function. These projects include extended kernel and unofficial updates rollup respectfully. Extended kernel, which is similar to KernelEx for Windows 98/Me, installs updated system files that include added dependencies that newer programs require to function properly. Unofficial service pack 5.2 is also in development which is to include all Microsoft .NET framework packages, updates found in the unofficial updates rollup package, as well as the extended kernel package.

In any case it is a time bomb, even if you manage to extend its life somehow, it might break unexpectedly (some forgotten virus/bug etc) later. This is the price you have to pay by chaining your business to proprietary software.

You might also try your luck with virtual machines, try VirtualBox and friends (running 2k inside linux).

[CharlesA]

At some point they have to draw a line under supporting old versions. Past a certain point it's uneconomical to support a system.

Businesses keep making the same mistake over and over: they develop in-house tools that are platfrom-specific. That ties them to that platform and leaves them unable to upgrade.

It's either that or the older software they use won't run well on newer OSes and they don't want to spend the money to upgrade to a supported version.

Sucks, but it is a fact of life. It all comes down to the bottom line.

[Petro Dawg]

I am an engineering intern working for a manufacturing company that is presently very concerned with what they are going to do once support for XP stops, not because of the computers in the offices (which are mostly converted to Win7, or can be with no big deal), but because most of their machinery runs off of programs running on XP boxes.

They have tried using Win7 but have run into major compatibility issues with the older programs. They have no interest in being able to "web browse" with the computers. The major issue they are facing will be years down the road when the computers in the factory need replaced and installing XP on a new PC will be impossible due to lack of driver support and such.

If anyone wanted to make some money in the manufacturing business, just develop a rock solid operating system and then stop trying to add new features and stop trying to make it more advanced; instead just keep up the OS compatibility as new hardware develops and work to improve overall stability. If you could provide an OS and guarantee that the programs which companies are running now, will still be compatible on machines 30 years from now, you would make lots of money.

[leclerc65]

The machine you talk about does exist: it's IBM's AS/400. Thru zillions of incarnations, I don't know what is its name now.

[CharlesA]

The machine you talk about does exist: it's IBM's AS/400. Thru zillions of incarnations, I don't know what is its name now.

Got one of those at work. Nasty beast.

[Petro Dawg]

The machine you talk about does exist: it's IBM's AS/400. Thru zillions of incarnations, I don't know what is its name now.

The AS/400 is good, and my company does use it; however, I believe it is a server OS not a workstation OS. I could be wrong, I'm no computer guru to be sure.

[llanitedave]

A really common mistake is businesses building big complex parts of their workflow in Excel spreadsheets. It would be much better off building them as web apps, as that no longer ties you in to Excel for getting to the data.

Tell me about it! That's a constant battle I'm facing at my company. I've spent most of the last year building a Python program on my own time to replace a redundant and error-prone Excel workflow. And that will solve only a small part of our problems, since it all ends up in a non-normalized Access database with scores of tables and gigabytes of largely repetitive data.

It's on my own time because I'm not a programmer, we don't employ one, and the boss still thinks the current system will expand as the business does. It's on the verge of collapse now, and I don't want to be at the bottom of it when it does.

I know that's off-topic about XP, but even though we have the Office 2010 software on Windows-7 computers, the mindset at the data end is pretty much the same.

[CharlesA]

Tell me about it! That's a constant battle I'm facing at my company. I've spent most of the last year building a Python program on my own time to replace a redundant and error-prone Excel workflow. And that will solve only a small part of our problems, since it all ends up in a non-normalized Access database with scores of tables and gigabytes of largely repetitive data.

*shudders*

A good dba/designer is worth their weight in gold.

A normalized database is an efficient database. ;)

[leclerc65]

Nasty beast.
Why ?
Banks are still using it.
Using Security Level 50, I'd love to see hackers cracking it.

[llanitedave]

*shudders*

A good dba/designer is worth their weight in gold.

A normalized database is an efficient database. ;)

Yep. I've been arguing for a move to a real database like PostgreSQL, but largely to deaf ears. We underlings can't even get permission to try to at least streamline Access.

[CharlesA]

Why ?
Banks are still using it.
Using Security Level 50, I'd love to see hackers cracking it.

I was talking more about the one we have at work which looks something like this:

http://cdn8.wn.com/pd/b8/eb/eed12884b720eb3e6ffec2de0689_grande.jpg

*shudder*

The newer ones are pretty slick looking though.

