Microsoft just made millions off a 14-year-old product it shut down a year ago - XP
Ron Czapala
Posts: 2,418
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/microsoft-just-made-millions-off-191937774.html
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2939435/government-it/us-navy-paid-millions-to-stay-on-windows-xp.html
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2939435/government-it/us-navy-paid-millions-to-stay-on-windows-xp.html
To Microsoft, Windows XP is like a gift that keeps on giving.
Even though Microsoft stopped selling Windows XP in 2010 and completely shut down support updates a little over a year ago, it's continuing to make money off of it.
It's because there's still a huge customer base using Windows XP and they're willing to dole out millions of dollars for custom security support.
The latest customer to sign a Windows XP support deal is the US Navy.
On Tuesday, the Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) closed a $9.1 million contract with Microsoft that guarantees continued custom support for security updates on the 100,000 workstations still using Windowx XP, Office 2003, Exchange 2003, and Windows Server 2003.
The full contract could extend to 2017, and be worth up to $30.8 million, IDG News added.
Comments
Shameful.
-Phil
The fact they hung on this long to XP tells me they hated the current offerings from Redmond and really don't want to migrate to them.
The absurdity of all of this is that these loyal users of unsupported and illegal XP just can't seem to accept the idea that they might legally use Linux with as good or better support. The problems seem to be that the users don't want to fully understand their OS, desire the ablity to just install and use, and seem to think that because 'everybody does it' -- so it is okay to abscond commercial software.
Of course, they have had huge on-going problems with security and the anti-virus threat. But they seem happy to tediously reload their illegal XP (which can take hours) rather than go to a more durible and easy to manage free OS.
Personally I think Windows 2000 was their best OS. XP wasn't quite as good, but it added USB 2.0 support so it had that going for it. However I agree that every OS since, and that foul Office Ribbon bar have been worse. It's almost like they're trying to convince users to jump ship.
About three years ago I was working with an engineer from the MS WPF group on a bug their support team escalated for me. I asked him what kind of feedback MS had received on the ribbon bar? He said it is uniformly negative feedback, but the ribbon bar isn't going anywhere. I was really stunned.
Some people just want the user-experience and nothing more. Plug and Play. Not everyone aspires to know their OS inside-out. // linux-user
Every day I get the recurring cries for help: Why doesn't this video play? Can you update Silver Light or Java or FLASH? Why did my computer do that it's never done that before? It won't boot?...
working in Windows working on Debian. I think they have made their last dollar from me.
Since Linux allows me to go into NTFS file partitions, I use Libre Office to access my old documents. Nonetheless, I still have all the BS2 stuff and Hydra stuff that is Windows dependent available if I ever go back that way.
I just figured dual boot was the way to go. At first it was because I was unsure that Linux would be good enough. Now it just provides an immediate alternative OS if my Linux ever goes down.
Diagnostically, a dual boot will tell you very quickly if you have a software problem or a hardware problem, and it can tell you a whole lot more as your knowledge grows. I am not willing to throw away the Windows provided with the computers I purchased. I just prefer not to use it as you end up having to buy so much more to get a useful tool set. Even then, Windows remains the preferred target of hackers due to its demographic dominance. I like being off their radar.
++++++++++
It seems extremely odd that MS officially ened support for XP, but is willing to provide paid support for it indefinitely. And it is even more odd that their clients for such support actually include the US government in general and the US military in particular.
I suppose that the USA plan for data security is to bury data in obscurity and confusion to the point that nobody but MS might really know what is going on.
Let's see......
Us Govt: "Hey, Microsoft, here's $9.1 Million can you provide security updates for us? It could be worth $30.8 M over three years!"
MSoft: "OK, I guess.'
Doe$n't $eem $range to me.
I won't speak to the government/military item.
Even when I was doing side jobs for friends, Windows itself was never a issue, 90% of the calls were basically not knowing how to use a particular app. Very easy work.
Is it just that it runs slower and can't search as well? Or did the NSA have MS insert the means to snoop? A lot of ugly disappointing distrustful ideas come to mind, but at least we have Linux to resolve the fears.
I don't think that MS is getting this work just because they paid a lot of corporate taxes over the years.....
That was exactly my reaction to Win8...to the point that I spent a few minutes trying to plumb the origins of Microsoft's death wish. It's almost like they've acquired a strange corporate disease.
Maybe I am a bit cynical, but have you ever noticed that when there is a new Windows release, the older Windows versions seem to slow down?
Perhaps I should not allow updates once there is a newer release???
OS/X updates, OTOH, are okay and have been without issues so far.
-Phil
I have seen Windows updates make machines unusable company wide. Over the lunch break, which was fun...
I have seen Debian updates make machines unusable until I fix them.
OK, Mac I have no experience with. But trusting updates to always work seems a bit dodgy to me.
No, it tells us that it is very difficult to change the spec. I had a gig where the aircraft was being phased out, but still flying (combat missions) and they were UPGRADING to WXP (from W98se). This was only because the spec'd hardware and software (486 PC with W98) could not be sourced (from the specified supplier). So a new proven OS + workstation was chosen. It cost millions to do the upgrade, and not because of the PC + WXP; but rather the fact that EVERYTHING had to be redone. The new equipment was so much better than the previous, all the specs had to be redone. And retested. And recertified. A gravy job, but there are several old pilots that are very happy to be flying, and not nose down in the ground.
They MIGHT have hated the current offerings from Redmond, maybe, but they didn't have the chance.
"For a user interface to be effective, it has to be consistent. Consistant is not what the ribbon is about. It suffers from large buttons, small buttons. Buttons labelled with words, buttons labeled with icons. Sometimes what appears to be a button is only a text label; clicking it does nothing. At least AutoCAD's ribbon is customizable and turn-off-able; Microsoft was not sufficiently innovative to figure that out for the ribbon in its line of software." Source: http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2008/05/why-the-ribbon-is-wrong.html
My particular pet peave are the little drop down menus on the ribbon that are indicated by the tiny (easily overlooked) downward triangles. Oh the huge manatee I hate the ribbon.
The full contract could extend to 2017, and be worth up to $30.8 million, IDG News added.
So $10m per year, 100,000 workstations, that's $100 per year per workstation. I wonder what it costs MS in workload.
Who the hell relies on their OS to be secure? Third party software and hardware take care of that. Some regulatory agency put pressure on them, just like all the MSPs did with XP EOL and HIPAA. Spare no expense on cyber security ONLY if you're worth hacking. The rest of us can get away with almost anything.
My solution has been lock everything down. Internet access is available on BYOD wifi networks. Sorry you can't cut and paste but it isn't worth being exploited on any level!
Of course they can then make similar deals with other organizations and hence get money for nothing. Business as usual! Almost nothing. Bit of back porting of bug fixes. That would be everyone who uses a computer I guess. Given that most of them run an OS now a days.
Yes, I have noticed this going way back. MS seems to have always pushed the customer along, and it seems one can't just update the OS -- there are always some snags that start a new round of hardware purchases as well.
I am not a fan of planned obsolescense driving the econony. I very much believe that quality products should be allowed to survive as long as they serve well. How else can a capitalistic society evolve with healthy innovation?
Clearly if products were long lived that would slow down the rate of churn and hence opportunity to make profit.
My conclusion is that "capitalistic society" is a contradiction in terms. In fact Margaret Thatcher, Britain's chief capitalist of the 1980's, agrees with me. She said outright "there is no such thing as society".
Anyway, yes, I agree, things should be lasting a lot longer than they do.
The full quote is opposite of what you surmise: "There is no such thing as society. There is living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate."
I'm no Thatcher apologist, but you've misquoted her out of context. She clearly meant anyone, including capitalists, could rise to the occasion to assist this fabric of the population others call society. Her aim was to take government out of the equation as solver of all things.
