backtop


Print 86 comment(s) - last by Dorkyman.. on Apr 27 at 11:59 PM

China is looking at home grown patch solutions now

For many people in the corporate world, there is no real reason or need to upgrade from the 14-year-old Windows XP to a more modern version like Windows 7 or Windows 8. Some cite costs as a reason for not upgrading, while others point to the fact that their “mature” integrated systems simply don’t need anything new or fancy to operate properly.
 
One of the largest organizations that has no desire to move away from Windows XP is the Chinese government. China instead plans to patch XP on its own rather than upgrade to Windows 8, because upgrading would be too expensive (Windows 8 sells for 888 yuan in China, or roughly $142).

Just a little bit of Windows XP nostalgia... 

Chinese firms have reportedly released special protection patches to shore up XP’s defenses and the Chinese government says that it is now assessing those patches for its own use.
 
Estimates peg the number of Chinese computers using XP at nearly 70% compared to 18% in the U.S. As of early April, 25% of all PCs on the market were still running Windows XP.
 
Despite the reluctance for many to leave XP behind, Microsoft finally ended official support for Windows XP earlier this month. So many people weren't keen to move from XP in the business world that Microsoft offered to extend support for some companies for a hefty price. 

Source: Sky



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Not for anyone
By Labotomizer on 4/23/2014 12:19:53 PM , Rating: 4
Wrong. XP runs everything at the user's access level. So if you're an admin ALL software you run is also an admin. UAC makes Vista and later substantially more secure. Add in things like SmartScreen at an OS level in Windows 8 and numerous other security technologies over the years and there is no question that modern versions of Windows are vastly more secure than XP.


RE: Not for anyone
By Motoman on 4/23/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not for anyone
By Labotomizer on 4/23/2014 12:40:33 PM , Rating: 5
Lots of people had issues with AV and fully patches machines. The TCO for SMB is FAR lower with Windows 7 than it was with Windows XP. That's a fact.

In a properly run corporate environment with security policies, GPOs, users not running with elevated permissions, AV, corporate firewalls, IDS and IPS systems then sure, XP is fine. But even in the right environment rarely is it run correctly. And at that point, with a layered security approach like you should have, Windows 7 is STILL more secure than XP because it is still a piece of the overall picture. It's just not nearly as big of a factor.

For a home user running with admin rights on their PC browsing FB and using email? Windows 7 is VASTLY more secure than XP. It's not even comparable. You saying "Well, then why did it work once upon a time?" is such an ignorant statement it makes me wonder why you're even posting. You clearly have NO idea how any of this works anyway.


RE: Not for anyone
By Motoman on 4/23/14, Rating: -1
RE: Not for anyone
By Labotomizer on 4/23/2014 12:48:30 PM , Rating: 4
Sure... I'm sure you've been doing this "since before I was born".

Not once I have I made an argument that XP doesn't work. Not once have I even made an argument that it won't run most software. I simply called out your complete and total fallacy that it is AS SECURE as Windows Vista and later. It is absolutely NOT. If you have a hint of the experience you claim to then you can't argue against that statement. At all.


RE: Not for anyone
By Motoman on 4/23/14, Rating: 0
RE: Not for anyone
By jimbo2779 on 4/23/2014 1:51:37 PM , Rating: 3
No you were arguing against it being less secure by saying that it is as usable. Nobody else is saying that XP is less usable, they are saying it is less secure which it absolutely is.

You do not win the argument by arguing a completely different point to everyone else.


RE: Not for anyone
By Motoman on 4/23/14, Rating: 0
RE: Not for anyone
By retrospooty on 4/23/2014 4:07:02 PM , Rating: 2
I am not arguing what you guys are arguing above, but Sorry Moto, it's not the same.

When you said "If you stay current with patches and antivirus/antimalware, you're fine." you may be correct, assuming the user is careful and diligent. The other 1/2 isn't even close to that...

Above you said (about it being insecure) "Not any more so than other OS's" which is completely incorrect. Win7 has alot of security features and 8 even more on top of that. Are they bulletproof? Hell no, but alot more so than XP ever was.


RE: Not for anyone
By Motoman on 4/23/2014 5:44:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Not any more so than other OSs, to be honest. And if you've been keeping current with patches and antivirus/antimalware, it's fine.


Don't try to cherry pick out of the rest of the statement. Does Win7/8 have more built-in security features? Sure. But if you stay current on XP, it's fine.

That is *all* I am saying.


RE: Not for anyone
By retrospooty on 4/24/2014 11:45:11 AM , Rating: 2
Ya, that can be said, but you have to give credence to the other point that most users aren't careful or educated enough to stay clean on XP and will eventually get infected and corrupt it if they are using the internet.

For the normal user, there are good reasons to upgrade. Come on, its 13 years old this Oct.


RE: Not for anyone
By compuser2010 on 4/25/2014 4:03:10 AM , Rating: 3
Thanks for posting. Vista was slow (pre-SP1) and a RAM-guzzler, but it indeed had massive improvements to security over XP. It brought Windows' security up-to-date in so many ways.

I believe the following is a useful article on the subject:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/security/archive/2013/0...

I have a friend who has been using a computer with Windows Vista on it since at least 2010. He has never had any complaints about slowdown, viruses or any other problems on it.

In December, 2012, I installed Windows 8 on a relative's computer. She's on the internet all the time, without anti-virus software, and regularly has long sessions at her computer (4-8 hours, daily). It still is just as fast and responsive as when I first installed it.

On her old computer with Windows XP (after fresh install, security updates, etc.), it would slow down after 3 months.

There's nothing wrong with XP. It's just a different operating system from a different era in computing. Windows Vista was truly a new operating system (NT 6.0 to XP's NT 5.1) and brought Windows into the 21st century with security and areas beyond the subject of security.


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki