Windows XP SP3 Postponed Until 2008

Rockgod quotes an article saying "With Microsoft now saying that its next major service pack for Windows XP will not ship until 2008, some Windows users are wondering whether the software upgrade will ever be released." and then later "Michael Cherry, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, agrees that Microsoft may very well decide to drop XP Service Pack 3. "It absolutely could happen. Microsoft is under no obligation to produce any service packs, ever," he explains. "They feel that because these fixes are available through the auto-update that there's less need to create a service pack."

Personally I think they will kill it

[raitchison]

They killed Windows NT 4.0 SP7 in the ßeta process
They killed Windows 2000 SP5 in the pre-ßeta stage

Given this track record of killing off Service Packs shortly before they are released, as some (including me) might suspect in an effort to drive adoption of their newer software (which makes them money unlike a service pack) I'll be extremely surprised if Windows XP SP3 is ever released.

IMO, what they are saying now is just lip service/stalling and they have already made the decision.

Re:Could they at least...

[quantum bit]

Yes, but the problem is that even with a slipstreamed SP2 (which is all I use anymore), there's still 60-70 updates that it has to download and install. That's a number which will only get bigger over the next year.

That's why we want SP3, so that it can be slipstreamed in and vastly reduce that number.

Re:Personally I think they will kill it

[Red Flayer]

Emphasis mine:

They killed Windows NT 4.0 SP7 in the ßeta process They killed Windows 2000 SP5 in the pre-ßeta stage

What is a Betaeta process/stage?

Or do you bank at an ATM machine?

I happen to agree with you, though, that SP3 is dead in the water -- unless Vista bombs and there is a lot of Linux switchover. Announcing a delay allows MS to change their mind later, if necessary, so that they can release SP3 if it becomes a good decision to do so.

Re:They're right, you know

[erroneus]

Actually, even Joe Sixpack is pretty tired of crashing spyware ridden computers. And the very moment they see another option, they are sure to at least look at it. And with Vista's new hardware requirements likely not matching their current hardware, there's yet another possibility he will look at his options before buying a new computer. Apple has become rather affordable as of late and their reputation for being easy will do a lot in the way of bolstering confidence. And if he actually talks to someone and finds that a mac can also run Windows, he'll be sold.

That's a lot of IFs, and I don't expect a huge number of people to fall within those cracks, but I think the numbers will increase and become rather noticable.

Re:They're right, you know

[Meatloaf Surprise]

That's true, but only to a certain extent. Will the training/problems that arise with training the user base of a company to use Linux be better or worse for a company than simply upgrading their machines to vista?

You crack me up.

[argent]

you can be sure that they're doing the very best they can to maximize their profits.

Hardly.

If Microsoft wanted to maximise their profits they would have jumped at the chance to split the company up so the Windows team wouldn't be able to piss in everyone else's milk, and all the other products they've had to drop or cripple because they couldn't be turned into life-support for Windows or Office could be created and sold. Microsoft is desperate for a way to get people to Buy More Windows, everything they've done since XP shipped has been tinged with "oh my god, what are we going to do now"... and Vista is more of the same.

Three or five "Baby Bills" would end up making more money for the shareholders than one big Microsoft.

Re:They're right, you know

[Meatloaf Surprise]

That's a very good point, however, I think we are still a long way away from a mass exodus, or even a small revolt, from windows.
Let's say a company upgrades its machines to vista. Sure, the users will have to learn the new tricks of vista compared to xp but it still is basically the same. Icons on the desktop, start button, menu similiar to the xp-style menu. There's not that much of a learning curve other than to accept the new colors and fonts (and loading times) vista has. As well, the company can still use office 2003 on the machines (or will vista not run office 2003?) and all other xp applications.
If that same company upgrades to Linux with KDE, users will have to learn new mouse gestures, new commands, new applications, and a new layout. openoffice is nice, but certainly not ready for big business. Plus, how about internet explorer-only web apps? As much as people like to complain about those, companies aren't going to just give them up for something else (Yes, theres wine, but that doesn't work all of the time).

Re:Available from autoupdate?

[david_g17]

See how long it takes to get rooted/malware. Answer? It NEVER will. Because the router blocks...

i did this with a system i had on dial-up. The installation media was a MS Windows XP disc prior to SP 1. I set up the dial-up connection and went immediately to download updates from windowsupdates.com. After half an hour or so, I noticed it was going really slow (even for dial-up). I was already infected with some worm (slammer IIRC). I just let it go and woke up the next day to install the updates / defenses for the worm and everything else. kinda sucks because even though I was as dilligent as possible about installing MS updates, it wasn't possible to avoid infection.

it's kinda funny b/c i was installing Windows b/c of the problems i was having with Linux.

Re:It's obvious

[powerlord]

Exactly my thoughts. Why bother patching XP, when they can simply force people to "upgrade" to Vista instead.

... because once people are getting a new machine, they might not do what you think they will.

Linux might not be ready for Joe Sixpack, but he might buy a Mac ("I hear it can run windows too", "they sure do have good ads on TV", "timmy swears BY his. All I've done is swear AT my computer.")

Making people feel "warm and fuzzy" about their OS (i.e. releasing a big update like a service pack to show you haven't forgotten about them), might keep them from jumping ship till your new OS is more established in the market. This might help keep you from going to the competition. If you don't HAVE to upgrade just yet, then maybe by the time you do, they'll be all of this good press about Vista.

Then again, maybe it'll tank like Windows ME. (except on 64-bit machines), leaving MS to support XP and Vista-64. ... Sound familiar?

they are going to have to figure a way to charge

[Archfeld]

for XP support. As the Vista License stands my employer already stated we WILL UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES upgrade to the Vista client. We currently have more than 110,000 copies of XP and 4500 copies of 2003. We have turned down EVERY copy and trial offer that M$ has made to premier members and made it known to our M$ rep that Vista is a NO GO at our place. How long the management hold out is unclear but they are standing firm over the re-install issues, and their 'new' rip you off all the way licensing terms.
We've been in serious talks with 2 or 3 unamed Linux providers for some BIG TIME migration *crosses fingers but doesn't hold breath*.