DISCLAIMER : I haven't been following the thread but had a quick look at these final posts and thought it might be worth answering a few things.

Quote from edge3147 :

The fact that the devs are trying to cater to a now unsupported OS and it's hardware is just another fine example of wasted time on things that need to be forgotten and moved on from.

Although I much prefer XP over the overcomplication and disabling of features that I discovered in my time using Windows 7, that is beside the point. In fact Microsoft has left me NO OPTION other than staying with XP. It is the ONLY way to use a debug version of DirectX 9, since Microsoft deliberately disabled the debug version of DX9 in later operating systems. LFS runs well on Linux using Wine and Wine supports up to DX9. I believe in options and I am very, very happy that LFS runs on Linux... maybe it really is the future if MS continues on this course of deliberately disabling things for loyal customers.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

No. XP is dead. Microsoft isn't releasing ANY security updates to consumer versions of XP (only the embedded versions), thus by running XP you are a malware target and a potential malware hellstew to infect others.

So simple, don't run IE or any other MS software that connects to the internet. Use a browser and email client from a reputable developer. Then, when you receive an email with an attachment "Big Boobies.exe" DON'T CLICK ON IT. Then you will not install any trojans and XP is perfectly safe.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

No. XP is dead. The people who continue to use it (outside of literally massive corporations with technical debt that require XP) are equivalent to necrophiliacs.

It's one thing to use some antique OS for hobbying like Amiga or even Classic Mac OS. But to want to use it as your daily OS is just flat out retarded. I don't know why Windows users seem to never want to upgrade.

At least Android users have the excuse of "Our carrier left us on Android 2.2 and never realeased an update".

Consumer Windows users have literally no excuse not to upgrade other than outright stupidity or just plain stubbornness.

Cheers. You really are wrong. There are the people like me who have no choice, and the other people who just want it to be easy to allow other computers on their home network to access a folder or a printer on another machine. So easy in XP (e.g. 2 minutes) and so hard on Windows 7 (hours of research combined with trial and error).

Quote from Racer X NZ :

There is no excuse to still run XP, particually in a business.

Win 7's built in virtual XP will run almost all older software that won't run on 7 or later. It really is shocking business practice ( I'm looking at my local hospital here, ) to continue running XP, there's been long enough to plan to upgrade.

These same people will be the ones whining about not being able to run later software on their XP box in years to come.

Technology does move on, if you dislike the later windows versons then run a version of Linux, mind you OS2 still lives so I'm just waiting for someone to want to run LFS on it........

http://www.ecomstation.com/ there you go........

I don't know if there is a Linux version that can run a debug version of DX9. It seems strange to go native Linux yet. Maybe OpenGL will be the way to go, Microsoft is basically driving me away. But just for now, it's definitely best to stay with XP so that I can actually keep LFS running on XP and Wine. It just works and I am not here dealing with problems. The problem was Windows 7. I got a new HDD and installed XP and now I don't have any computer problems.

Quote from Flotch :

(OT) I prefer by far XP ... Options easily available, perfectly known (when looking for tricks on internet), etc ... Win7 is clearly not simple when you play with network feature for example ... We are loosing so many times in my job making several computers based on Win7/Server2008 behaving correctly on a lan ... while with XP/server2000 it was almost instaneous ^^

to be clear, if there was not some #%$* game that are forcing you to upgrade to win7 at least (translation : without willing to test AC), I would have kept XP and still be happy with it !

Yes, a voice of reason. I don't understand why so many people are being sucked into the Microsoft hype and falling into the ridiculous capitalist trap of lies.

The practice of deliberately disabling good things so you are forced to purchase inferior products, or products with very very few improvements and no new actual abilities, isn't a good thing at all. It's a bad thing. Remember to use your own brains and not believe everything you are told, specially what you are told by the guys who want your money.

[18:36:30] Ray Kingsbury: old indycar is good too tho
[18:36:33] Ray Kingsbury: just not as good
3 minutes later
[18:39:37] Remco "TCLF" Majoor 420Blazit'olot: I'm sorry matt, but your iracing fanboyinsm is shooting out of bounds here
[18:40:30] Matt Kingsbury: have you driven the IR05 recently? its really bad
[18:40:32] Matt Kingsbury: on road
[18:40:37] Remco "TCLF" Majoor 420Blazit'olot: NO SHIT
[18:40:41] Matt Kingsbury: its like an FO8 with ADD
[18:41:03] Ray Kingsbury: it's like an fo8 with road tires

iRacing only stands because of the fanboys who don't use their brains. I would almost say that I'd be better off by just leaving this team.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

It's less secure because.... blah blah, rant rant...