[Grenage]

When I started here, the firm had just moved away from a much older AS400 model than the one above - man, the data cables around the place were chunky back then. The server itself, was huge.

That said, as old and hideous as both the server and client interface were (black and green business), I really respected it's reliability and efficiency. I'd never have major qualms about going in that direction again.

[CharlesA]

When I started here, the firm had just moved away from a much older AS400 model than the one above - man, the data cables around the place were chunky back then. The server itself, was huge.

That said, as old and hideous as both the server and client interface were (black and green business), I really respected it's reliability and efficiency. I'd never have major qualms about going in that direction again.

They are pretty sweet, but I think the one we use is like 14 or 15 year old and the mess of cables behind it is just insane.

We've already had to replace two power supplies in it due to blackouts so apparently they don't have it on a UPS for some reason. I think they mentioned something about the power consumption when they were thinking about it.

[leclerc65]

Used as a data mining server, with correctly security set up - it's one of the most if not the most secure platform ever made.
How about setting Security Officer (equivalence of Root in Linux) so he/she can only log in only from the System Console, 3 tries with wrong password then you are out, users can be set that have only menus but no command line, or one that they can't type (hackers beware !). You cannot access the heart of the machine directly but thru an interface whose codes are partly ... burnt into the machine (you need an IBM technician come in to do that). Software updates and installed are done by...CD ! I used to swear at that archaic system, but looking at computer hackings going on these days, I give the AS/400 team my respects. By the way when IBM assemble that team they choose their cream of the cream people to do the project.
Taken into account that it started life in 1983 (as S/38) it's quite a long run. All its competitors (DEC PDP11, HP3000...) are now RIP.

[Artemis3]

If anyone wanted to make some money in the manufacturing business, just develop a rock solid operating system and then stop trying to add new features and stop trying to make it more advanced; instead just keep up the OS compatibility as new hardware develops and work to improve overall stability. If you could provide an OS and guarantee that the programs which companies are running now, will still be compatible on machines 30 years from now, you would make lots of money.

Those exist, but you didn't pick one. Have you seen the other unix like OSes? Have you seen commercial ones? How about real time types? QNX come to mind:
QNX is a commercial Unix-like real-time operating system, aimed primarily at the embedded systems market. The product was originally developed by Canadian company QNX Software Systems, which was later acquired by Research In Motion.

Even if you go free open source, something like netbsd could serve you for decades, and unlike a proprietary os, you have the source and can keep the exact version you want, or only make the changes you need, etc.

If you pick a proprietary OS, you are no longer in control. At any point, they can declare it obsolete, unsupported, etc; or they can go bankrupt or purchased by somebody else. Open source is your only safe choice for long term needs. Even big iron IBM could be gone tomorrow.

IMO it is idiotic to pay a development for a SCADA system to run under windows. How else did the Iranians lose those expensive centrifuges? By a stupid virus in a thumb-drive someone plugged to a machine in the internal, isolated network...

You want stability? Don't use windows. You want long term? Don't use windows. Else get ready to afford costly replacements down the road, because thats exactly what those "solutions" were designed for: planned obsolescence.

[Petro Dawg]

Those exist, but you didn't pick one. Have you seen the other unix like OSes? Have you seen commercial ones? How about real time types? QNX come to mind:

Even if you go free open source, something like netbsd could serve you for decades, and unlike a proprietary os, you have the source and can keep the exact version you want, or only make the changes you need, etc.

If you pick a proprietary OS, you are no longer in control. At any point, they can declare it obsolete, unsupported, etc; or they can go bankrupt or purchased by somebody else. Open source is your only safe choice for long term needs. Even big iron IBM could be gone tomorrow.

IMO it is idiotic to pay a development for a SCADA system to run under windows. How else did the Iranians lose those expensive centrifuges? By a stupid virus in a thumb-drive someone plugged to a machine in the internal, isolated network...

You want stability? Don't use windows. You want long term? Don't use windows. Else get ready to afford costly replacements down the road, because thats exactly what those "solutions" were designed for: planned obsolescence.

First off, I didn't pick anything. If it were up to me the company would be using Linux/Open Source for nearly everything. And you speak as if companies choose to get screwed by Windows. Most manufacturing companies don't really have a choice.

Unfortunately the software sold with CNC machines, Plasma Cutters, Lathes, 3D printers, and so on; are usually specific to Windows OS and any service contracts on those machines most likely only cover assistance with the proprietary software supplied with the unit.

