Microsoft's Software is Malware

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by bad_user on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @11:42AM (#10621815)

Lets not forget that Windows XP is a commercial product, for which people paid money and that was the only reasonable choice for about 8 years, the gap between the release of XP and that of Windows 7 (Vista was a flop due to poor drivers).

In these 8 years a lot of companies and individuals bought computers and then stayed on XP because (1) Windows upgrades cost money, (2) compatibility issues and (3) fear of upgrades (Microsoft never educated its users to upgrade, quite the contrary, they've made Windows users fear upgrades because of their fuck-ups with Windows ME or Vista).

Windows XP reached end of life on April 8, 2014, with people being stuck on it without a migration path. Nowadays 5 year old desktops and laptops are often good enough and don't need to be replaced. If you had a company with dozens or hundreds of computers, what would you do? Would you pay $120 before taxes for the Home edition or $199 before taxes for Pro, per computer? Would you try to negotiate better terms maybe? Or would you stay on XP because it works? The offer for a 1-year free upgrade for Windows 10 is not valid for XP and Vista.

And yes, Microsoft supported XP for 12 years. That's 4 years after those 8 years in which XP was the only choice. That's hardly an accomplishment.

They still have users on XP. For those users they have an ethical responsibility to provide security fixes, or a cheap migration path (why is the upgrade to Windows 10 not valid for XP?), or the source code such that they can fix problems by themselves.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by mangecoeur on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @12:05PM (#10621974)

The fact that you paid for windows bundled with your laptop at discount 14 years ago does not entitle you to a lifetime of free support. Big companies get XP support at great cost, because support is very expensive.

As you said yourself, Windows is a commercial product - you get what you pay for. Microsoft don't really owe anybody anything beyond what they get paid to do - the only reason they kept XP support for so long is that to do otherwise would be a PR nightmare, all their big customers would be angry and all the regular folks would have machines (even more) full of malware.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by laumars on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @12:10PM (#10622012)

I think it's a bit selective to exclude Vista's timeline from XP's concurrency just to make a point. But even that aside, 4 years of concurrency is still pretty good compared to most other Linux distributions. Ubuntu Desktop's long term support (LTS) is only 3 years and that's one of the better supported Linux desktops. Granted Ubuntu Server LTS is 5 years, but then we'd have to compare Linux with Server 2003 to be completely fair.

The only real complaint I have against Windows' support is that it's update utility, "Windows Update", makes the whole process unnecessarily painful compared to the most Linux package managers.

Just as an aside, Windows Home (which you mentioned the cost of compared to Pro) wouldn't be an option for many businesses because you can't join Home editions of Windows to a Windows domain.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by scholia on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @01:41PM (#10622590)

"In previous releases, a Long Term Support (LTS) version had 3 years support on Ubuntu (Desktop) and 5 years on Ubuntu Server. Starting with Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, both versions will receive 5 years support." https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by delecti on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @12:58PM (#10622302)

Vista was a flop because of OEM marketing inadequate hardware as supporting it.

I had a reasonably competent machine, and Vista worked great on it from the day I switched (summer '07, only a few months after it released).

Making the comments others have said about your choice to exclude Vista as a viable option even stronger.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by taurath on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @02:50PM (#10623133)

On most metrics of performance Vista was a big downgrade from XP, regardless of your hardware.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by tracker1 on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @11:54AM (#10621897)

Cheap is relative... for a computer purchased 4 years ago, for under $1k a $200 software upgrade is a pretty cheap migration path.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Microsoft's Software is Malware by bad_user on Tuesday November 24, 2015 @11:58AM (#10621928)

If you distribute that cost over several years, then it may not look so expensive, but the problem is many people may not be capable of such an upfront cost and the perceived benefits of the upgrade (e.g. security patches, newer IExplorer) are seemingly minimal.

[ Parent | on HN ]