Windows XP Home: obsolete sooner than you expect

Ars Technica ^ | 3 January 2006 | Ken "Caesar" Fisher

[ShadowAce]

Microsoft set out to adopt a formal and rigid support lifecycle in 2002, back at a time when most analysts were expecting to see Windows Vista (then, "Longhorn") within a couple of years. My own point of view was that this lifecycle business had a lot to do with Microsoft's then-new volume licensing scheme, which among other things is oriented towards selling software subscriptions. If you're buying a subscription for software, you can see how lifecycle plans become important. However, delays in Windows Vista coupled with a questionable approach to "consumer" products means that 2007 will carry a few surprises unless policy changes are made at Redmond.

XP Professional and Home are divided into two general product categories for Microsoft, namely business and consumer products. XP Professional, as a business product, will receive mainstream support for two additional years after the release of Windows Vista (whenever that may be). After that, Professional will have an additional five years of extended service (minimum), though this could be lengthened considerably if the OS update after Windows Vista does not ship within three years of Vista's debut.

Mainstream and Extended support are virtually identical, with both carrying security updates, service packs, online support, and the availability of paid support. However, the transition to the Extended Support phase means that hotfixes that are not security related will be made available by a (paid) commercial contract, warranty claims can no longer be made, and Microsoft will not entertain adding any new features or design elements to the OS.

Based on the current timeline and our own expectations for the launch of Windows Vista, we estimate Windows XP Professional Mainstream Support ending in late December 2008, with Extended Support ending in December of 2013. It could stretch out longer, but we don't expect the window to be more than two to three additional years. After the Extended Support phase is finished, online support (knowledge base, FAQ, etc.) will continue for 10 years.

Windows XP Home coming up short

Windows XP Home is another story. As a consumer product, it suffers from two policy deficiencies. First, consumer products do not qualify for Extended Support, but instead move directly into the online support phase after Mainstream Support ends. Second, whereas business products are guaranteed Mainstream Support for two years beyond the release of the next subsequent version of a product (in this case, Windows Vista), consumer products do not get this built-in transitional period. The end result is that Windows XP Home will leave Mainstream Support and enter online support on January 1, 2007—in less than a year.

When that day comes, XP Home users may feel left out in the cold, because they will no longer qualify for security updates, and will not be able to purchase support from Microsoft. Finding this situation somewhat alarming, I contacted Microsoft's representation to clarify the matter.  A Microsoft spokesman relayed the following to me:

"For consumer products, security updates will be available through the end of the mainstream phase. For Windows XP Home Edition, there will be no security updates after 12/31/06." Regarding paid support for problems unrelated to security patches, I was told that "Users who want to continue to receive support after the Microsoft assisted and paid support offerings have ended may visit the Retired Product Support Options Web site."

I urge Microsoft to reconsider this stance. There should be considerably more overlap in support for their consumer OS. While five years of support for XP Home may have seemed reasonable when it was expected that there would be little more than three years between major OS updates, the time it has taken to bake Windows Vista has thrown this out entirely. If Vista launches in October, it would give users a mere two months to move to the OS, or risk being unsupported.

I suspect that Microsoft will grant a stay of execution for Windows XP Home, because the alternative is to create a PR nightmare that would also leave customers fuming. Citing emerging markets in the past, Microsoft extended support for Windows 98 and ME by more than two years, and this decision was made long after Windows XP was released. Microsoft should extend support for Windows XP Home well into 2008. Otherwise users will have to hope that updates to XP Professional meet their needs, but it remains unclear if Windows Update will point XP Home users to updates to XP Professional.

[Republican Wildcat]

They're still providing updates for Windows 98. I don't see why they'd stop supporting XP home so soon if they are still doing that.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Well I own a version of 2kAS, don't have one of 2003 server - yet. But no need to buy one now.

[Petronski]

I saw that too late. Sorry. Didn't mean to pile on.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

leave it be.

if you want to change to pro you can just put the pro cd into your laptop and upgrade and it may prompt you to buy a license when you go to windows update with it later, but it is cheaper than buying the separate OS

[Dont Mention the War]

OKAY....so we have XP Home on a laptop here at home....what should we do....our desktop has XP Pro......any suggestions out there? (And, I'm not looking for smart a** remarks/suggestions.)

In all honesty: Do nothing. The upgrade can be a major leage hassle, and in all likelihood you will see literally no difference when you're done. (The most important differences betweeen Pro and Home have to do with some networking features that are mainly of use in big offices.)

[RedBloodedAmerican]

No problem. I should have had my comment deleted. You were only the 10th one. LOL
But stupid me; I deserved it for not thinking first. Wish I could blame it on cold meds and lack of sleep, but cant!

