โMay-30-2014 02:07 PM
โJun-01-2014 02:18 AM
burlmart wrote:1492 wrote:
A counterpoint is just how long should a company provide free update support for an OS?
Seen correctly, the thing MS did wrong is to force XP users to buy their paradigm over yours. People do not like others to mess w/ their paradigm! I do not buy a laptop to run an OS, I buy it to process my info/data.
All MS just had to say was, "We no longer supply patches to XP," then shut up. Do not try to shame a customer into buying what you sell. The product will speak for itself.
โMay-31-2014 11:43 AM
โMay-31-2014 06:39 AM
โMay-31-2014 04:40 AM
โMay-31-2014 04:04 AM
Gale Hawkins wrote:
Actually MS is supporting XP for the banking industry since about 80-90% of AMT's still are XP based computers I read.
โMay-31-2014 03:31 AM
1492 wrote:
A counterpoint is just how long should a company provide free update support for an OS?
โMay-30-2014 09:51 PM
โMay-30-2014 08:15 PM
1492 wrote:
I read about this hack early on, but not from this site. There's no guarantee that these updates will actually work to patch WIN XP vulnerabilities as they are designed for WIN XP embedded and server applications. Could just end up having a placebo effect? Plus, you don't think MS could kill this in an update that determines you're not running an embedded or server version of WIN XP?
A counterpoint is just how long should a company provide free update support for an OS?
โMay-30-2014 07:15 PM
โMay-30-2014 06:12 PM
โMay-30-2014 06:01 PM
โMay-30-2014 04:19 PM
1492 wrote:
I read about this hack early on, but not from this site. There's no guarantee that these updates will actually work to patch WIN XP vulnerabilities as they are designed for WIN XP embedded and server applications. Could just end up having a placebo effect? Plus, you don't think MS could kill this in an update that determines you're not running an embedded or server version of WIN XP?
A counterpoint is just how long should a company provide free update support for an OS?
โMay-30-2014 02:30 PM
โMay-30-2014 02:25 PM