Microsoft denies extending Windows XP support for China

Microsoft denies extending Windows XP support for China

Summary: Reports on Monday that Microsoft has extended support for Windows XP in China are incorrect.

TOPICS: Security, Windows

On Monday, Microsoft China made statements on a Chinese social network that have been misinterpreted in reports in the West. Microsoft in Redmond told ZDNet that they are not extending support for Windows XP in China.

Microsoft translates the actual language used in the post as:

Microsoft China has taken special actions to closely work with leading Chinese internet security and anti-virus companies including Tencent for them to provide security protection for Chinese Windows XP users before they upgrade to modern operating system.

This policy is no different from what will be happening in other countries. Other companies, including security software companies, will be continuing to support Windows XP after Microsoft's end of support on April 8. That does not change Microsoft's policy for their support ending on April 8.

Topics: Security, Windows

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Aren't most XP

    installations in China pirated anyway?
    • Most, I don't know

      A hell of a lot, yes
      Larry Seltzer
  • So why MS is not doing this?

    Which raised the question of why MS is not doing this.
    • What? supporting an old OS?

      Why should MS support Windows XP?

      My car is old, but GM doesn't support it anymore with parts or warranty.
      • What?

        You can't get "Mr. Goodwrench" parts for your car? My daughter has a 98 Ford Taurus and we can get parts from Ford for it and those parts are covered with their own warranty. We usually go to AutoZone, though, because it costs less; and those parts have their own warranty as well.
      • Cars aren't OS's

        If Microsoft released the source code for Windows XP so that anyone who bought it could analyze it, and fix holes and problems, then you'd have a more appropriate simile.

        Auto manufacturers stop making parts for their cars, but they license others to continue to do it. If Microsoft licensed other tech companies to make their own "parts" for XP, then you'd have a more apt comparison.
        • Curiously enough...

          ...IBM licensed the OS/2 codebase to Serenity Systems years ago when it stopped selling OS/2 itself. It's called EComStation and is still supported and sold.

          I don't think that's the approach MS should take, but I think it makes sense to support old versions of Windows for an annual subscription fee (I'd pay $20-$50 a year; and maybe MS could legalize illegal copies for another $50). The price should be affordable (probably going up as the old versions get older), but enough to provide some profit. And when demand is so low that support can no longer be profitably provided, *then* discontinue it.

          Makes more sense than an enforced upgrade cycle.
          John L. Ries
          • Still $50 to expensive

            If you pirated Windows XP, $50 is still too expensive for each year. When Windows 8 came out it was sold at $15 for to upgrade from Windows 7 and $40 for everybody else. You can still buy Windows 7 license at a very low price if you buy the software as a OEM.
          • Legalization would be a one time fee

            $50 per year *is* to expensive.
            John L. Ries
        • Apples and Oranges, not the same

          Car parts are hardware. If Ford stop building fenders for Taurus but license them to a third party it is only a piece of metal, that anyone can do. Software is a different preposition. Add to that if your Taurus fender rust up or don't last as long as the original you still blame Ford, not the third party. Same with Windows. If it breaks down, people expect Microsoft to take responsibility for their Windows software made by third party.
      • Doctors will support an old person

        Supporting an old OS is nothing like a car. A car is physical. An OS can be sent over the internet. Steel costs money. OSes do not. Old OSes cost nothing. Cars are open source. You can modify a car quite easily and fix it yourself. XP can not be fixed. The engine compartment is locked and only Microsoft has the keys. So Microsoft has the keys to my car and will not let me fix my car because they deem that my car is too old and should be junked. I don't want to junk XP. I want to be able to fix it myself and not junk it because Microsoft says so.
        Tim Jordan
    • Because it's old and there are newer, better products

      Nobody supports software longer than Microsoft. XP will be almost 12 1/2 years old when they end it.
      Larry Seltzer
      • Not sure about that

        I don't know about the policies of old line computer manufacturers now, but I seem to recall that Compaq/DEC was still supporting the PDP-11 at the time of the merger with HP.
        John L. Ries
      • Assuming they really mean it this time.

        The last time it was brought back due to the backwash against Vista...

        This time they could bring it backup due to the incompatibility that W7 has, AND backwash against W8.
      • Linux is 22½ years old

        Linux is 22½ years old and I hope it lives forever. Do you think Linus Torvalds has any plans to retire Linux any time soon because, you know, it is 22½ years old?
        Tim Jordan
    • Because they already extended it once

      A business needs to make money to pay their employees, and XP isn't going yo pay the bills. How can it? Nobody is paying for XP anymore.
      Michael Alan Goff
      • MS can always charge for the support

        Seems fair to me.
        John L. Ries
        • John L. Ries: "MS can always charge for the support"

          They do, it's called custom support. Very expensive as well. So much so, that only large enterprises can afford it.
          Rabid Howler Monkey
          • In which case...

            ...MS might make more money by lowering the price. This is, of course, assuming that the real intent is to maximize profit instead of artificially inflating sales of the latest and greatest for public relations purposes.
            John L. Ries
          • Eh?

            Most people still won't pay for patches. And people really should stop living so far in the past. :|
            Michael Alan Goff