mark1447 Posted April 14, 2009 Share #1 Posted April 14, 2009 | On April 14, 2009, Microsoft plans to cut off mainstream support for Windows XP and Office 2003. As a consequence, both products will move in the Extended support phase, which will last for the next five years. The Redmond company is of course using the opportunity in order to stress the importance of upgrades to the latest releases for its main cash cows. Still, the end of mainstream support is not synonymous with completely severing the lifeline of Office 2003 and Windows XP. In fact, both products will continue to be supported until 2014, although the updates provided to customers running the two products will be less diversified. “Microsoft’s standard support policies dictate that mainstream support will provide free fixes for security and bugs for the life of the product. Mainstream support usually lasts 5 years after which the product would enter a period known as ‘extended support’,” revealed Viral Tarpara, Microsoft IT Pro evangelist. “’Extended Support’ is only provided to customers who have signed support contracts with Microsoft. While Microsoft will continue to provide security fixes for a product for free, any bug fixes or non-security hot fixes will require extended support contracts.” The following Windows XP SKUs are affected by the mainstream support cut-off: Home Editions, Media Center Edition, XP Professional (both 32-bit and 64-bit), as well as the Tablet PC Edition. Essentially, Microsoft will offer free security updates for Windows XP Service Pack 3 (SP3) until 2014. Office 2003 SKUs affected are: Basic Edition, Professional Edition, Small Business Edition, Standard Edition, Student and Teacher Edition. Extended support for both XP and Office 2003 ends 08/04/2014. “Naturally, Microsoft wants few people on these types of support contracts as possible, promoting that customers should consider upgrading. Upgrading, however, isn’t always an option so getting extended support is a good way to cover the needs of an enterprise. SMB markets won’t be affected too much by this because they don’t typically do a lot of heavy customization and integration work like enterprises. For what it’s worth, Windows XP and Office 2003 have had a great run,” Tarpara added. Source: Softpedia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted April 14, 2009 Share #2 Posted April 14, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broad St. Belle Posted April 14, 2009 Share #3 Posted April 14, 2009 Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8100/4.2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100) Oo how cute I like your little Microsoft avatar Mark! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted April 14, 2009 Share #4 Posted April 14, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1447 Posted April 14, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted April 14, 2009 Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8100/4.2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100) Oo how cute I like your little Microsoft avatar Mark! its the windows live orb i dunno who changed it but i didnt :confused: lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted April 14, 2009 Share #6 Posted April 14, 2009 People should switch to new these days since old lacks support, safety and stableness. On the contrary. When Vista first came out, it was so unstable that people were actually switching back to XP. Just shows that the "old" is tried and true, even though it's a non-issue today. I look forward to Windows 7's release; however, it has to be tested extensively to avoid a Vista-like debacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 14, 2009 Share #7 Posted April 14, 2009 On the contrary. When Vista first came out, it was so unstable that people were actually switching back to XP. Just shows that the "old" is tried and true, even though it's a non-issue today. I look forward to Windows 7's release; however, it has to be tested extensively to avoid a Vista-like debacle. You mean the beta version, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted April 14, 2009 Share #8 Posted April 14, 2009 On the contrary. When Vista first came out, it was so unstable that people were actually switching back to XP. Just shows that the "old" is tried and true, even though it's a non-issue today. I look forward to Windows 7's release; however, it has to be tested extensively to avoid a Vista-like debacle. The problem with Vista was lack of driver support NOT instability. I've been using Vista since launch. Trust me on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KTrainExp Posted April 14, 2009 Share #9 Posted April 14, 2009 The problem with Vista was lack of driver support NOT instability. I've been using Vista since launch. Trust me on this. I think you should change WAS with IS....Vista still crashes on my driver saying display driver nvlddmkm stopped responding ...it's annoying because it crashes once a week during a full screen game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted April 14, 2009 Share #10 Posted April 14, 2009 I think you should change WAS with IS....Vista still crashes on my driver saying display driver nvlddmkm stopped responding ...it's annoying because it crashes once a week during a full screen game. Blame nVidia for bad drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted April 14, 2009 Share #11 Posted April 14, 2009 The problem with Vista was lack of driver support NOT instability. I've been using Vista since launch. Trust me on this. No matter. The point is, that there were problems with Vista that XP didn't have, thus the point that AWWang put up that old is less stable is moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 14, 2009 Share #12 Posted April 14, 2009 No matter. The point is, that there were problems with Vista that XP didn't have, thus the point that AWWang put up that old is less stable is moot. It depends on what kind of computer you are using. I mean, if you have an older computer and you switch to Vista, you are certainly going to run into problems. A newer computer that is made for Vista will run the system smoothly. It also depends on the memory the computer has, hard drive space, graphics etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.