is my cynicism getting the better of me?

[bazz]

Today, I was notified of numerous windows XP updates. All showed to be security updates and I have it set to tell me about them rather than to automatically install them.

My cynicism makes me wonder if at some point these 'sucurity' updates will affect XP such that the only logical solution would be to change to vista or other new windows program. At some point, surely, wouldn't it be in M$'s interest to make me change over?

What better way to make me update than to use a security update, paradoxically, to reduce the security of XP?

Anyone got a knowledgable viewpoint? I don't want to switch to a new M$ OS. Next time I upgrade, it will be to a flavour of linux or, even, to a mac but I haven't time to begin the challenege of either's learning curve, just yet.

bazz

[Apostropartheid]

Windows XP is in extented support (read: life support) mode till 2014, at which point Microsoft won't provide any more security updates, but even then, community fixes still exist, like the "SP5" of Windows 2000. They don't go back and cripple former OSes; rather, they rely on the new features and constant support of whatever their new OS is in order to provide incentive to upgrade. Anyway, most people don't buy an OS upgrade, instead getting the OEM copy with a new hardware cycle. So yes, I believe your cynicism is getting the better of you.

[oracleguy]

Usually it is when Microsoft finally EOLs an OS and stops supplying new updates is when you really need to switch. In 2014, if Windows 7 is still the most current Windows version available, it will be much like XP today. It will be pretty ironed out and the hardware available at the time will far exceed what it needs. Considering double digit amounts of processor cores and gigabytes of memory are closing in fast, I'd imagine it will happen a lot sooner than 2014.

I don't think anyone needs to worry about them intentionally leaving security holes, well at least any more so than they do already.

[bazz]

Thank you both for your replies.

I don't think anyone needs to worry about them intentionally leaving security holes, well at least any more so than they do already.

I wasn't thinking they might do that: I was wondering more along the lines if whether they would update XP such that windows might freeze more or crash, or do things unpredictably which would frustrate the user into an upgrade. OK, so those aren't the best examples of what would likely be a more subtle approach but, I think you get what I mean.

Anyway I take your point that I am likely being overly cynical :)

bazz