MS's support logic

Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
and/or blackmail on MS's part?

They act as if money isn't an issue for most people and it's little to
no "effort" for most people to simply throw out their old computer and
buy another.

Welll I for one can't easily afford to just throw away a pc that works
fine and does all I want simply because MS decides I should no longer
use it for it's intended purpose because they decide they'll no longer
patch it to work properly and as it should have when it was bought.

It's obvious now that MS releases software, they know has bugs in it nd
they've already decided to NOT fix them unless they have to.

In the meantime, the old XP pc's I have here that continue to work will
continue to connect to the internet. Until/unless something gets
surreptiously installed on them I see no reason to not keep doing what
I've always done. If said software becomes a problem I'll simply reimage
the pc and start again.

As far as I'm concerned MS is leaving me out to hang so I don't see why
the stink shouldn't carry wherever it wants to go. not my fault or
responsibility nor can I do anything about it except throw it away and
that I refuse to do with a working pc.

Gine me a $5 upgrade path and I might change my mind but no way I'm
buying a copy of Vista or Win7 (pc's running XP now will run those OS's)
for the amount they feel it's worth. Geez, we all know it's defective
right out of the box!!!

See, I really don't give a rat's ass about malware, virus's etc. So what
if they cause DOS attacks etc. That's MS's problem for not fixing their
software not mine for using it. As I said, I can reimage anytime so if
it don't affect me ...

pjp wrote:


Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
and/or blackmail on MS's part?

They act as if money isn't an issue for most people and it's little to
no "effort" for most people to simply throw out their old computer and
buy another.

Welll I for one can't easily afford to just throw away a pc that works
fine and does all I want simply because MS decides I should no longer
use it for it's intended purpose because they decide they'll no longer
patch it to work properly and as it should have when it was bought.

It's obvious now that MS releases software, they know has bugs in it nd
they've already decided to NOT fix them unless they have to.

In the meantime, the old XP pc's I have here that continue to work will
continue to connect to the internet. Until/unless something gets
surreptiously installed on them I see no reason to not keep doing what
I've always done. If said software becomes a problem I'll simply reimage
the pc and start again.

As far as I'm concerned MS is leaving me out to hang so I don't see why
the stink shouldn't carry wherever it wants to go. not my fault or
responsibility nor can I do anything about it except throw it away and
that I refuse to do with a working pc.

Gine me a $5 upgrade path and I might change my mind but no way I'm
buying a copy of Vista or Win7 (pc's running XP now will run those OS's)
for the amount they feel it's worth. Geez, we all know it's defective
right out of the box!!!

See, I really don't give a rat's ass about malware, virus's etc. So what
if they cause DOS attacks etc. That's MS's problem for not fixing their
software not mine for using it. As I said, I can reimage anytime so if
it don't affect me ...


Or you can use Linux which is free. I recommend Net Runner for ex Window
users:

http://www.netrunner-os.com/

You can dual boot with XP until you get used to it.

--
A

In pjp
wrote:

Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
and/or blackmail on MS's part?

How so?

How far back do most consumer software vendors provide free support?

--
St. Paul, MN

pjp wrote on Friday 8/8/2014 2:01 PM:


Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
and/or blackmail on MS's part?

They act as if money isn't an issue for most people and it's little to
no "effort" for most people to simply throw out their old computer and
buy another.

Welll I for one can't easily afford to just throw away a pc that works
fine and does all I want simply because MS decides I should no longer
use it for it's intended purpose because they decide they'll no longer
patch it to work properly and as it should have when it was bought.

It's obvious now that MS releases software, they know has bugs in it nd
they've already decided to NOT fix them unless they have to.

In the meantime, the old XP pc's I have here that continue to work will
continue to connect to the internet. Until/unless something gets
surreptiously installed on them I see no reason to not keep doing what
I've always done. If said software becomes a problem I'll simply reimage
the pc and start again.

As far as I'm concerned MS is leaving me out to hang so I don't see why
the stink shouldn't carry wherever it wants to go. not my fault or
responsibility nor can I do anything about it except throw it away and
that I refuse to do with a working pc.

Gine me a $5 upgrade path and I might change my mind but no way I'm
buying a copy of Vista or Win7 (pc's running XP now will run those OS's)
for the amount they feel it's worth. Geez, we all know it's defective
right out of the box!!!