So in the context of this thread, we have a company who has done what every manufacturer has done, they've replaced old product with new. The government -- not just the US, but every government -- regularly spends *billions* every year on replacement parts for products no longer manufactured. They spend more on these parts because they're not in regular production. This is a known and accepted practice in logistics. Windows XP is not in production, so it's no surprise its replacement parts, in the form of updated code, carry a higher price. Given the cost of replacing all these systems -- hundreds of millions -- gobment is coming out ahead. MS could make more by following Nancy Reagan's lead, and just say no. The only solution is upgrade. (Unsaid in that original article is that the gobment, like most large business, pay MS extra in support even for the latest OS. So those numbers are skewed to begin with.)
So actually, Microsoft is playing its capitalist card quite poorly. They're walking away from the real money.
No haven't quoted out of context. That is a different quote. I don't know which one came first but your version sounds like it's been sanitized by political poet, "...living tapestry..." blah, blah, blech. Adding those few extra original words that surround my quote does not make it any better:
"They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours." – in an interview in Women's Own in 1987
At best these statements are self-contradictory: "no such thing as society" vs "look after our neighbours". OK, which is it then?
At worst it's a statement that we are going wash our hands of health care, education, the elderly, the penal system, and so. Which of course is an ongoing project in Britain to this day.
"Taking government out of the equation" was never on the agenda. It's intrusion into all our lives has only been increasing over the years.
OK, that's it for political observations from me for a while....
You referenced her phrase related to capitalism, and it's wrong. She firmly believed it was capitalistic endeavors, among other things, but not government, that answered the needs of the people.
I'm not actually sure why you even brought it up as it has nothing to do with Microsoft of Windows XP. I just wanted to clear up a common misquote.
@Loopy, I'd hardly say XP is superior, but everything is in the eye of the beholder. Whenever I have to go back and use an XP machine -- which I must maintain for consulting purposes -- I miss the features I've grown fond of in Win7. I'm not yet up to 8 (or 10), so I don't know how it compares, but I'd wager as it's been reasonably successful in the market, at least some people like it. Based on the percentage of Win7, they must love that version.
MS is a brutal monopolistic organ that used every dirty trick in the book to get where they are. Every company that cut a back room deal with them has regretted it. I remembered how they muscled various application houses when IBM released OS/2 2.0 so they wouldn't port their flagship products to it. Well they did as MS said, then MS strangled them into oblivion.
And they don't care about innovation, security or maintaining product lines that people like. Why should they when they are a monopoly?
The only program I really need local is the remote desktop application to connect to various server in Germany. I usually get a new computer from Walmart when one older one gets slow, dirty or loud. I spend $200-$450 and am up and running in about one hour, Thus I phased out XP a long time ago. Hated vista and have now W7 and W8.1 running local. No problems at all.
But - I do not do much local besides browsing and YouTube. All my work and important stuff is somewhere out there on dedicated servers. At my Employers site - well - things are different. There are a lot of old systems still running. The oldest one I can think of is the 'scanrechner' or 'scancomputer' needed for some old application and scanner. Still WinNT. There is also one Win2000 server beta (MSDN) from 1996(?) in production. Running strong, now as virtual machine one some newer hardware.
A couple of W2003 server bound to be upgraded/replaced by W2008 server. A couple of W2008 server bound to be upgraded/replaced by W2012. Basically this is a continuous process and it is hard to keep pace with Microsoft there. Same with workstations and software versions. Still running >20 XP clients. Some 35+ Win7, Some Win8.1, some already W10. A mix of Office 2003 and Office 2010. Tons of different browser and browser versions.
And this is just a small company. Around 100+ people. But this constantly upgrading, updating, changing of the work environment takes a lot of time of all people involved, Time taken away from them doing there job.
This includes me. Sure, Visual Studio is quite consistent between versions, but still you need to change/upgrade your projects, build server, whatever.
Now Microsoft announced they will 'upgrade' their version cycle for office and other major applications from 2 years to a 1 year cycle. Slowly I start to panic. When can we get any work done in the IT department, spending all our time with upgrades/updates/support for new versions?
This is really getting out of hand...
Mike