Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: How long Will WindozeUpdate and license validation function for XP after April?
3 views
Skip to first unread message
XP Guy
Mar 29, 2014, 9:20:09 AM3/29/14
to
Charlie+ wrote:
> > 1) Has Milkro$oft published anything regarding how long they will
> > be keeping their update server on-line to provide the library of
> > XP patches and updates for anyone caring to download them?
>
> > 2) Has Milkro$oft published anything regarding how long they will
> > be keeping their validation server running to perform on-line
> > validation of new installations of XP?
>
> No and No
Fine. A straightforward, concise, honest answer.
> and dont expect MS to answer these questions either, why should
> they tie their own hands in any way by guessing into the future?
And a sycophantic answer from a Macro$haft appologist, covering for them
and explaining away their cowardly behavior in not deciding to carve a
date in stone regarding two very important aspects of the life cycle of
one of their products.
Really - there is no reason to defend Micro$haft in that manner.
You can at least admit that they are acting like cowards by not having
the balls to declare some sort of date for the ending of those 2
services.
There is precedent for the update server to no longer supply or be
functional for one or two of their products, as WindowsUpdate went dark
for win-98 I think 2 years after win98 EOL. I don't know what happened
for Win-2k in that regard - I presume that WindowsUpdate service no
longer functions for win2k - correct? But in any case, it came as a
surprise when the update service failed for win-98.
But there is ->NO<- precedent for Meekro$oft turning off its validation
server or failing to validate product keys, and I think it's cowardly
for such an organization to not announce publicly what their police is
or will be for such an important function, and anyone involved in IT
would be correct in expecting to see such a policy in writing.
> > 1) Has Milkro$oft published anything regarding how long they will
> > be keeping their update server on-line to provide the library of
> > XP patches and updates for anyone caring to download them?
>
> > 2) Has Milkro$oft published anything regarding how long they will
> > be keeping their validation server running to perform on-line
> > validation of new installations of XP?
>
> No and No
Fine. A straightforward, concise, honest answer.
> and dont expect MS to answer these questions either, why should
> they tie their own hands in any way by guessing into the future?
And a sycophantic answer from a Macro$haft appologist, covering for them
and explaining away their cowardly behavior in not deciding to carve a
date in stone regarding two very important aspects of the life cycle of
one of their products.
Really - there is no reason to defend Micro$haft in that manner.
You can at least admit that they are acting like cowards by not having
the balls to declare some sort of date for the ending of those 2
services.
There is precedent for the update server to no longer supply or be
functional for one or two of their products, as WindowsUpdate went dark
for win-98 I think 2 years after win98 EOL. I don't know what happened
for Win-2k in that regard - I presume that WindowsUpdate service no
longer functions for win2k - correct? But in any case, it came as a
surprise when the update service failed for win-98.
But there is ->NO<- precedent for Meekro$oft turning off its validation
server or failing to validate product keys, and I think it's cowardly
for such an organization to not announce publicly what their police is
or will be for such an important function, and anyone involved in IT
would be correct in expecting to see such a policy in writing.
Message has been deleted
JJ
Mar 30, 2014, 2:46:01 AM3/30/14
to
On Sat, 29 Mar 2014 09:20:09 -0400, XP Guy wrote:
> There is precedent for the update server to no longer supply or be
> functional for one or two of their products, as WindowsUpdate went dark
> for win-98 I think 2 years after win98 EOL. I don't know what happened
> for Win-2k in that regard - I presume that WindowsUpdate service no
> longer functions for win2k - correct? But in any case, it came as a
> surprise when the update service failed for win-98.
I've read a new post somewhere in Windows XP newsgroup a few months ago. One
> There is precedent for the update server to no longer supply or be
> functional for one or two of their products, as WindowsUpdate went dark
> for win-98 I think 2 years after win98 EOL. I don't know what happened
> for Win-2k in that regard - I presume that WindowsUpdate service no
> longer functions for win2k - correct? But in any case, it came as a
> surprise when the update service failed for win-98.
Windows 2000 user said that the auto update server is still working.
Even if the Windows XP auto update server has stopped working, you can still
do a manual update. Microsoft already provide a DVD ISO that contains
security updates up until March 11th 2014.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913086
Newer updates if any, won't be that many and troublesome for manual
downloads.
Bob F
Apr 11, 2014, 8:14:58 PM4/11/14
to
released that month. Do you know otherwise?
Good Guy
Apr 12, 2014, 3:38:52 PM4/12/14
to
On 30/03/2014 07:46, JJ wrote:
> Even if the Windows XP auto update server has stopped working, you can still
> do a manual update. Microsoft already provide a DVD ISO that contains
> security updates up until March 11th 2014.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913086
>
> Newer updates if any, won't be that many and troublesome for manual
> downloads.
>
You mean to say ISOs for monthly updates. They are not cumulative so
> Even if the Windows XP auto update server has stopped working, you can still
> do a manual update. Microsoft already provide a DVD ISO that contains
> security updates up until March 11th 2014.
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913086
>
> Newer updates if any, won't be that many and troublesome for manual
> downloads.
>
you need to download all the ISOs since SP3 was released.
If anybody continues to insist using XP then updates are of no relevance
because any time after May 2014, the XP machines would be a weak-link
anyway because no new updates would be released for it.
XP Guy
Apr 12, 2014, 7:37:10 PM4/12/14
to
Good Guy wrote:
> any time after May 2014 the XP machines would be a weak-link
trojan-dropper code, it's probably been the case for a few years now
that the average home and soho XP system is hacked via a vulnerability
in some Adobe product (flash or acrobat) or a vulnerability in the
browser (Firefox, chrome, etc).
For XP users that use primarily IE, then yes, WindozeUpdate fixes for IE
are useful.
But for XP users that don't touch IE but use some other browser, then
it's not likely that any Windozeupdates to come down the pipe over the
last couple of years has actually patched a vulnerability that would
have been of any benefit to that system.
In other words, IE patches aside, WindozeUpdates for XP is largely
irrelavent and has been for the past 2 or 3 years, because the typical
home/soho system is hacked either by running a malicious spam attachment
or through a weakness in a Mozilla or Adobe product.
> any time after May 2014 the XP machines would be a weak-link
> anyway because no new updates would be released for it.
Aside from being tricked into clicking on a spam attachment and running
trojan-dropper code, it's probably been the case for a few years now
that the average home and soho XP system is hacked via a vulnerability
in some Adobe product (flash or acrobat) or a vulnerability in the
browser (Firefox, chrome, etc).
For XP users that use primarily IE, then yes, WindozeUpdate fixes for IE
are useful.
But for XP users that don't touch IE but use some other browser, then
it's not likely that any Windozeupdates to come down the pipe over the
last couple of years has actually patched a vulnerability that would
have been of any benefit to that system.
In other words, IE patches aside, WindozeUpdates for XP is largely
irrelavent and has been for the past 2 or 3 years, because the typical
home/soho system is hacked either by running a malicious spam attachment
or through a weakness in a Mozilla or Adobe product.
XP Guy
Apr 12, 2014, 7:39:16 PM4/12/14
to
XP Guy wrote:
> In other words, IE patches aside, WindozeUpdates for XP is largely
> irrelavent and has been for the past 2 or 3 years, because the typical
> home/soho system is hacked either by running a malicious spam attachment
> or through a weakness in a Mozilla or Adobe product.
Add Sun (Oriface) Java to that relatively short list.
> In other words, IE patches aside, WindozeUpdates for XP is largely
> irrelavent and has been for the past 2 or 3 years, because the typical
> home/soho system is hacked either by running a malicious spam attachment
> or through a weakness in a Mozilla or Adobe product.
0 new messages