Not the main reason but one of the reasons I want to keep a true WinXP OS on my machine is not for online activities. The OS is mostly irrelevant as long as your browser of choice is still working well with the older Windows OSs but my interest is still being able to use ‘legacy’ software, particularly specific games.
Some of these are difficult enough to get running even using WinXP with its earlier Windows versions compatiblity mode, often requiring specialist patches created by enthusiasts long after the developers stopped support. So having WinXP still available is surely the best way of keeping retro gaming as simple as possible because either you’re using the OS the games where designed for or the necessary WinXP compatible patches and fixes have long been available.
I wonder if you could get charged for purposely acting grossly negligent by using Windows XP after the end of support with internet access and thus having a high chance of becoming a victim to a botnet which would be used against others even if the state is only temporarily due to kiosk software or image backups.
Would banks or insurances still pay and/or refund you for the damage you caused or has been caused to you if you have that much layers of additional protection on an outdated operating system or would they rather pay if you only have the basic protection (Windows Firewall + up-to date router, Windows updates, browser, flash player, adobe reader and java if you’re using them) on a still supported OS?
I tend to think it would be the latter case. That’s why I would advice everyone to stop listening to “security experts” who claim to be able to make XP unexploitable even after the end of support. While I can’t see the future, I wouldn’t risk it.
You can get some games and, of course, emulators working on any Windows OS but I was talking about specific games. Anyone into PC gaming knows that even when designed for a particular OS system many PC games are often released with significant problems. There can be a lot of trouble involved getting stuff to work and it often relies on patches and fixes, as I said, created by enthusiasts which may not, for instance, work on 64 bit OSs. That is why maintaining WinXP 32 bit OS, if not as your main OS, but in a dual boot or virtual environment is a very sensible idea if these sorts of concerns are relevant to your interests.
“AVAST will continue to support Windows XP users by creating protection modules and detections to cover vulnerabilities and other security problems for at least the next three years.”
Do you or someone you know still use #WindowsXP? Microsoft will cease support on April 8, but never fear, AVAST will continue to protect you against security threats for at least 3 years.
To increase your protection, we suggest using Google Chrome as your browser. Chrome will also continue to support XP users.
If we’re going to quote, let’s quote some other parts too:
It was released in August 2001, and in less than one month, on April 8, 2014, Microsoft will cease to provide support and security updates. The security updates patch vulnerabilities that could be exploited by malware and help to keep users and their data safe. Because of the continued use of XP in homes, businesses, schools, hospitals, and ATMs around the world, this has the potential to create massive security issues.
The end of Microsoft support means you will no longer get security updates or new support information updates for Windows – for free. Very large customers will have an option to subscribe to a program called “Custom Support,” an after-retirement support contract, but this is not available for SMBs or individual home users.
“I think the users do not sufficiently understand the cessation of support for XP,” said Mladen Dumitraskovic from StudioNexT in Serbia. “They need to consider the possible consequences and seek appropriate solutions.[...]"
Of course, it’s in the interest of most people to prevent massive bot infections, however I don’t like the encouragement for using an unsupported operating system. I doubt that Avast would be willing to pay even a paying XP customer in case he or she would get infected even if that state would be only temporarily due to kiosk software or image backups reverting to a fresh state every morning and the infections would either lead to legal actions against the user or to financial damage due to online banking or to data stealing.
All software we use is “at risk”. EULA even says so, as in ‘not warrented for any use’
I don’t think Avast is encouraging us to stay on XP, just being realistic instead.
Problems created due to the software (bluescreens of death, freezings, etc.) are not equal to problems not prevented by the software, but promised to prevent.
However, the most quoted part from the blog so far, might imply that Avast would be able to cover for all vulnerabilities:
“AVAST will continue to support Windows XP users by creating protection modules and detections to cover vulnerabilities and other security problems for at least the next three years.”
Some people here actually believe that by installing Avast and using Chrome (or any other still supported browser), they would fix every security issue in Windows XP after the end of support. That’s the frightening part.
Another is that there are so many people here who would rather recommend some “security software” than to plea for prudence to at least switch to a live Linux system for online access and playing all those retro-games offline.
Since using XP also means that you can only run IE 8, the suggestion is to runa browser that’s more secure and
still being updated. Chrome is one suggestion but, any other browser that still supports XP and is still a browser that’s continuously
being updated would certainly be safer than using IE 8.
Does anyone except those who know no better choose to use EI except when they’re forced too?
Having said that I’d use it in preference to Chrome unless I was paid huge sums of money and had written, witnessed confirmation from Google that I hadn’t signed away my life and soul in the process.
I am fortunate enough as to have relative who is extremely computer-savvy. Also I am completely happy with my XP programs for use ‘internally’.
So I bought a (legit) copy of Win 7; and for a supply of beer while working, he split the drive into two partitions and reduced the XP partiton to half the size, installed Win7 on the other and diasbled the XP modem. Apparently this removed it from outside contact to the world and leaves me using a system (Win7) which is close enough to XP as to be an easy move for all outside contact.
It may not be the purist’s solution; but, in my opinion Linux is too fiddly for a personal machine, and it avoids having to have anything to do with the appalling mess that is Win 8/8.1. If the current project Win9 creates a sensible environment, then if my machine could handle it that may be a next step.
I guess you haven’t followed: http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=85094.0 to realize that with very little
adjustment, the latest version of Windows can be just the same as Windows 7 but, quite a bit improved in many fronts.
Thanks Bob, but I really just want to use my operating system, not poke it until it works.
It appears that MS techies forgot that not everyone is a smartphone/touch screen user, until the howls went up; and as ‘bodging’ is rarely a good thing in any field of Design, I prefer to wait until a re-think is carried out.
