Microsoft killing Windows XP SP2, 2000 support

Microsoft has announced that they will be ending the product life cycle for Windows 2000 client and server support next year. Windows XP SP2 support will also come to an end, and are encouraging users to upgrade to Windows XP SP3, Windows Vista or preferably upgrade to Windows 7.

Microsoft has announced that on July 13, 2010, both Windows XP SP2 and Windows 2000 server and client support will come to an end. Microsoft is offering migration guides for free online to help upgrade from Windows XP and Windows 2000 to Windows 7, Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008 or Windows Server 2008 R2.

Windows XP currently holds more than 69% of the operating system market, while Vista currently holds 18.55% and Windows 7 with just over 5% and growing.

Users looking to upgrade to Windows Vista should know that Microsoft is set to support it up until 2012, and have not revealed plans to extend support further. Windows XP users will be happy to know Microsoft will be supporting Windows XP SP3 until 2014.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google introduces real time search

Next Story

A busy day for Google's Android

95 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

hmm...to upgrade or not.

At home running Windows 7, at work 2 PCs running XP, one SP3(fully updated) other SP2 (IE6!! ). The SP2 machine is controlled by our IT dept. so I can't touch it. The SP3 is my development machine, ideally updating to Win7 is an ideal choice but the chance of a catastrophic failure is not worth it, especially for time critical stuff..... maybe I should throw in another drive and dual boot???

Oh come on, quit complaining. It's thanks to these things that most of us have a job!!

OS's get updated, patched, re-developed and released again. It's a natural cycle in IT. Don't like it? Go into another business.

I have no idea why some people hate WinXP SP3. I LIKE IT! I even "slipstreamed" SP3 onto my XP installation so I don't have to install SP3 after installing WinXP.

Julius Caro said,
Why do people hate xp sp3? It's more like a cumulative patch than an actual full fledged SP

I haven't a clue. I really don't understand why someone would be so against a service pack in any event... It's really silly.

The company I work for is still very heavily dependant on Windows 2000 Terminal Services with plenty of 10 year old Dell Optiplex's running Windows 2000.

I hope some enterprising company will find a way of extending the life of Windows 2000. I'll be using XP until it gasps it's last breath. Windows 7 is an unwieldy resource hog like Vista. The only killer application is native booting of VHD's (Ultimate and Win2008 R2 only). The rest is total garbage.

boho said,
The company I work for is still very heavily dependant on Windows 2000 Terminal Services with plenty of 10 year old Dell Optiplex's running Windows 2000.

I hope some enterprising company will find a way of extending the life of Windows 2000. I'll be using XP until it gasps it's last breath. Windows 7 is an unwieldy resource hog like Vista. The only killer application is native booting of VHD's (Ultimate and Win2008 R2 only). The rest is total garbage.

Glad to know you have a firm grip on reality regarding operating systems. Oh wait..

Or you could purchase Extended Support from Microsoft directly alleviating these concerns.

Your misconceptions about Windows Vista/7 on the other hand, probably won't have a first party solution.

I run XP on all of my machines, except for the one 7 box. Most are still running SP2 because I cannot be arsed to update them. I will be doing so, however

Pc_Madness said,
Why couldn't IE 8 have been included as part of SP3. Solved so many problems.


Maybe for home users i'll agree: but organisations would still be stuck with their custom-written software designed and tested on IE6 only, and how much do we think they'll charge for IE8 compatibility for a system that was a made-to-measure order?

este said,
Eventually these companies will need to move on. When will they finally begin to do so?
At the last possible moment. Any expense that can be delayed will be.. And the more that go ahead of you the more you learn from their mistakes, and thus the cheaper it should be for you.

Ah I see we're still in the honeymoon period for 7. I personally built a new machine specifically for 7 64-bit, but only did so as my previous machine was just over 6 years old and ran XP throughout all the service packs and I loved it. I still run it on my parent's machine, my netbook and notebook and have almost zero problems (i say ALMOST).

XP is a very old OS but has been a very reliable OS to many people as well as businesses and I think we forget that even large companies (especially at the moment) do not have the finances to completely upgrade all machines within it's infrastructure plus whatever problems may arise due to botched rollout (lost takings etc) or just plain 'old hardware complications

Bad decisions will have been made (what's new?) where for some reason or another a particular ordering system/accouting system/database frontend was made custom for IE6, and is now a complete mess due to the flakiness of IE6. It was the best and most cost efficient solution at the time so erm go figure what else are they meant to do? use Firefox?

I'm really shocked at all the XP bashing, sure its an old OS but its still very quick and stable and it works. If its broken dont fix it I say. I'm still using it myself, don't get me wrong I love Windows 7 but I just find it hard to migrate because windows explorer is so different and some older apps dont work e.g nero 6 (before it was extremely bloated)

"Users looking to upgrade to Windows Vista should know that Microsoft is set to support it up until 2012, and have not revealed plans to extend support further." - this is only partially true, as the business and the enterprise versions have extended support until 2017.

out of 5 pcs only 1 is running 7 but the rest are still XP as there is nothing wrong with it and on one it runs a few games that would not run on 7 and the HDD is not big enough for 7 sides the user that uses it is happy with XP as are all the other XP's, no need to change to 7 well not yet but perhaps in 2014 a few may change over.

Wait, isn't server 03 support set to end in july 2010? Kinda pointless upgrading?

I have to say; server 03 is the best windows OS I've ever used, for both server and client uses, I love it!

n_K said,
Wait, isn't server 03 support set to end in july 2010? Kinda pointless upgrading?

I have to say; server 03 is the best windows OS I've ever used, for both server and client uses, I love it!

Ditto

What i find quite odd is that Microsoft confirm they will support xp sp3 until 2014 but there newer OS Vista only gets support till 2012.
Why would that be?

Riggers said,
What i find quite odd is that Microsoft confirm they will support xp sp3 until 2014 but there newer OS Vista only gets support till 2012.
Why would that be?

I believe that's Vista without Service Packs.

Assuming there will be a Vista SP3, it could get extended further.

It WILL get extended further, +Kirkburn. guaranteed!
especially that Vista SP2 was released in late April 2009.
support for Vista with SP1 will end earlier than expected; July 2011 as noted here.
Only support for the original/RTM release of Vista will end in 2012.

Ah, the good old Windows 2000... Took 3 service packs to get to a decent state, but damn, what a rock solid workstation OS! I loved the profissional way this OS looked and felt. I used to love when people would see I had Win2k runnign in my laptop and home computer, while they were all "happy" with win98se (also a good os tho). R.I.P. Windows 2000 Family! To bad I never got to use Windows 2000 DataCenter Edition, but hell, what a great OS! It showed to the world what AD was, and it was the beginning of the end for netbios. Anyone had other good experiences with this OS?

I loved Windows 2000 - before Windows 7 it was the best OS Microsoft had released. Solid, reliable and quite snappy at most times. I used it as my main OS on my home computer for years.

We still use XP at work but there are plans to upgrade to Vista/7 soon, but none of my friends still us XP, and most of them are not tech-geeks. I recently persuaded on of my mates to upgrade to Windows 7 after he saw me using it.

XP is long dead - there really is no reason to use it now that 7 is out. It's insecure, slow, buggy. I hate using XP after using Vista/7 for the past few years - its a step back in time too far for me!

Wait... so there's people on this site that are surprised that people are still running XP? Why would that possibly be? What logic is churning to make anyone think that most people are on Vista and 7? Most people still have XP because not everyone upgrades their OS when a new one comes out. Also, Vista and 7 tends to run like crap on older machines compared to newer ones. If you haven't upgraded your hardware and you bought your computer from HP or Dell and it came with XP with no Vista as an option then chances are you're running a Pentium 4 w/HT or WORSE with a MAX of 4 GB of RAM and not that super fast RAM either. These machines are not meant to be running either Vista or 7 for games (or even browsing too many pages - as I've seen on a friend's laptop recently) without upgrading the hardware.

This is highly noticeable to gamers for sure and not all people have money to upgrade their hardware.

As a note, I am running Windows 7-64 bit, but there's NO WAY that I'd tell anyone with XP to "upgrade" to 7 and especially not Vista until the support for XP was terminated. They'd be better off just buying a new machine.

KSib said,
As a note, I am running Windows 7-64 bit, but there's NO WAY that I'd tell anyone with XP to "upgrade" to 7 and especially not Vista until the support for XP was terminated. They'd be better off just buying a new machine.

I highly doubt you wouldn't recommend people upgrade a PC from an 8+ year old OS (that last got a Service pack in April 2008) until 2014, if it's in active use. Indeed, a lot of people still got XP on relatively recent purchases. Win7 isn't all that different to XP in terms of requirements.

Besides, I think when many people say "upgrade" they include getting a new PC in that definition.

Yeah. I still need to get my Win 7 installation disc. And I havent had much time yet to migrate over even if I did have the disc!

Kirkburn said,
I highly doubt you wouldn't recommend people upgrade a PC from an 8+ year old OS (that last got a Service pack in April 2008) until 2014, if it's in active use. Indeed, a lot of people still got XP on relatively recent purchases. Win7 isn't all that different to XP in terms of requirements.

Besides, I think when many people say "upgrade" they include getting a new PC in that definition.

In terms of hardware requirements, NO, +Kirkburn!

minimum hardware requirements to run Win7 according to the Windows 7 Requirements page:

*1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
*1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)
*16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)
*DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver

Heck, that hardware config is more than enough to run WinXP well but barely good enough to run Vista or Win7.

Why would they encourage someone to upgrade to VISTA?? That is like recommending someone who needs a heart transplant to the monkey heart rather than a human heart. all existing copies of VISTA should be destroyed, and not sold. Win7 is so superior! VISTA & Windows ME... both garbage in the line of MS OS's.

DJ Specs said,
Why would they encourage someone to upgrade to VISTA?? That is like recommending someone who needs a heart transplant to the monkey heart rather than a human heart. all existing copies of VISTA should be destroyed, and not sold. Win7 is so superior! VISTA & Windows ME... both garbage in the line of MS OS's.

*facepalm*

DJ Specs said,
Why would they encourage someone to upgrade to VISTA?? That is like recommending someone who needs a heart transplant to the monkey heart rather than a human heart. all existing copies of VISTA should be destroyed, and not sold. Win7 is so superior! VISTA & Windows ME... both garbage in the line of MS OS's.

Vista got a bad rap, but I don't know many people that actually know about OS's that would agree with that consensus... 7 is better in many areas, but Vista is hardly another ME...

About time. If you are running XP, you should at least be running SP3. Of course, with Windows 7 being as light as it is, there really isn't any reason to run XP anymore. Even my university is sending out notices that the upgrade to 7 is about to begin and they are killing off XP.

Chrono951 said,
About time. If you are running XP, you should at least be running SP3. Of course, with Windows 7 being as light as it is, there really isn't any reason to run XP anymore. Even my university is sending out notices that the upgrade to 7 is about to begin and they are killing off XP.

That's good to hear. Windows 7 is really nice.

mocax said,
SP3 removed the address bar from my taskbar....

damn them anti-trust people.... :(


Its there in windows 7, so i doubt anti-trust has anuthing to do with it...

I would recommend upgrading to XP SP3 AND installing latest updates , that have been released after that. Some of the updates fix problems that SP3 brought!

outspoken said,
I would recommend upgrading to XP SP3 AND installing latest updates , that have been released after that. Some of the updates fix problems that SP3 brought!

I would recommend being on top of Windows Updates in general... But people still on XP SP2 and fighting an update to SP3 clearly don't have much of an interest in updating their system unfortunately...

Now if only they'd kill support for IE6... That thing is one of the most annoying things I've ever had to deal with when designing websites.

Oh, c'mon. People have better things to do than install a speculative 'update' to their OS. Like playing solitaire. Not everyone, infact a whole lot of people, are uber-realtime-update fanatics. And for some, 'downloading' something called 'Service Pack 3' from the M$ website is something that wouldn't occur in their wildest dreams! The same people who turned off Automatic updates for one reason or another.

It *still* works, damnit!

XP still works, yes. Which is why these people should probably have Service Pack 3. You don't need to be uber-realtime either, Service Pack 3 was released months ago.

And the kind of people who should have AU off are system admins, who test then install, or the kind of people who should not be using the computer because they, or whoever set it up, has no sense of how much risk they are causing to themselves and their network.

billyea said,
XP still works, yes. Which is why these people should probably have Service Pack 3. You don't need to be uber-realtime either, Service Pack 3 was released months ago.

SP3 came out back in April 2008 actually.

Omkar, don't be an idiot.

billyea said,
And the kind of people who should have AU off are system admins, who test then install, or the kind of people who should not be using the computer because they, or whoever set it up, has no sense of how much risk they are causing to themselves and their network.

I turned-off automatic update because in the past updates that Microsoft posted ended up hosing computers. Do you remember?

Also, the AU service eats up lots of memory at times on the older machines

pezzonovante said,
Actually it should be: Windows 7 > Windows Vista > Windows 98 > Windows 95 > Windows XP > Windows ME

What a weird world where Win95 is better than XP.

pezzonovante said,
Actually it should be: Windows 7 > Windows Vista > Windows 98 > Windows 95 > Windows XP > Windows ME


Wow, really? Other than gaming support I think that any version of Windows NT (which includes 2000, XP and forward) is hands down better than any version based on the old DOS code. If you used your computer for gaming then I can see perfering Windows 95/98 over NT 4.0, but by the time 2000 and XP came out they had the leg-up on gaming too.

