For Windows XP SP2 users:

For any other die-hards out there still running XP SP2 (like me), do you plan to move to SP3 when security updates are no longer offered for SP2 (on July 13, 2010)? If not, will you remain with SP2 or move to Windows 7?

 

Still with sp2 myself. Once the time comes I will migrate to sp3.

I've been putting that aside since I need to also schedule some major system maintenance to that same occasion. Meaning moving and resizing partitions etc. so I might as well do clean reinstall with XP having SP3 integrated.

I can't migrate from XP myself. Motherboard being too old and it doesn't even have Vista drivers available. That kinda narrows down my options.

When I have money (aka paying job) I will likely buy the parts for new PC that will run Win7. But that is a distant dream as I spent some years as student and then graduated to full unemployment ... (I learned to lesson hard way: you don't do a thing with BBA if you don't know anyone! All the jobs go to people with connections ...)

 

SP3 doesnt change much so its a low risk service pack.
you should already have pretty much all what sp3 offers so it makes no sence not to use SP3.

 

Agreed

 

For me, it's the principle.
Microsoft is demanding that I install on my computer updates I do not want or need.

From the beginning, I have kept my system patched but because I don't use Messenger or Outlook Express, I haven't downloaded/installed updates for those applications.

I also don't use .net framework.

I will see how it goes without updates following the cut-off; from there, who knows ?
I have to wonder about the overall effectiveness of the updates and hotfixes as even after eight or so years of patches from M$, XP users get hacked by the thousands every day.
I realize it has (at least) as much to do with user actions as with recognized vulnerabilities so with that in mind I will continue to sandbox/virtualize, use Keyscrambler, employ LUA and SRP, tighten my browser as much as is reasonable, and maintain a viable backup strategy if all else fails.

Should I find that is not enough I will only then reconsider, but since November of last year I have been surfing without having an antivirus application of any kind or third party firewall installed.
About every three days, I will wipe the hard drive and re-image.
Prior to wiping the HDD, I download either Avira or Avast as well as A-Squared free and also scan with Malwarebytes.
To-date, I have not found malware.
Perhaps I'm just lucky.

 

From what I remember SP3 caused quite a few problems when it came out. One reason i haven't installed it yet; along with the fact that I had always kept up with updates with the exception of the ones that I had purposefully chosen to avoid.

 

but the security fixes should be available till 2014

http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=208800494
http://www.e-typedesign.co.uk/canada/windows/windows-xp/future.aspx

 

I haven't checked those articles, but the security upgrades till 2014 will be for SP3 only. All support for SP2 ends now (or very shortly, anyway).

That's assuming, of course, MS didn't make a last-minute change in plans that I've missed.

(Edit) I've now gone back and read both articles, and they're both a little misleading since neither one refers to the SP ... the second one's particularly to blame since it's from MS themselves.
But it's been published all over the internet that MS extended support (i.e., security updates only) for XP will be available for SP3 only after this summer.

 

I'll remain with SP2, don't appear to require all that other stuff. Plus if everythings working fine, and i'm pretty well secure with my config and apps etc, who needs more Mbytes of code on disk and in memory etc, not me anyway

 

I'm staying with SP2 also,until I get my new gaming computer later on this year

 

Like many other posters I haven't bothered with SP 3 because, based on MS's own documentation, it doesn't offer anything I want/need. I was up to date with all Critical/Important patches before SP 3 and I have all the subsequent ones.

I also avoided it a) because I'm on dialup and the d/l would kill my connection and, b) I don't need .NET or Silverlight etc. (although I've since been told they aren't actually included in SP 3).

The thing that puzzles me most is why MS are willing to allow thousands (if not millions) of XP computers to go unpatched after July when one of their biggest problems must be the many that are already improperly patched due to user ignorance or because they are using 'illegal' copies of Windows. This reservoir of unpatched computers is storing and distributing spam and malware and anything that adds to their number would seem to be counter productive. Mine is a second hand computer and couldn't be upgraded, even if I wanted to.

Given the relative failure of Vista, MS must be anxious to push as many people as possible onto Windows 7 and the none too subtle pressure on XP users may be part of their strategy.

 

Unbelievable. ... in the time its taken to create this spam thread, you could of had it installed ;/

If your unsure... Image your system first.

 

@kC: a.) this is not a spam thread and b.) *proper* imaging solutions cost money.

(I was lucky enough to win something along those lines though.)

SP3 didn't introduce any features or improvements I would have needed, so why update as long as MS supports SP2? Just because there is newer SP out there is not good enough reason

 

From Microsoft:

The Microsoft Support Lifecycle policy requires that the product’s supported service pack be installed to continue to receive support (including security updates).

Service Pack Support Policy
When a new service pack is released, Microsoft will provide either 12 or 24 months of support for the previous service pack
Support for the previous service packs is either 12 or 24 months, varying according to the product family (for example, Windows, Office, Servers, or Developer tools)
Support timelines for service packs will remain consistent within the product family
Microsoft will publish specific support timelines for a previous service pack when the new service pack is released
When support for a product ends, support of the service packs for that product will also end. The product’s support lifecycle supersedes the service pack support policy

Nothing in their announcement last month inferred that the decision was negotiable.
As I see it, download and install SP-3 or do without any further updates.

 

Do you really wipe your hard drive every three days? Or you meant weeks or months? Or you're just restoring from a fresh image of your system?

(Personally, I wipe and reinstall from the provided OEM CD every two months or when time permits, though reactivation of software, e.g. MS Office is a real pain!)

 

The drive I was referring to is a Western Digital 40gb SATA which is one of four I use for "practice" installs.
I try lots of software.
A 40gb drive can be wiped and imaged in about 20 minutes, so these offer very quick turnaround.
After about three days, I feel the need for a fresh start, even when using CTM or Returnil.

My Primary drives are- in terms of installed applications- essentially permanent in their current state and I use them for archival purposes (photos, movies, music, etc.).

 

is so worse the sp3?

in short the security support is only for sp3 , i mean till 2014

but is so worse the sp3?

i will try to keep sp2

 

Vista is excellent. Some people wrongly have cast doubts on it because they were installing Vista on ancient machines (slow CPUs and low RAM), perhaps suitable for OSs like XP. For the record, as mentioned by Iodore post #3, if your XP SP2 is fully updated, to download SP3 would be fast and light.

I really can't see what the problem is. MS has a marketing strategy, it's not a 'non profit organization' and it will produce new OSs on a regular basis to make money. Do you expect car companies to produce always the same model?

XP SP2 will still work even unsupported, but in time its users won't be able to find new software which will be compatible (can't blame MS for that).

 

Very true.
By that time, I will (hopefully) be looking into Windows 12.

 

Good point. Looking at even older OSs, the latest release of avast (ver. 5) will marginally run on W2K, but the latter must be SP4 plus have a couple of other updates, plus you need to acquire and install a couple of DLLs which aren't included in the avast installer or in W2K itself but which are in later Win versions. I think they're related to VBasic functions.

 

I have been away from my computer for a couple of days and just got the chance to read all the replies so far. To everyone except kC, thank you for the replies. To kC, sorry you don't like the thread but I am not sure how it constitutes spam. If it is spam then why did you waste your time replying to it? Personally I never reply to spam.

 

a silly question

but xp sp2 + all the hotfixes should be (=) sp3 ,should not it?

thanks

 

http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/xp_sp3.asp