URGENT If you operate Windows XP please read

[NIN]

XP has long been scheduled for 'no further support' , it doesn't mean that third parties will not make updates available, XP SP3 has long been considered the most stable & favourite of many. As a matter of course I've only ever allowed the likes of Iobit Advanced System Care to make any recommended updates, mostly for fear of installing the dreaded 'Genuine Copy' alert . Avast & regular Malware scans have kept me from corruptions thus far. (plus avoiding too many dodgy sites)
I'd still be using XP myself if I hadn't built a much better system this summer (Quad Core 78LMT-2SP, currently running Win7 Ultimate) but I occasionally hook-up the old pooter to the web & prefer many of it's controls & systems as it's familiar to me.

Originally Posted by buttsie

At worst XP users should stop surfing while signed in with Full administrator rights when they dont need to be.

That's something I would have never even considered - Thanks buttsie

[MrInBetween]

Originally Posted by bigbobnobody

It seems completely asinine to think, that as of May 1st any XP's are at an extreme risk, when the day before they weren't. If that was the case, then XP's have been at risk a helluva long time before that.

There's an interesting argument for why the risk might increase put forward here:

Originally Posted by Greenman

http://blogs.technet.com/b/security/...port-ends.aspx

The danger is that whenever Microsoft releases a patch for another version of Windows, the patch unavoidably reveals the nature of the vulnerability that it's designed to fix. If this vulnerability is also present in XP, due to common code, then XP has had it pointed out to the hackers, without any fix being provided.

Originally Posted by buttsie

Ironic thats windows updates still continue to cause users of all versions angst every now and then

The latest a few days ago has been locking up peoples computers for hours on end

Microsoft to fix Windows XP update SVCHOST redline issue “soon”

http://www.askwoody.com/2013/microso...redline-issue/

Off-topic, but we're still running an XP machine, and it seems to have been suffering from this problem before the current update. However, the patch mentioned in the article appears to have fixed it (fingers crossed).

[a435843]

I would still not be running XP after April, even with good, up-to-date virus scanners & alternative browsers, running in user mode, because of the zero-day exploit issue. In other words, it is unknown if there have been Windows XP vulnerabilities found, not even involving Internet Explorer, that have been "hoarded" by hackers, ready to unleash the exploits after Microsoft has committed to stop fixing the vulnerabilities after April.

Secondly, it is not necessary to upgrade to Windows 8, or even new hardware. On the operating system side, Windows 7 is sufficient for several years to come, and Linux distributions like Linux Mint & Ubuntu are options. Several things to keep in mind, though:

• Linux is only a good choice if you're only doing the basics, web browsing, e-mail, video/audio playing, etc. If you're editing video or photos (and aren't already familiar with GIMP), or running other Windows-only software, Linux probably won't work for you. Also, Linux is a little harder to install and get running successfully than Windows, I've found, so unless you have an Intermediate-level experience with computers, stay with the Microsoft Empire.
• If you have a computer that goes back prior to about 2008, an upgrade or a basic Linux distro is necessary at this point. Even 2009-era laptops can run Windows 7, though not Vista. In terms of system bloat & resource usage, Windows 7 is very roughly in similar territory as XP, and a bit better than Vista. If you have a computer that's just a couple of years old, upgrading to Windows 7 may be an option. I just finished upgrading a '09 netbook to Windows 7 and it runs well (just boots slowly).

[9876543210]

Anybody else noticed that its not exactly easy any longer to upgrade from Win 7 Home Premium to Pro or Ultimate? The MS anytime upgrade now goes straight to Win 8.1.

I'm trying to help a friend upgrade and finding it a bit of a bitch. Win 7 is more expensive than 8 and you can't find 7 in the stores anymore (but they'll order it for you). My friend can't go to 8 as she's using Adobe CS3 and can't afford to upgrade that so it looks like we're going to keep one of her machines XP Pro with CS3. Her other 6 core machine looks like will only be good for getting on the web. Jeez, she spends all that money on a speedy machine and its only good for the web?

[buttsie]

Originally Posted by NIN

XP has long been scheduled for 'no further support' , it doesn't mean that third parties will not make updates available, XP SP3 has long been considered the most stable & favourite of many. As a matter of course I've only ever allowed the likes of Iobit Advanced System Care to make any recommended updates, mostly for fear of installing the dreaded 'Genuine Copy' alert . Avast & regular Malware scans have kept me from corruptions thus far. (plus avoiding too many dodgy sites)
I'd still be using XP myself if I hadn't built a much better system this summer (Quad Core 78LMT-2SP, currently running Win7 Ultimate) but I occasionally hook-up the old pooter to the web & prefer many of it's controls & systems as it's familiar to me.

That's something I would have never even considered - Thanks buttsie

Theres an in depth tutorial about everything to do with setting up a limited rights guest account below in response to the question

guest account protects from virus?

Its not a silver bullet and does have some downsides but its a good over view of an alternative way if you plan to keep using XP

There are other links to useful privacy & security subjects

Anonym zu www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/350147/guest-account-protects-from-virus/

[DTravel]

Originally Posted by Greenman

If the major computer magazines talk about XP being discontinued and urge people not to go online next year if they still have it on their machines I listen mate, because 9/10 times they are usually spot on.

Most major computer magazines are dependent on computer company ads for their income and as a result parrot what they are told to say so they can continue to stay in business. This is also why you should not trust reviews in gaming magazines.

[bigbobnobody]

So just one quick question.....
Is there something particular about Windows XP, that sets it apart from
the OS's before it, that so much fuss is being made? I don't recall near
this much "evil demons" being forecast, to those users of 95,98, or Windows
ME, or Windows 2000 users as they were phased out of the Windows Updates
menu.

[a435843]

Originally Posted by bigbobnobody

So just one quick question.....
Is there something particular about Windows XP, that sets it apart from
the OS's before it, that so much fuss is being made? I don't recall near
this much "evil demons" being forecast, to those users of 95,98, or Windows
ME, or Windows 2000 users as they were phased out of the Windows Updates
menu.

XP has been out since 2002, and since the first service pack, has been quite stable. So, it has been running successfully for 11 years. That's a lot of time to build up a huge base of users. In fact, almost one-quarter of all computers on the Internet, according to StatCounter Global Stats, is still running XP.



This really is an interesting chart, given the lack of popularity of so many other OS's that everyone thinks is the future. Anyway, there's another reason...back in 2008, a number of PC vendors released models of small, cheap laptops, called "Netbooks". They were released with Linux, and were popular for a time, and I still like them and use them. They're light, portable, and since I usually do some work when I'm out, not just web browsing (or other tablet-type tasks), the keyboard is nice.

The Evil Empire saw the threat quickly, and re-released XP, in the midst of the Vista debacle (it's one after another with them), to thwart the Linux threat. They were successful, but it put XP on a lot of netbooks, laptops, and even desktops (the "nettops" are still good video streamers), as late as 2010. That's when Windows 7 Starter Edition started being installed widely on small laptops & netbooks (it was cripple-ware until 2009, with a 3 applications-running-at-once limit).

So, since:

• XP has been a good OS for a long time, with a large, established base of people, a lot of whom have software that only runs on XP,
• plus the fact that there's still a lot of not-super-old hardware running XP,
• plus the fact that there's a lot more competition in the OS space this time around, creating confusion and FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt),

hence, the significant attention & dislocation of the stopping of support of Windows XP.

[GallifreyMan]

Question: My regular laptop, (not this one I hasten to add,) is infected. It obviously needs going in for a full system clean. It has XP on it (home edition). Should I have XP reinstalled on it or wait / choose another os? I'm not computer literate, so any replies, can you please state in "idiot speak."
Thanks.
GFM.

[9876543210]

GallifreyMan,

Originally Posted by GallifreyMan

Question: My regular laptop, (not this one I hasten to add,) is infected. It obviously needs going in for a full system clean. It has XP on it (home edition). Should I have XP reinstalled on it or wait / choose another os? I'm not computer literate, so any replies, can you please state in "idiot speak."
Thanks.
GFM.

The first question you need to answer is; can the old laptop handle a newer OS? Win 7 or 8, for the most part, really need four Gb RAM and about 40 Gb of hard drive space to operate correctly. So if the old machine is maxed out at 2 Gb RAM with an 80 Gb HD then I'd just stick with XP. You might be able to stick a 160 Gb HD in the laptop and Win 7 or 8 will disable some features in order to work a bit faster.

There is a MS website out there where you can download a small applet to tell you if your machine can handle the newer OS's. Can't remember where at the moment.