People who STILL have not updated to service pack 3 are the same morons that are running random executable files that appeared in a popup add informing them they are infected.

jim2006193 said,
My parents don't have SP3 and they aren't morons that open every exe file they come across...

Why don't they?

jim2006193 said,
Because I don't feel like doing the update then having to deal with the possibility of broken software.

I've upgraded a lot of software, and haven't seen anything break between XP SP2 and SP3... Not sure if anyone else has seen anything like this...

No, it just means after June 13, 2010 Win2k and WinXP SP2 are "frozen" so to speak and won't receive update anymore. You can continue to use them till the end of time should you wish.

June 2010. 6 months! Plenty of time still! Amusing though to see Windows 7 fanboys bashing XP every time they get a chance.

tuxplorer said,
June 2010. 6 months! Plenty of time still! Amusing though to see Windows 7 fanboys bashing XP every time they get a chance.



Why not? It's old, time to move up. AFter using 7 for over a month and counting I'd shoot myself before I went back to XP.

tuxplorer said,
June 2010. 6 months! Plenty of time still! Amusing though to see Windows 7 fanboys bashing XP every time they get a chance.

Inferiority complex much?

The reason Windows 7 users may bash XP is because, oh I don't know, it's worlds better than XP?

FrozenEclipse said,
The reason Windows 7 users may bash XP is because, oh I don't know, it's worlds better than XP?


They are actually very similar, makes you wonder what Microsoft has been doing for eight years.

GP007 said,
Why not? It's old, time to move up. AFter using 7 for over a month and counting I'd shoot myself before I went back to XP.

Yeah, I don't understand sticking to a Service Pack like that. If you want to stick with XP, fine, but why not upgrade to the latest version at least? lol

Tech Star said,
About time. Everyone should have no reason not to update to SP3.

`
You have no idea of the amount of businesses around the world (and I'm talking big corps, fortune 500 and the likes) who still use xpsp2 as their main OS. Same thing applies to that horrible cancer called IE6

dmeireles said,
`
You have no idea of the amount of businesses around the world (and I'm talking big corps, fortune 500 and the likes) who still use xpsp2 as their main OS. Same thing applies to that horrible cancer called IE6

And they shouldn't be... if they continue to support it some wouldnt switch for another decade.

lt8480 said,
And they shouldn't be... if they continue to support it some wouldnt switch for another decade.


True, but you know that is not an easy and fast thing to do when you have a big infrastructure. Plus, IT will want to upgrade, and management will put a lot of questions.

lt8480 said,


And they shouldn't be... if they continue to support it some wouldnt switch for another decade.


You know there are still a lot of people using windows 3.1? lots of factories still use it for automation...

No one is saying that you can't use those older versions of Windows anymore. Dropping support just means that anyone who choses to run those older versions are on their own.

neufuse said,

You know there are still a lot of people using windows 3.1? lots of factories still use it for automation...

wow i did not know that... Windows ROCKS!

dmeireles said,
True, but you know that is not an easy and fast thing to do when you have a big infrastructure. Plus, IT will want to upgrade, and management will put a lot of questions.

neufuse said,
You know there are still a lot of people using windows 3.1? lots of factories still use it for automation...

Generally continued support provides security and compatibility, Windows 3.1 or even older is fine to run on an independent machine, these system won't be connected directly to the internet or used for browsing, and won't pose any real problem continuing to run on it.

By the time 2014 comes XP will be 13 years old, that would almost be like running Windows 95 now... no-one in their right mind would be using it for desktop use, sure it may be running machinery and stuff, but it really isn't what you should be using in a desktop environment. No-one is complaining that currently NT 4.0 98 or Me are unsupported. They should only exist in static environments, anything that is "live" and being used for changing needs should be fairly up to date.

dmeireles said,
`
You have no idea of the amount of businesses around the world (and I'm talking big corps, fortune 500 and the likes) who still use xpsp2 as their main OS. Same thing applies to that horrible cancer called IE6

And what would the reason be for not updating to SP3? I can understand being hesitant to upgrade to the next full OS release, but SP3 wasn't THAT huge...

neufuse said,
You know there are still a lot of people using windows 3.1? lots of factories still use it for automation...

I didn't know that either. That's really amazing. I know that I've seen some really old versions of software and such out there. Some businesses never update anything. I didn't know Windows 3.1 was still in use though.