[Doohickey]

open a command prompt and let me know the version of the command interpreter.

If you don't believe that, run wmic os get version. That'll return the product version for you.

[goodnesswins]

Thanks.

[goodnesswins]

Thank you.

[Age of Reason]

the alternative is to create a PR nightmare that would also leave customers fuming.

Never stopped them before.

[ShadowAce]

LOL!

[Bones75]

"I've already looked at it (month ago)-- its horrible. SLOW, SLOW, SLOW -- very large footprint -- very clunky -- nothing worked -- from network copy to renaming simple files to find -- it really irritated me. Its how many years late?"

That sounds pretty annoying. I have an old laptop, like 600mhz or so I think it is, that I'm not doing anything with. I was thinking about installing the new Windows on it, just out of curiosity, but since you describe it that way, Maybe I will make it a Linux machine, since I have never used Lunix and have been curious about it. (/run-on sentence)

[Focault's Pendulum]

Where do you go to turn off updating???

Try going to a pub where women shoot darts.

[Doohickey]

Make no mistake, this is just more Microsoft hate spew. There's a reason Home is cheaper than Professional, and it isn't sunk costs like the DS client, policy engine or RDP.

Does the other think he can call Dell after five years and get support on his broke-dick PIII 866? If the idiot author wanted to ever provide the appearance of not having an ABM bias, he'd demand that OEMs provide certificates for free OS upgrades.

Almost every tech thread degenerates into a Microsoft hate-fest. I'm sick of it and pay scant attention to them nowadays because of it.

Think different? Get root? Get bent.

[rahbert]

In XP w/SP2 go to the control panel, select Security Center,
then select Automatic Updates. A dialog will allow you to configure the feature.

I don't have an earlier version of XP in front of me at the moment. Try looking at the various customizations for the
Run Menu.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

It reads "Microsoft Windows 3.1"

Is that good?

[Doohickey]

Sure, it means you can drop to DOS an run Gorillas in QBasic.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

I can put Asteroids back on my computer! YAY!!!

[MrsEmmaPeel]

I'm finding installing Linux can be a frustrating experience. Mr. Peel & I tried many different flavors - Mandrake, Red Hat, SUSE .. etc and without a doubt we can say that the biggest problem with Linux is that there is no consistent installer. You *think* you're doing everything right -- then a certain piece of the installation simply won't take -- like wireless -- or print -- or something -- then you go onto the various Linux message boards to see if the error you've experienced matches the errors others are talking about. Sometimes its simple, some times not. For us, SUSE was pretty painful to install, but once we got past the hurdles, its a very fine OS. Linux, IMHO is not ready for prime time. Because I think a lot of people simply won't have the patience work out the kinks. For Linux to really take, there needs to be a consistent installer implementation that can handle the majority of common usage scenarios.

[ThePythonicCow]

The traditional names in firewalls are, as another replier mentioned, Netgear, Linksys and D-Link. Of late, Belkin has been selling such equipment, on the slightly pricier end, and Hawking, on the lower cost end.

I had not heard of AlphaShield or Stingray before reading your post. From searching on the web, these both seem to be providing a new category in the firewall market - Zero configuration for a higher price. The following, from a review quick review of AlphaShield at Toms Networking seems to sum it up well, for both these products:

The Verdict

The AlphaShield definitely does provide an effective firewall and, as AlphaShield's product pitch asserts, is certainly more robust than Windows' built-in firewall—SP2 notwithstanding. But although I think it serves its target audience well—the non-technical broadband user with a single computer— I also think that AlphaShield is counting on its target customers' networking naivete a bit too much.

With consumer routers easily available at $50 or less, which include 4 port 10/100 switches, and that provide essentially the same level of protection, I think AlphaShield's $100 pricing is twice what it should be. (Shame on those on-line retailers selling it for as much as $169!) And although AlphaShield's FAQ make it clear that the device does not provide Internet sharing, the FAQ don't make it as clear that using an AlphaShield and a NAT router isn't necessary, or is at least redundant.

That said, the AlphaShield could be the perfect solution for protecting a far-away parent or loved one that is foolish (or uninformed) enough to have their computer tied directly to their broadband modem. And think how proud they'll be when they install it themself!

If the zero configuration appeals to you, and you aren't price sensitive, then these should work.

Instead of the configurability, these boxes both have a button you have to push to connect and disconnect. The firewalls (aka routers) I use require no day to day interaction. These two boxes you mention do require routine interaction -- that's a major step backwards in my view.

Personally, I like paying less, and getting more configuration and out of sight, fully automatic operation, so will get something like NETGEAR RP614 10/100Mbps Cable/DSL Web Safe Router , which is $42.99 at newegg.com: