Microsoft denies it's running call-in 'save XP' petition

[Hurmoth]

Microsoft denies it's running call-in 'save XP' petition

After a popular technology Web site reported that Microsoft Corp. was logging calls from customers who requested that the company extend the retail availability of Windows XP, some users claimed that they couldn't get through to the support lines.

Today, however, Microsoft denied that it organized any kind of call-in petition and pleaded with users not to dial its technical support numbers to ask for an XP extension.

On Friday, Neowin.net posted a notice titled "Microsoft Taking Official Petitions to Keep XP Alive" that claimed Microsoft has been tallying calls made to the support lines.

"Word has been passed down to the tech support teams (and then on to Neowin) that they are to begin logging any calls that come in for the sole purpose of requesting an extension to the retail life of Windows XP," said the notice. "The calls will be logged and, if enough complaints are filed, Microsoft will consider giving XP some more time."

Neowin also listed the toll-free telephone numbers for Microsoft's XP and Vista technical support desks in the U.S., the U.K. and Canada.

Microsoft has set June 30 as the date when it will stop providing large computer makers and retailers with copies of Windows XP. After that resellers and retailers will be able to continue selling from their stock but will not be able to order more licenses or boxed copies from Microsoft. Some exceptions apply, most importantly an extension until the end of June 2010 for makers of low-cost notebook and desktop PCs.

Within hours of the Friday posting, people claimed that they had dialed the numbers and received only a busy signal. "Line's been busy for hours," said a user identified only as "jayr0" in a comment left about six hours after the notice appeared.

Microsoft said it is not running any kind of XP-related poll, a company spokeswoman said today in an e-mail reply to questions. "Microsoft is not organizing any official petitions to extend sales of Windows XP," she said. "The phone numbers claimed on Neowin's Web site as capable of logging calls requesting an extension for Windows XP are actual Microsoft support numbers. They are designed for people seeking technical solutions and help; they are not intended to receive official complaints or suggestions regarding the life span of our products."

She also urged users to stop dialing. "As a courtesy to customers in need of technical assistance, we ask callers not to call Microsoft Customer Support Services to request an extension for Windows XP."

Microsoft declined to comment on whether its support lines had experienced a call-volume spike starting last Friday, when the Neowin notice first appeared.

Some users commenting on Neowin.net were skeptical from the start that Microsoft was counting calls. "This is all pretty much [a] waste of time," said someone named "Somnus" last Friday. "It is not likely that Microsoft will extend the sales of Windows XP past the current deadline, no matter how many people call in."

"What the hell?" asked a user labeled as "MMaster23," also in a Friday comment. "Surely, you have got to be kidding me ... those support numbers are there for a reason."

The talk of a phone-in petition may have gained credence from Windows users because of comments made by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. In April, Ballmer said that Microsoft might reconsider its decision to pull the resell and retail plug on XP if it received enough user feedback. Later that same day, however, a company spokeswoman said that Microsoft's position on XP's final days had not changed.

Some save-XP petitions are, in fact, circulating on the Web, including one organized by InfoWorld, a Computerworld sister site. According to InfoWorld, more than 200,000 people have "signed" its petition as of Wednesday morning.

[stevehoot]

Shame on the original author of the post last Friday. Surely common sense dicates that a support line is for Technical Support.

Without looking it up, I'd imagine that the number is the generic Microsoft Support number - meaning that large companies with enterprise support agreements are unable to get help with business-critical outages. There's a good chance that some poor IT manager or administrator is having to explain why his systems went down and he couldn't get them back running again - due to some small-minded arogant fanantic creating a false rumour.

This is a disgrace and the author should feel ashamed - as should the Neowin staff who authorised the post on the home page. (Without citing any 3rd party reference to confirm that it's anything more than a rumour)

Strange that this ISN'T on the home page, and that Neowin staff have made no comment other than quoting a 3rd party source. Very poor....

[M118LR]

MSFT has posted a page on their Website explaining what will happen to XP on 30 June 2008.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/...sxp/future.mspx

[Veedems Veteran]

If I hadn't gotten the story from someone who works within the company and had the email explaining the procedure for logging petitions, I wouldn't have posted it.

[Hurmoth]

Strange that this ISN'T on the home page, and that Neowin staff have made no comment other than quoting a 3rd party source. Very poor....

It is poor that one of our staff received this information from an inside source? Do you go to other websites and bash them when they get inside information and the company denies it? With all due respect, Microsoft doesn't want to keep XP alive, they want people to move to Vista, but that doesn't mean they aren't doing customer research to see what customers want. The article, if you read it, clearly states that Steve Ballmer said "that Microsoft might reconsider its decision to pull the resell and retail plug on XP if it received enough user feedback".

Our staff did nothing wrong other than report the information he was given, which is what all news outlets do. If we had made this information up, then you might have some justification in getting upset with us, but we didn't.

The point is that isn't, or at least shouldn't be, surprising to anyone that Microsoft has denied this, they did so right after Ballmer made those claims above.

[clx]

wasnt this already covered the other day? with MS saying they will push back the end of life until 2010 ?

[stevehoot]

I see your point - but having an email sent to me from a mate that works at MS is hardly justification for posting an item on a IT news website with thousands of visitors - in particular when you consider the repercussions such as people unable to get business critical support. A simple call to Microsoft's PR would have been able to clarify if the email was offical or just an employees point of view. Stating that it's Microsoft's offical policy and posting numbers is a little over the top without clariffication.

Unless the email was a formal statement from the press team then surely, by definition it's a rumour....? Nothing wrong with it being published in the forums or even the home page with a bit of healthy sceptism, but the home page of a site like this without clariffication - when you consider that this message has rendered the support lines for the worlds most popular desktop operating system unusable (essentially an accidential DDOS attack! :-)) - is a something of a little irresponsible to say the least.

There's a fine line between rumour spreading and journalism - attempting some clariffication on rumours placed on your desk is something that I think would apply to one and not the other.

wasnt this already covered the other day? with MS saying they will push back the end of life until 2010 ?

Not really. End of sale for mainsteam Windows XP is 30th June 2008.

End of mainstream support is April 2009 (e.g. full patches, new updates - everything you have now including phone support)

End of extended support is 2014 - this means free security updates still, but no bug fixes or support without paying a fee.

XP Home is avaliable to OEM's for ULCPC's until June 2010. Not sure if this means you can still get it from places likes Dabs and eBuyer etc. or if MS will restrict sales to just OEM's that have ULCPC's...?

[Hurmoth]

wasnt this already covered the other day? with MS saying they will push back the end of life until 2010 ?

End of life isn't until 2014. There's a huge different between EOL and EOS (End of Sale) and the EOS has been extended only for low end systems.

[clx]

ah ty, my mistake.

[C_Guy]

The point is that isn't, or at least shouldn't be, surprising to anyone that Microsoft has denied this, they did so right after Ballmer made those claims above.

Except that you're going on the assumption that the petition was real in the first place and there was anything to deny. Isn't it also possible that the employee who passed on the information was mis-informed? Or there was a mis-communication?

[Veedems Veteran]

Except that you're going on the assumption that the petition was real in the first place and there was anything to deny. Isn't it also possible that the employee who passed on the information was mis-informed? Or there was a mis-communication?

It's always possible, but I trust my source as he's been accurate in the past. I don't have any answers here. Was he wrong? Did MS not want this to get out so they can say they tried and there was no demand? I don't know. I apologize for the chaos this is causing, but I trust my guy.

[Dev Null Zen]

I see your point - but having an email sent to me from a mate that works at MS is hardly justification for posting an item on a IT news website with thousands of visitors - in particular when you consider the repercussions such as people unable to get business critical support. A simple call to Microsoft's PR would have been able to clarify if the email was offical or just an employees point of view. Stating that it's Microsoft's offical policy and posting numbers is a little over the top without clariffication.

Unless the email was a formal statement from the press team then surely, by definition it's a rumour....? Nothing wrong with it being published in the forums or even the home page with a bit of healthy sceptism, but the home page of a site like this without clariffication - when you consider that this message has rendered the support lines for the worlds most popular desktop operating system unusable (essentially an accidential DDOS attack! :-)) - is a something of a little irresponsible to say the least.

There's a fine line between rumour spreading and journalism - attempting some clariffication on rumours placed on your desk is something that I think would apply to one and not the other.

Not really. End of sale for mainsteam Windows XP is 30th June 2008.

End of mainstream support is April 2009 (e.g. full patches, new updates - everything you have now including phone support)

End of extended support is 2014 - this means free security updates still, but no bug fixes or support without paying a fee.

XP Home is avaliable to OEM's for ULCPC's until June 2010. Not sure if this means you can still get it from places likes Dabs and eBuyer etc. or if MS will restrict sales to just OEM's that have ULCPC's...?

I'm sorry, but your argument is pure failure. First off, M$ has different customer support lines for Business clients rather than your average joe. THAT is pure commons sense. Try doing some research.

#2 When a source leaks non-public information, no self respecting journalist would call up Public Relations to ask about that info. It could have any number of ramifications, not the least of which is the employee getting found and fired.

#3 Having the gall to compare an exclusive news item to a malicious hacking attack, is just despicable. If you have this little resepct for the people that work hard, and for free, to bring the best news they can to this community, maybe this isn't a place for you.

[MMaster23]

Heh .. the little dance "told you so" comes to mind:

https://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/05/30/m...p-xp?cid=638848

[Minimoose]

^ :huh:

Except that you're going on the assumption that the petition was real in the first place and there was anything to deny. Isn't it also possible that the employee who passed on the information was mis-informed? Or there was a mis-communication?

You can say that about any inside source... The point is that you sometimes get correct information out of it.