You've done a lot of shouting and name calling, but provided no proof whatsoever. Lets see some actual data to back up your assertions. Show us some empirical evidence that XP is more dangerous right now than using the latest windows.

Quote from col :

You've done a lot of shouting and name calling, but provided no evidence whatsoever. Lets see some actual data to back up your assertions. Show us some empirical evidence that XP is more dangerous right now than using the latest windows.

Well using Windows in general is about as secure as leaving your house unlocked with the door open.

That said, XP will never ever improve security wise. Any vulnerabilities that are still in the OS, which there are most certainly plenty, considering Microsoft has been releasing security fixes for XP every week or so for the last 12 years, there's no reason why that would have stopped other than them End-Of-Life-ing the product.

XP was a good OS, 6 years ago. Now you're just vulnerable to a plethora of potential attacks. The only way you're actually safe is if you literally unplug your ethernet cable,throw your wifi stick out the window and glue all your USB, internal SATA/IDE ports, floppy drive and CD/DVD drive.

Also Scawen, just because someone agrees with your antiquated and downright wrong opinion, doesn't mean that they're the "voice of reason" in this matter. It simply means they are also wrong. As a software developer, I'd expect you to understand that "no security updates means perpetually less secure over time", especially in an OS that was so popular as XP.

Dustin, please go stare to sun or something like that. will be more useful
Didn't you stated that you want to lose weight? Go to fresh air, run, cycle, ... lfsforum won't help there.

Quote from DANIEL-CRO :

Didn't you stated that you want to lose weight? Go to fresh air, run, cycle, ... lfsforum won't help there.

I can't really go outside and do these things while I'm working!

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Well using Windows in general is about as secure as leaving your house unlocked with the door open.

That said, XP will never ever improve security wise. Any vulnerabilities that are still in the OS, which there are most certainly plenty, considering Microsoft has been releasing security fixes for XP every week or so for the last 12 years, there's no reason why that would have stopped other than them End-Of-Life-ing the product.

XP was a good OS, 6 years ago. Now you're just vulnerable to a plethora of potential attacks. The only way you're actually safe is if you literally unplug your ethernet cable,throw your wifi stick out the window and glue all your USB, internal SATA/IDE ports, floppy drive and CD/DVD drive.

Also Scawen, just because someone agrees with your antiquated and downright wrong opinion, doesn't mean that they're the "voice of reason" in this matter. It simply means they are also wrong. As a software developer, I'd expect you to understand that "no security updates means perpetually less secure over time", especially in an OS that was so popular as XP.

Well I switched off MS updates about 10 years ago or whenever it was I first got XP. I fail to see the benefit of getting rid of some old bugs and introducing new ones, which is how I see those updates.

I never used anti virus software but I did use zonealarm so I'd know if any local program tried to access the internet (usually MS or newly installed software phoning home, by the way).

And what happened... not one single virus. Obviously I take great care researching anything I install or any exe I run.

But like riding a motorbike, it's not that dangerous if you look around, check the traffic situation around you and don't take every corner right on the limit. I feel safer on a motorbike than I would in a military tank.

[ EDIT : I'm NOT saying XP is like an agile motorbike and the later Windows versions are like tanks. I'm pointing out that you can stay safe by watching what you do. Surrounding yourself with safety nets will hinder you. It may allow you to blunder around like a fool, and soften some of the inevitable impacts. But eventually you will be tied in knots. I do believe the worst / most successful virus of all is anti virus software itself. ]

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

I can't really go outside and do these things while I'm working!

Then work.?

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

...
Also Scawen, just because someone agrees with your antiquated and downright wrong opinion, doesn't mean that they're the "voice of reason" in this matter. It simply means they are also wrong. As a software developer, I'd expect you to understand that "no security updates means perpetually less secure over time", especially in an OS that was so popular as XP.

in wich way saying Win7 is far more complex than XP as soon as you are out of "MS way" is wrong ? I had encountered so much more issues with Win7 default parameters, that for sure I can state I prefer WinXP.
I agree with Scawen point about security, for a lambda user point of view, where the f*ck WinXP is not secure ? Are you constantly under hacker attacks ? Never got any viruses until I click on a wrong exe ... and it was under Win7 (no more fool click for the future)
NB : if you think MS is protecting you, I can't do anything

XP and LFS simply the best.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

XP will never ever improve security wise. Any vulnerabilities that are still in the OS, which there are most certainly plenty, considering Microsoft has been releasing security fixes for XP every week or so for the last 12 years

Another way to look at it is that the newer the windows version, the more security holes there are that have not yet been fixed by Microsoft.
If XP has had security fixes every week or so for 12 years, it is likely to be a whole lot more secure than windows 8.
It's all fine and dandy that Microsoft patches the more recent windows, but they can't do it instantly, so a new Windows is going to leak like a sieve for a few years compared to a more mature version, unless Microsoft find all the exploits before malicious hackers do.

Quote :

"no security updates means perpetually less secure over time", especially in an OS that was so popular as XP.

Or maybe the hackers will move on to targeting new versions of windows, where they are likely to find more exploits more easily that they can milk for a few days until Microsoft patches them. They will also prefer to target an OS that users are unfamiliar with in the hope that they will be easier targets. In that case older OSes like XP are naturally going to be safer to use.


Of course this is pure conjecture just like your claims. Unless you can back them up with actual data?

If an OS has required 12 years of security fixes, isn't it pretty easy to infer that there's still many more security fixes that could be applied?

Regardless, there's no trying to convince the technology amish that what they're doing is unsafe as they're exactly like the parents who claim that vaccines are evil.

Maybe we should all switch to the bitten apple? Isn't it a perfect OS with far less security issues?

They did announce the 2014 date for the end of security updates way back in 2007. It would be a coincidence if all the holes also happened to be fixed by that time, and if someone had a brilliant exploit, why allow MS to patch it if you could wait a few months and know nothing will be done about it? The first few weeks post-support-termination were probably the worst.

There are probably measures you can take, but it's one less safety net without MS support imo.

I agree with col - it would be great to hear of some example stories of XP users who have fallen foul of these assumed (or actual) security holes. It would really be interesting. I have given my own counter-example where for around 10 years I have had security updates switched off, never installed anti-virus software and got no viruses, trojans, etc.

For my purposes, when I read any stories, I will ignore the ones about people who happened to visit a dodgy site while using MS Internet Explorer or ran an EXE they had no reason to trust. These examples are very simply avoidable, if you know how to look at a file name before you double click it and don't choose Internet Explorer as your browser.

Until I hear any such stories, my fear of increased infection risk through use of XP will remain zero.

Quote from Scawen :

I agree with col it would be great to hear of some example stories of XP users who have fallen foul of these assumed (or actual) security holes. It would really be interesting. I have given my own counter-example where for around 10 years I have had security updates switched off, never installed anti-virus software and got no viruses, trojans, etc.

For my purposes, when I read any stories, I will ignore the ones about people who happened to visit a dodgy site while using MS Internet Explorer or ran an EXE they had no reason to trust. These examples are very simply avoidable, if you know how to look at a file name before you double click it and don't choose Internet Explorer as your browser.

Until I hear any such stories, my fear of increased infection risk through use of XP will remain zero.

Quote from Scawen :

I agree with col - it would be great to hear of some example stories of XP users who have fallen foul of these assumed (or actual) security holes. It would really be interesting. I have given my own counter-example where for around 10 years I have had security updates switched off, never installed anti-virus software and got no viruses, trojans, etc.

For my purposes, when I read any stories, I will ignore the ones about people who happened to visit a dodgy site while using MS Internet Explorer or ran an EXE they had no reason to trust. These examples are very simply avoidable, if you know how to look at a file name before you double click it and don't choose Internet Explorer as your browser.

Until I hear any such stories, my fear of increased infection risk through use of XP will remain zero.

One of the most obvious examples would be some form of malvertising/drive-by-downloading which exploits vulnerabilities in browsers or the OS itself. The HTML5 FillDisk proof-of-concept exploit (see this video) is an example of effectively a browser exploit which requires no interaction from the user other than visiting a site with the exploit code. Due to the aforementioned increase in malvertising, this type of exploit code could be served by even popular/reputable websites (meaning you could be hit even if you didn't visit shady sites). All it takes is one compromised advert. These type of implementation bugs (the FillDisk exploit effectively worked by exploiting a poor implementation in major browsers) are exactly the sort of real world threat you leave yourself up to by using unpatched software. Up-to-date browsers and operating systems (along with AV/security applications) definitively decrease the risk of this type of infection e.g. by scanning or blocking remote scripts.

I'm also not sure how you can claim with absolute certainty that you've been virus/trojan/malware free for a decade, since there are certain types of malware which are very difficult or even nearly impossible to detect (rootkits, for instance, would be a classic example).

Quote from amp88 :

One of the most obvious examples would be some form of malvertising/drive-by-downloading which exploits vulnerabilities in browsers or the OS itself. The HTML5 FillDisk proof-of-concept exploit (see this video) is an example of effectively a browser exploit which requires no interaction from the user other than visiting a site with the exploit code. Due to the aforementioned increase in malvertising, this type of exploit code could be served by even popular/reputable websites (meaning you could be hit even if you didn't visit shady sites). All it takes is one compromised advert. These type of implementation bugs (the FillDisk exploit effectively worked by exploiting a poor implementation in major browsers) are exactly the sort of real world threat you leave yourself up to by using unpatched software. Up-to-date browsers and operating systems (along with AV/security applications) definitively decrease the risk of this type of infection e.g. by scanning or blocking remote scripts.

I'm also not sure how you can claim with absolute certainty that you've been virus/trojan/malware free for a decade, since there are certain types of malware which are very difficult or even nearly impossible to detect (rootkits, for instance, would be a classic example).

:clapclap:

At my workplace we use XP on several machines as a neccessity for backwards compatibility. Our company deploys and manages cutting edge radio technology and is not a big company at all. We were also able to strip XP down to the essentials and it runs very very fast and is very stable. It is easy to get rid of the junk in XP.

While I much prefer Windows 7 as an OS, I'd be an imbocile to state that XP is useless or redundant, having seen it flawlessly operate year in - year out with no issues at all. As for security, there is plenty you can do to protect your network and system without Microsoft's help. Most security issues concerning home computing lie somewhere between the chair and the keyboard.

Every statement made here denouncing XP as useless or dangerous or past its useful life smacks of ignorance about computing in general and of operating system use in particular.

Repeatedly stating the situation to the contrary will not change the facts.

Quote from Scawen :

Maybe OpenGL will be the way to go

Oh no, please don't do that...

nVidia 3D Vision doesn't run with OGL at the moment.

Quote from Gunn :

At my workplace we use XP on several machines as a neccessity for backwards compatibility. Our company deploys and manages cutting edge radio technology and is not a big company at all. We were also able to strip XP down to the essentials and it runs very very fast and is very stable. It is easy to get rid of the junk in XP.

While I much prefer Windows 7 as an OS, I'd be an imbocile to state that XP is useless or redundant, having seen it flawlessly operate year in - year out with no issues at all. As for security, there is plenty you can do to protect your network and system without Microsoft's help. Most security issues concerning home computing lie somewhere between the chair and the keyboard.

Every statement made here denouncing XP as useless or dangerous or past its useful life smacks of ignorance about computing in general and of operating system use in particular.

Repeatedly stating the situation to the contrary will not change the facts.

This. At home I have 1 Win7 pc for internet and another with xp where I run what runs, the xp box is bare essentials and only connected to anything when needed. Some "old" games on that xp box, of course.

I've worked in many geology and microanalysis labs where xp remains standard, and there the rationale is the same.

XP users aren't stupid. This could've been a reasonable discussion but for that ad hom.. I've done basically the same thing as Scawen for 15 years or so. No need to update if you just keep good habits.

I love how scawen always closes threads if it goes off-topic, except if it's about xp. Then he needs to participate because xp is god.

Where did he say XP is god? Can you not refute his arguments without hyperbole?

It is really strange that some people think it is really an option at this stage to actually remove all XP, Linux and Mac users from our community. It is not an option!

I'll explain just one more time in the clearest way I can:

Point 1:

LFS can run on some other operating systems, not developed by Microsoft, called "Linux" and "Mac" that some people choose to use for various good reasons. This is achieved by using some clever software called "Wine" which is a sort of wrapper that allows Windows programs to access Windows functions, including DirectX up to DX9, on non-Windows computers.

LFS can also run on an operating system called "XP" that is more than a decade old! It is a version of Windows that, although not perfect, does work well and was certainly a great improvement over its predecessors and actually helped desktop computing reach a new level globally. The newer versions of Windows have some improvements over XP and also removed some features and made some things more difficult.

Point 2:

Microsoft has deliberately disabled the ability to develop for DirectX 9 on Windows 7. You can actually compile your programs in Windows 7 but debug output is not available. Any programmer knows why debug output is important - it shows you when you have made many types of mistake, instead of just mysteriously not working under various circumstances. If you want to develop DX9 software, you must have debug output.

Conclusion:

Point 1 above means that LFS must be targetted at DX9 (or possibly OpenGL though I have not researched this and there is no need to do this conversion at this time because DX9 works very well indeed and has far more abilities than we need for the foreseeable future and beyond). Point 2 above means that to develop for DX9 you need to use XP.

Final comment:

If you can't understand that logic then there is simply no hope of us communicating and you can go back to your world of advertising and you can just believe everything you are told by the marketing departments of massive corporations who just want your money.

That's how people think these days.

If you like something (even just a little bit) = you're a "fanboy"
If you aren't 100% positive about something = you're a "hater".
If something doesn't happen in the next 24 hours = it's never going to happen
If something is better visually than something yesterday = it's photorealistic

Don't ask me why.

(Typed on a perfectly secure XP machine)