kurttrail wrote:
> why bother RTM'ing XPSP3 at all, if manufacturers can only sell it
> with a new computer for another couple of months?
>
> Is this a hint at MS prolonging XP's shelf life yet again? Not
> that I think that that would be a bad thing.
>
> Let's hear your opinions.
Same question, different phrasing...
Why not RTM Windows XP SP3?
Doesn't it follow the same schedule as previous 'near end of life' service
packs?
Example:
- Windows 2000 SP4 released on June 26, 2003 and Windows 2000 Update Rollup
#1 for SP4 released on June 28, 2005... Windows 2000 stopped main support
on June 30, 2005, 2 days after the Rollup was released. I don't recall when
Microsoft stopped 'selling' Windows 2000.
So my question can be expanded to 'why would the 8 days bother anyone?'
Also 'what is the big deal?' - the OEMs will decide what the OEMs want to
do. They sell their products, sure they have agreements with Microsoft, but
they could make all sorts of decisions and changes and such if they want -
but I doubt they see the point either.
Welcome to the wonderful world of computing and technology. Things change
and they change quickly. Truthfully - the change from Windows XP to Windows
Vista was longer than most prior changes took (look how long Windows XP was
out before the official release of Windows Vista and compare it to Windows
95, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP...) Just like people
moving from Windows 2000 to Windows XP - some will choose not to move
immediately (and may think they have chosen never to move.)
For those who want to keep Windows XP alive - they will (people, not
necessarily large OEMs) and for those who want to move on, they will. The
people who still run Windows 9x and Windows 2000 are proof of that. Windows
2000 is nearly 3 years past its EOL date, yet questions about it still come
up on these newsgroups - and Windows XP's EOL date is still like several
years away. Most people will do what most people have always done - fight
change until they cannot fight anymore.
A computer is *not* just the OS. Major component, yes. So's the video card
for those that can see and the sound card for those who cannot see but can
hear. Not getting far without the processor and memory for anyone. The
motherboard gives it all a place to mix and mingle and the power supply -
without it - none of it matters. So the manufacturers (OEM agreements or
not) have choices. Individuals have choices.
Some manufacturers (video, sound, network, motherboard, etc) have made
theirs already and may not be making official drivers (or updated drivers)
for any Windows OS before Vista. Some of the OEMs that put all those parts
together to sell you a Dell/IBM/Gateway/HP/etc may have also made their
choice. It may/may not be based on an agreement with Microsoft - even
though that would most likely be in the mix.
*shrug*
In the end - things will happen either way. Nothing will stay stagnant.
Either Windows XP's 'date of final purchase from Microsoft direct' will be
extended or it won't (betting on the latter.) Either more people will go to
Windows Vista or more people will stick with Windows XP (betting the former
for consumer market, the latter on the enterprise market.) I will either
have a ham sandwich for lunch or I won't (betting the latter - it's a good
bet - you should get in on it.) In the end, they are all about the same
importance. ;-)
--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Linear Mode