See, I really don't give a rat's ass about malware, virus's etc. So what
if they cause DOS attacks etc. That's MS's problem for not fixing their
software not mine for using it. As I said, I can reimage anytime so if
it don't affect me ...

Don't use IE. There are quite a few other browsers on the market (free
too), and they provide security updates.

On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 15:01:19 -0300, pjp wrote:

rant snipped
That's a lot of complaints over nothing. First, I very much doubt MS
deliberately releases software with known defects. The defects are
discovered in the field.

The chances of you're being bothered by a system that old is small I've
never had a virus after many years of computing. A virus checker helps but
practising safe computer habits is the best safeguard.

Some people update their os, I never do. When I do purchase a new machine
it's for improved performance and I use whatever is on it, although I did
specify windows 7 professional over windows 8.

So you can happily use your existing system, but I don't think MS will
lose any sleep over your failure to buy the latest and greatest.

"pjp" wrote in message


Welll I for one can't easily afford to just throw away a pc that works
fine and does all I want simply because MS decides I should no longer
use it for it's intended purpose because they decide they'll no longer
patch it to work properly and as it should have when it was bought.

Does it work now? It will keep on working the same way.

Besides, you have no gripe, MS provided support for a long time. Not like
the damn auto maufacturers; I mean, you are really SOL if you want OEM
parts for your model A.


--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net

On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:20:10 +0200, A wrote:

Or you can use Linux which is free. I recommend Net Runner for ex Window
users:

http://www.netrunner-os.com/

You can dual boot with XP until you get used to it.

Linux is ok, but it's not for everyone. Linux users like to tout the
system using as their main argument that windows is awful, full of bugs
and virus ridden.
It isn't, I've nothing against Linux but I refuse to discard apps I like
and have paid for in favour of the Linux equivalent if available. Most of
the good open source stuff like Libre Office runs on either system.
I have Ubuntu running under virtual box but rarely use it, although for
those paranoid about malware that might be a good solution.

On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 15:51:51 -0400, dadiOH wrote:

"pjp" wrote in message


Welll I for one can't easily afford to just throw away a pc that works
fine and does all I want simply because MS decides I should no longer
use it for it's intended purpose because they decide they'll no longer
patch it to work properly and as it should have when it was bought.

Does it work now? It will keep on working the same way.

Besides, you have no gripe, MS provided support for a long time. Not like
the damn auto maufacturers; I mean, you are really SOL if you want OEM
parts for your model A.

That's not even OT: as I understand it, the Model A came with Windows.

Today's Fords also come with Microsoft softwa

QUOTE
MyFord Touch (branded as MyLincoln Touch on Ford's Lincoln brand
products.[1]) is an in-car communications and entertainment system
developed by the Ford Motor Company, based on Microsoft technologies.
/QUOTE

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyFord_Touch

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 19:46:27 +0000 (UTC)
Dave wrote:

On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 15:01:19 -0300, pjp wrote:

rant snipped
That's a lot of complaints over nothing. First, I very much doubt MS
deliberately releases software with known defects. The defects are
discovered in the field.

I agree in that I don't believe MS would deliberately release
software with known defects. However, they do it knowingly.
I can remember that fixes and updates for Windows 95 was on
the MS support web site weeks before it was released.

--
Wildman GNU/Linux user #557453
The cow died so I don't need your bull!

On Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:21:56 -0500, Wildman wrote:


I agree in that I don't believe MS would deliberately release
software with known defects. However, they do it knowingly.
I can remember that fixes and updates for Windows 95 was on
the MS support web site weeks before it was released.


*Every* software developing company does it knowingly. As a single
example of a scenario in which it happens:


Product X has ten known defects. Its manufacturer works on fixing
them, and gets fixes to the seven most severe ones. The remaining
three are very minor and would affect few people, and when it does
affect them the effect is minor.

So what do they do--release the version with the seven fixes or wait
until the other three are fixed? It should be obvious that they do
what they should do--release the version with the seven fixes which
still has three known defects.

That's only one such scenario. There are others.

| Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
| and/or blackmail on MS's part?
|

Yes. They're still issuing updates. You just have to have
a support agreement with them to get those updates. And
for that you have to be a big company that is spending
a minimum amount of money for support. (In the millions
per year, I think.) So they could issue patches on a non-
support basis easily, since they're already making them and
testing them anyway. (They could do it on a "take them if
you want at your own risk" basis.)
Or they could sell personal support for some reasonable price,
like maybe $30 or so per year. It would certainly be reasonable
to expect them to do at least that much, given that XP is
still being used on hundreds of millions of PCs.

But Microsoft has always been brazen about gouging
their customers. They've lost court cases over it, but never
been *really* punished. So they don't care. And in this case
their kind of extortion probably isn't illegal. And there's no
real competition. Apple exploits their customers even worse,
and Linux will probably never be ready for prime time. So
one has to make do. MS is the only company I know of that
markets new product by saying, "Our old stuff is junk. You
should buy the new stuff."

But the real exploitation of their customers is Microsoft's
media blitz to get everyone saying that XP is no longer safe.
It just simply isn't true. Last I saw, there were more attacks
for Win7. And as others have said, it's not really XP that's
likely to need patches. It's IE and MS Office, neither of
which should be used by people who care about system
security. If you do use Office then you'll need to be more
careful about docs in email. There's really no reason at
all that you need to use IE, especially since you can only
install a very old v. 8 on XP.

I use mainly XP. The last patch was SP3. I would never
allow Windows Update to run. I'm not worried about XP
ever being unsafe. If you worry about that you can always
run XP as a limited-rights user and get all the hassles and
restrictions of Win7 for free. The only thing I worry
about with XP is the eventual end of support by 3rd-party
companies and hardware companies. That's the real end
of an OS -- when people can no longer use it to do what
they need to do.

| Product X has ten known defects. Its manufacturer works on fixing
| them, and gets fixes to the seven most severe ones. The remaining
| three are very minor and would affect few people, and when it does
| affect them the effect is minor.
|
| So what do they do--release the version with the seven fixes or wait
| until the other three are fixed? It should be obvious that they do
| what they should do--release the version with the seven fixes which
| still has three known defects.
|
| That's only one such scenario. There are others.

There's an interesting related article he

http://arstechnica.com/information-t...-21st-century/

A two year cycle for each version of Visual Studio, with
about 2 months of actual coding, and a long list of bugs
that are considered "too late to fix" by the time a version
goes to market. It's an interesting view into the inefficiency
of bureaucracy, but I expect it also says something about
the challenge of quality control for software that gets installed
on millions of computers. Despite all the criticism of Microsoft
that's justified, I think they're actually very good at simply
making dependable software. Maybe they sometimes lack
when it comes to design. They tend to confuse marketing with
engineering and bloat with quality. But generally the final
product works pretty well, and since they aim at business
the products usually have a relatively long lifespan. (Apple
customers are on a high-price treadmill, and Linux is perennially
under construction, with "support" being anything that's
consistent for more than 6 months.)

On 2014-08-08, pjp wrote:

Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
and/or blackmail on MS's part?

10+ years support not enough for you?

Perhaps you want to switch to linux where with the free versions support for
a particular release lasts typically 3 to six years?


--
umop apisdn


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

In article ,
says...

In pjp
wrote:

Isn't stopping IE as well as XP security updates kinda like extortion
and/or blackmail on MS's part?

How so?

How far back do most consumer software vendors provide free support?

Until the product is bug free as that's the impression they give you
when they sold it to you.

My own opinion is that once they stop supporting a product by law they
must make public ALL the source code and support files so that at the
least someone else can do what they want with it.

In the end it's my opinion that ALL knowledge is owned by ALL of us and
to allow such inital effort to simply be discarded is not in OUR best
interests even if it is for the inital few who created it. It becomes
knowledge lost to all that perhaps might just benefit us all.

Dave wrote:
On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:20:10 +0200, A wrote:

Or you can use Linux which is free. I recommend Net Runner for ex Window
users:

http://www.netrunner-os.com/

You can dual boot with XP until you get used to it.

Linux is ok, but it's not for everyone. Linux users like to tout the
system using as their main argument that windows is awful, full of bugs
and virus ridden.

I don't agree. I just don't want to rent Windows which is what you will
have to do in the very near future. We're on the *threshold". Office 365
is just the beginning.

--
A