Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Windows Microsoft IT

Slashdot Asks: Will You Need the Windows XP Black Market? 245

Posted by timothy
from the undead-is-more-like-it dept.
NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) writes "As Whoever57 pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP — the 'haves'. However, most will be the 'have nots.' Anytime you have such market imbalance, there is opportunity. Since Microsoft clearly intends to create a disparity, there will certainly be those who defy it. What will Microsoft do to prevent bootleg patches of XP from being sold to the unwashed masses? How will they stop China from supporting 100 million bootleg XP users? And how easily will it be to crack Microsoft's controls? How big will the Windows XP patch market be?" There are a lot of businesses still on Windows XP; if you work for one of them, will the official end of life spur actually cause you to upgrade? (And if so, to what?)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashdot Asks: Will You Need the Windows XP Black Market?

Comments Filter:
  • by CaptainOfSpray (1229754) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @04:20PM (#46678899)
    Looks like XP, mostly works like XP, closer to XP than Win 8, easier upgrade path than Win 8, lower rate of support calls from friends and family ...and in my experience, it's lighter and faster and more responsive than XP. So, no, I won't be laying out hundreds of pounds/dollars on a new machine or even more hundreds on replacing all the software that will not work on Win 8.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @04:26PM (#46678933)

    what on earth does that sentence mean?

    What do you mean what on earth does that sentence mean what on earth does that sentence mean - the haves?

  • Pointed out (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 06, 2014 @04:43PM (#46679035)

    As Whoever57 pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP ...
    Big cock penis denis menis fenis benis genis denis

  • by msobkow (48369) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @05:08PM (#46679159) Homepage Journal

    Nobody in their right mind is going to resort to the black market for XP support for a business -- it'd be like *inviting* the crackers into your network.

    Home users either won't know how or won't care to bother. Most people I know who are still running XP have been virus-infected for months or even years. As long as it lets them play YouTubes, check their gMail, and surf Crackbook they just flat out don't *care* that the machine is infected.

    Hell, most of them don't even realize the adware popups they keep seeing are due to an *infection*, not "bad behaviour" on the part of the aforementioned websites. One fellow I knew used to complain about the "popups from YouTube" all the time, 'cause all he ever did was YouTube and Crackbook. As far as he was concerned, it was YouTube that was putting up all the porn ads.

  • by causality (777677) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @05:09PM (#46679171)

    Seriously? Nobody even bothered to read the first sentence of the submission?

    Apparently lots of people did and are also griping about it. Are Slashdot "editors" capable of feeling embarassment?

    Back to the discussion...

    Since Microsoft clearly intends to create a disparity, there will certainly be those who defy it. What will Microsoft do to prevent bootleg patches of XP from being sold to the unwashed masses? How will they stop China from supporting 100 million bootleg XP users? And how easily will it be to crack Microsoft's controls? How big will the Windows XP patch market be?

    Unless these third-party patch vendors are claiming to be Microsoft then they're not in any way "bootleg". If Microsoft no longer wants to do this but someone else does, what's the problem? How would this be different from (i.e. less legitimate than) publishing a device driver, AV suite, or other system-level software?

    Do the submitter and "editor" not understand what the word "bootleg" means, or is there a real problem here I'm just not seeing?

  • by causality (777677) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @05:12PM (#46679187)

    "As Whoever57 pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP pointed out, there are some who will still get support for Microsoft Windows XP — the 'haves'

    what on earth does that sentence mean? this is even worse than Timothy's earlier oversight of re-running the same article less than a week after its first run. we know slashdot doesn't pay editors to edit, but could they at least show enough pride in their job to read what they post?

    This kind of poor quality work is what long ago dissuaded me from ever paying for a Slashdot subscription. I block ads, too, since before my karma level gave me the option of having Slashdot do it for me. That was all before Malda sold out to Dice Holdings. It's not improved since.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 06, 2014 @05:17PM (#46679215)

    I think it speaks more to the quality of opensource that the masses would rather run a 12 year old OS.

  • Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fredprado (2569351) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @06:01PM (#46679491)
    The objective of applying security updates from Microsoft is to make your OS safer by applying fixes delivered by a trusted party. MS may not be perfectly "trusted" but at least it has to worry about the liability of any fishy piece of software they install in your computer. On the other hand any source from the "black market" can simply deliver rootkits and any kind of malware disguised as security updates which certainly defies the purpose of applying updates.
  • by caseih (160668) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @07:38PM (#46679919)

    Do you actually have experience or are you just making things up? Are are you willing to both write a driver and port the software for me that controls a chemistry instrument that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, uses some proprietary PCI card (or worse yet, ISA)? The instrument runs absolutely fine now, and will for years (I managed one instrument controlled by a Mac from the mid 80s), but would either cost a lot to upgrade to Windows 7, or require a new instrument. Instrumentation companies are like this. They do operate stupidly, are stuck in the 80s, and I'd love to smack them, but like it or not, in vertical industries, the choices are few and far between, and *very* expensive.

    So what do you do? The hard part is some of these instruments generate a lot of data and require access to network servers. Dedicated, firewalled LANs will suffice here. Windows XP is going to be running for another ten years or more.

    The whole problem revolves around the fact that in many industries computers are treated as "hardware" not "software." I mean you only replace a pump's pressure switch when it fails. We in the computer industry have been successful in pushing our technology into all kinds of places where it's invisible and just seen as a "controller" or a "switch" and treated as such. And it's not entirely the fault of the users of these devices either. The thought of securing and updating the firmware on these devices has really only been something anyone worried about recently. When was the last time you did a firmware update to your lawn sprinkler controller? Add internet capabilities to it, and suddenly it's a security hole requiring weekly software updates. How does this relate to XP? Well for a lot of people and industries, their instruments and devices are in their mind much like the sprinkler controller in your garage. They are just tools and they don't think about the software security, updates, EOL, etc. They've never had to before. It's a brave new world we've started, and this Windows XP EOL issue is just the beginning of our problems with this new "internet of things" idea. Which is brilliant, but fraught with all kinds of danger.

  • by gonnagetya (3580051) on Sunday April 06, 2014 @08:21PM (#46680085)

    Here's what you are missing: Someone will leak the patches and they will end up on torrents or the like. People will be able to get these patches without paying for the extra support.

    Never mind the issue of companies using illegally obtained patches they haven't paid a support agreement for (except for perhaps China who don't give a shit), there's also the security issue of obtaining patches from someone other than direct from the vendor. Such a great opportunity to slip in your own code to do interesting things along with the actual patches.

1 Billion dollars of budget deficit = 1 Gramm-Rudman

Working...