The manufacturer choices are limited by what the machine suppliers will offer. Is there anyway to get the suppliers to unite and provide software and support for an open source OS, and if so, which one? On top of that, the software is designed to read AutoCad or ProE inputs which are Windows based CAD packages and about the only CAD software that drafting schools offer instruction in. Can the machine suppliers get autodesk to start supporting anything other than Windows or Mac, if so which one? Companies are rightly wary of how many dead Linux distros are there now. And how does any one company have the power to change what drafting software the schools teach?

Small to medium companies cannot afford (or don't have the pre-requisite knowledge) to get into the software business as well. Its a huge integrated problem that spans many markets with no easy solution. At the moment Windows is winning with a death grip on the manufacturing world.

[monkeybrain2012]

The machine you talk about does exist: it's IBM's AS/400. Thru zillions of incarnations, I don't know what is its name now.

Hahahaha!! At work we have the misfortune of dealing with someone who use As/400. We work on database and they could only send us one big flat file even if the creator has no clue what is in it. They probably still have a room full of floppies. I heard the programmer there is due to retire soon and they have a real hard time getting a replacement. I was told if I learn that I could get a cushy job, but no thanks.

[mips]

The machine you talk about does exist: it's IBM's AS/400. Thru zillions of incarnations, I don't know what is its name now.

The AS/400 is essentially a virtual machine if one can think of it that way. This way you are gonna have compatibility for a very long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_System_i#Instruction_set


Instruction set

One feature that has contributed to the longevity of the IBM System i platform is its high-level instruction set (called TIMI for "Technology Independent Machine Interface" by IBM), which allows application programs to take advantage of advances in hardware and software without recompilation. TIMI is a virtual instruction set independent of the underlying machine instruction set of the CPU. User-mode programs contain both TIMI instructions and the machine instructions of the CPU, thus ensuring hardware independence. This is conceptually somewhat similar to the virtual machine architecture of programming environments such as Smalltalk, Java and .NET. The key difference is that it is embedded so deeply into the AS/400's design as to make applications effectively binary-compatible across different processor families.

Unlike some other virtual-machine architectures in which the virtual instructions are interpreted at run time, TIMI instructions are never interpreted. They constitute an intermediate compile time step and are translated into the processor's instruction set as the final compilation step. The TIMI instructions are stored within the final program object, in addition to the executable machine instructions. This is how application objects compiled on one processor family (e.g., the original CISC AS/400 48-bit processors) could be moved to a new processor (e.g., PowerPC 64-bit) without re-compilation. An application saved from the older 48-bit platform can simply be restored onto the new 64-bit platform where the operating system discards the old machine instructions and re-translates the TIMI instructions into 64-bit instructions for the new processor.

The IBM System i's instruction set defines all pointers as 48-bit. This was the original design feature of the System/38 (S/38) in the mid 1970s planning for future use of faster processors, memory and an expanded address space. The original AS/400 CISC models used the same 48-bit address space as the S/38. The address space was expanded in 1995 when the RISC PowerPC RS64 64-bit CPU processor replaced the 48-bit CISC processor.

For 64-bit PowerPC processors, the virtual address resides in the rightmost 64 bits of a pointer while it was 48 bits in the S/38 and CISC AS/400. The 64-bit address space references main memory and disk as a single address set which is the single-level storage concept.

[makitso]

OK, we have 65000 desktop systems in our company on XP. There are also about 4000 apps that run over all of these machines ( yes we are out of control.)

It takes about 4 hours to update a XP machine to WIN7 assuming there are no problems. So, you can see the size of the problem.

Now get this. When we upgrade an old machine to new hardware, something we do every 2 years, it gets XP not WIN7. :icon_frown:

[sdowney717]

When XP goes down its just best to go over to a linux solution as a windows 7 install on a older machine would be too bulky and windows 8 is made for tablets.

Win7 runs just fine on older P4 hardware. I have a copy on a 478 Prescott 2.8 with 800 buss and 2gb ddr. I dual boot that one and ubuntu runs a little slower.

It really depends on your hardware.

[3rdalbum]

OK, we have 65000 desktop systems in our company on XP. There are also about 4000 apps that run over all of these machines ( yes we are out of control.)

It takes about 4 hours to update a XP machine to WIN7 assuming there are no problems. So, you can see the size of the problem.

At my workplace, we left our computers on one night and the next morning they were running Win 7. It got pushed out over the network, one floor each night. Took months as we have a lot of sites in remote areas as well, and there were breaks to fix issues, but it wasn't a nightmare.