Why is XPSP3 being RTM'ed?

C

Canuck57

"Peter in New Zealand" <peterbalplug@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1208839699.217027@ftpsrv1...
> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>> As you can see by other threads today in this ng, SP3 rtm'd today and
>> will be available on WU on the 29th. XP remains in mainstream support
>> through April 2009 and extended support through April 2014. XP at
>> service pack level 2 will be supported for 24 months from now. XP at
>> service pack level 3 will be supported through April 2014. XP is hardly
>> a dead duck. Please check your facts.
>>
>> "Andrew E." <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote in message
>> news:0327CB69-036E-4ABB-89E2-E08FEC12D53F@microsoft.com...
>>> XP is about at the end of its life-cycle with microsoft,with SP3 being
>>> the
>>> last
>>> big update,they probably are in no rush to release the final
>>> version.Prolonging
>>> has nothing to do with it,xp is a dead-duck with MS OS (almost),why rush
>>> it
>>> with SP3......
>>>
>>> "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.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Peace!
>>>> Kurt
>>>> Former Self-anointed Moderator
>>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
>>>>
>>>>
>>
> Still, it does seem a little curious to me that MS are producing an SP for
> an OS that is about to go off the market. I cannot help but wonder if they
> are secretly harbouring an intention to extend its availability slightly,
> even just as a PR exercise so people will see them as responsive to their
> customers. It wouldn't be the first time. On the other hand, who knows
> what goes on the collective mind of MS?

Not really. It actually could be considered a confirmation of XP going to
the shelf. Just before you discontinue the sale of it and ramp down support
for it you would want to roll up all the changes into SP3 in this case. So
all future emergency patching will only reference SP3. That is simplify the
patch level before it is mothballed to make testing of the odd security
patches that will come later easier.
 
K

kurttrail

Canuck57 wrote:

> "Peter in New Zealand" <peterbalplug@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:1208839699.217027@ftpsrv1...
>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>>> As you can see by other threads today in this ng, SP3 rtm'd today and
>>> will be available on WU on the 29th. XP remains in mainstream support
>>> through April 2009 and extended support through April 2014. XP at
>>> service pack level 2 will be supported for 24 months from now. XP at
>>> service pack level 3 will be supported through April 2014. XP is
>>> hardly a dead duck. Please check your facts.
>>>
>>> "Andrew E." <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote in message
>>> news:0327CB69-036E-4ABB-89E2-E08FEC12D53F@microsoft.com...
>>>> XP is about at the end of its life-cycle with microsoft,with SP3
>>>> being
>>>> the
>>>> last
>>>> big update,they probably are in no rush to release the final
>>>> version.Prolonging
>>>> has nothing to do with it,xp is a dead-duck with MS OS (almost),why
>>>> rush it
>>>> with SP3......
>>>>
>>>> "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.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Peace!
>>>>> Kurt
>>>>> Former Self-anointed Moderator
>>>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> Still, it does seem a little curious to me that MS are producing an SP
>> for an OS that is about to go off the market. I cannot help but wonder
>> if they are secretly harbouring an intention to extend its availability
>> slightly, even just as a PR exercise so people will see them as
>> responsive to their customers. It wouldn't be the first time. On the
>> other hand, who knows what goes on the collective mind of MS?
>
> Not really. It actually could be considered a confirmation of XP going
> to the shelf. Just before you discontinue the sale of it and ramp down
> support for it you would want to roll up all the changes into SP3 in
> this case. So all future emergency patching will only reference SP3.
> That is simplify the patch level before it is mothballed to make testing
> of the odd security patches that will come later easier.

But then why bother with releasing it to OEMs first? Why not just
release it to the world, if MS's intention is just to mothball XP on June
30th?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Former Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
 
K

kurttrail

Peter wrote:

> All this discussion!! SP3 was planned years ago, I remember reading
> about it's approx. release date when SP2 first came out. I wish I could
> find that page that outlines all the platforms and their life cycle.

The confusion is my fault. I wasn't asking why is there an XPSP3, but
why MS is bothering to go thru the Release To Manufacturing stage with
it, if MS is just shutting off the XP faucet on June 30th. Why not just
release it to everyone if MS intends to stop most sales of XP in a couple
of months?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Former Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
 
C

Colin Barnhorst

"Released to manufacturing" is just a generic term that describes releasing
the software for public use with support from MS Product Support Services.

It does not necessarily mean that discs and boxes will be made. In fact, XP
Home and XP Pro discs with SP3 integrated are scheduled for manufacturing
but XP MCE and Tablet integrated discs are not. Nevertheless, SP3 is
"released to manufacturing" for all XP x86 including MCE and Tablet.

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:10nPj.12086$NF4.10623@fe78.usenetserver.com...
> Peter wrote:
>
>> All this discussion!! SP3 was planned years ago, I remember reading
>> about it's approx. release date when SP2 first came out. I wish I could
>> find that page that outlines all the platforms and their life cycle.
>
> The confusion is my fault. I wasn't asking why is there an XPSP3, but
> why MS is bothering to go thru the Release To Manufacturing stage with
> it, if MS is just shutting off the XP faucet on June 30th. Why not just
> release it to everyone if MS intends to stop most sales of XP in a couple
> of months?
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Former Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
>
 
C

Colin Barnhorst

This in not the case. There will undoubtedly be one or more XP rollups in
the future, including one final one before XP goes out of support. A
service pack is not just a rollup. All a rollup contains is already
published patches and updates. A service pack includes a rollup but also
modifications to the system that are not and will not be done by any patches
or updates.

"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
news:OFmPj.82181$rd2.33475@pd7urf3no...
>
> "Peter in New Zealand" <peterbalplug@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:1208839699.217027@ftpsrv1...
>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>>> As you can see by other threads today in this ng, SP3 rtm'd today and
>>> will be available on WU on the 29th. XP remains in mainstream support
>>> through April 2009 and extended support through April 2014. XP at
>>> service pack level 2 will be supported for 24 months from now. XP at
>>> service pack level 3 will be supported through April 2014. XP is hardly
>>> a dead duck. Please check your facts.
>>>
>>> "Andrew E." <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote in message
>>> news:0327CB69-036E-4ABB-89E2-E08FEC12D53F@microsoft.com...
>>>> XP is about at the end of its life-cycle with microsoft,with SP3 being
>>>> the
>>>> last
>>>> big update,they probably are in no rush to release the final
>>>> version.Prolonging
>>>> has nothing to do with it,xp is a dead-duck with MS OS (almost),why
>>>> rush it
>>>> with SP3......
>>>>
>>>> "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.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Peace!
>>>>> Kurt
>>>>> Former Self-anointed Moderator
>>>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>> Still, it does seem a little curious to me that MS are producing an SP
>> for an OS that is about to go off the market. I cannot help but wonder if
>> they are secretly harbouring an intention to extend its availability
>> slightly, even just as a PR exercise so people will see them as
>> responsive to their customers. It wouldn't be the first time. On the
>> other hand, who knows what goes on the collective mind of MS?
>
> Not really. It actually could be considered a confirmation of XP going to
> the shelf. Just before you discontinue the sale of it and ramp down
> support for it you would want to roll up all the changes into SP3 in this
> case. So all future emergency patching will only reference SP3. That is
> simplify the patch level before it is mothballed to make testing of the
> odd security patches that will come later easier.
>
 
K

kurttrail

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> "Released to manufacturing" is just a generic term that describes
> releasing the software for public use with support from MS Product
> Support Services.

I disagree. It is a generic term that describes releasing the software
to OEMs (and VL customers) for them to have a chance to get it ready
before the software is released to the general public.

That way OEMs can get a chance to have computers with the new software
ready at least as soon as it is publicly available to the general
population.

> It does not necessarily mean that discs and boxes will be made. In
> fact, XP Home and XP Pro discs with SP3 integrated are scheduled for
> manufacturing but XP MCE and Tablet integrated discs are not.
> Nevertheless, SP3 is "released to manufacturing" for all XP x86
> including MCE and Tablet.

Yeah I read somewhere that XP x64 users are supposed to go with Win03 SP2
instead. Although I have trouble believing that one.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Former Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
 
K

kurttrail

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> This in not the case. There will undoubtedly be one or more XP rollups
> in the future, including one final one before XP goes out of support. A
> service pack is not just a rollup. All a rollup contains is already
> published patches and updates. A service pack includes a rollup but
> also modifications to the system that are not and will not be done by
> any patches or updates.

So I guess technically SP1 for Vista was more of a rollup than a real SP?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Former Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
 
C

Canuck57

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:ZWmPj.12085$NF4.11081@fe78.usenetserver.com...
> Canuck57 wrote:
>
>> "Peter in New Zealand" <peterbalplug@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
>> news:1208839699.217027@ftpsrv1...
>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:
>>>> As you can see by other threads today in this ng, SP3 rtm'd today and
>>>> will be available on WU on the 29th. XP remains in mainstream support
>>>> through April 2009 and extended support through April 2014. XP at
>>>> service pack level 2 will be supported for 24 months from now. XP at
>>>> service pack level 3 will be supported through April 2014. XP is
>>>> hardly a dead duck. Please check your facts.
>>>>
>>>> "Andrew E." <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:0327CB69-036E-4ABB-89E2-E08FEC12D53F@microsoft.com...
>>>>> XP is about at the end of its life-cycle with microsoft,with SP3
>>>>> being
>>>>> the
>>>>> last
>>>>> big update,they probably are in no rush to release the final
>>>>> version.Prolonging
>>>>> has nothing to do with it,xp is a dead-duck with MS OS (almost),why
>>>>> rush it
>>>>> with SP3......
>>>>>
>>>>> "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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Peace!
>>>>>> Kurt
>>>>>> Former Self-anointed Moderator
>>>>>> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
>>>>>> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> Still, it does seem a little curious to me that MS are producing an SP
>>> for an OS that is about to go off the market. I cannot help but wonder
>>> if they are secretly harbouring an intention to extend its availability
>>> slightly, even just as a PR exercise so people will see them as
>>> responsive to their customers. It wouldn't be the first time. On the
>>> other hand, who knows what goes on the collective mind of MS?
>>
>> Not really. It actually could be considered a confirmation of XP going
>> to the shelf. Just before you discontinue the sale of it and ramp down
>> support for it you would want to roll up all the changes into SP3 in
>> this case. So all future emergency patching will only reference SP3.
>> That is simplify the patch level before it is mothballed to make testing
>> of the odd security patches that will come later easier.
>
> But then why bother with releasing it to OEMs first? Why not just
> release it to the world, if MS's intention is just to mothball XP on June
> 30th?

Look at SPs as roll ups of all the changes since the last SP, or the anchor
point they used. While features can be added in an SP, they don't have to
be in there and often are not.

Manufacturers get them first as they can test them and gives them a chance
to QA it before it makes a general release. If any real big issues come up,
they may either add to the SP to fix or have a patch right after the SP is
released. Or in worst case create a SP3a.

Has no bearing on if Microsoft is going to keep XP or not. In fact, I
suspect they will not unless someone in the executive at MSFT changes their
minds. There is not that much money left in "XP", rolling out a new version
generates revenue.
 
K

kurttrail

Canuck57 wrote:

> Look at SPs as roll ups of all the changes since the last SP, or the
> anchor point they used. While features can be added in an SP, they
> don't have to be in there and often are not.

No really? I know all that, and it has no bearing on why bothering to
RTM XPSP3.

> Manufacturers get them first as they can test them and gives them a
> chance to QA it before it makes a general release. If any real big
> issues come up, they may either add to the SP to fix or have a patch
> right after the SP is released. Or in worst case create a SP3a.

OEMs won't have enough time to do any of that effectively in just one
week's time before XPSP3 is generally released on the 29th.

> Has no bearing on if Microsoft is going to keep XP or not. In fact, I
> suspect they will not unless someone in the executive at MSFT changes
> their minds. There is not that much money left in "XP", rolling out a
> new version generates revenue.

Tell that to the OEMs that want to keep selling XP.

So again I ask, why bother with this RTM nonsense? Why not just release
it to all at once? And this time assume that I know as much as you do
about SPs.

Usually SPs are RTMed for a month or so before general release. XPSP3
just 8 days. Certainly there have been a bunch of mixed signals coming
from Redmond over extending the sales of XP beyond June 30th, and this
RTM nonsense just adds more mixed signals. Bothering to RTM it at all,
yet only for 8 days.

Does MS even know what it is doing any more?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Former Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
 
C

Canuck57

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknownuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:QgoPj.19601$Og1.16633@fe82.usenetserver.com...
> Canuck57 wrote:
>
>> Look at SPs as roll ups of all the changes since the last SP, or the
>> anchor point they used. While features can be added in an SP, they
>> don't have to be in there and often are not.
>
> No really? I know all that, and it has no bearing on why bothering to
> RTM XPSP3.

While you and I can't buy it, OEMs can keep shipping it into next year. Or
something like that. Most businesses are not buying Vista. But for you or
I, to buy a "home" PC or a copy of XP, likely June is it.

But who knows, Micrsoft has to wonder why their quarterly sales of XP were
50% higher than their forcast. I call it the Vista rejection factor. Who
knows, maybe they will at the last minute stave off XPs execution at the
stores, but sure the decision will be based on more $$$$->MSFT.



>> Manufacturers get them first as they can test them and gives them a
>> chance to QA it before it makes a general release. If any real big
>> issues come up, they may either add to the SP to fix or have a patch
>> right after the SP is released. Or in worst case create a SP3a.
>
> OEMs won't have enough time to do any of that effectively in just one
> week's time before XPSP3 is generally released on the 29th.
>
>> Has no bearing on if Microsoft is going to keep XP or not. In fact, I
>> suspect they will not unless someone in the executive at MSFT changes
>> their minds. There is not that much money left in "XP", rolling out a
>> new version generates revenue.
>
> Tell that to the OEMs that want to keep selling XP.
>
> So again I ask, why bother with this RTM nonsense? Why not just release
> it to all at once? And this time assume that I know as much as you do
> about SPs.
>
> Usually SPs are RTMed for a month or so before general release. XPSP3
> just 8 days. Certainly there have been a bunch of mixed signals coming
> from Redmond over extending the sales of XP beyond June 30th, and this
> RTM nonsense just adds more mixed signals. Bothering to RTM it at all,
> yet only for 8 days.
>
> Does MS even know what it is doing any more?
>
> --
> Peace!
> Kurt
> Former Self-anointed Moderator
> microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
> "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"
>
 
S

Shenan Stanley

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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Why is XPSP3 being RTM'ed?
Replies
19
Views
262
Ghostrider
G
K
Serial Plonkers v. Serial Killers
Replies
16
Views
164
kurttrail
K
K
Alias v. Frank
Replies
9
Views
87
kurttrail
K
K
Hillarious Horny Heron Review!
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
531
brummyfan
B
K
kevpan v. Kevpan
Replies
18
Views
266
kurttrail
K
Back
Top Bottom