When will Microsoft pull the plug on your version of Windows or Office?

Summary: The countdown for Windows XP is about to get serious. In one year, Microsoft officially stops supporting XP. What happens when the clock runs out? And how long until your current version of Windows or Office suffers the same fate?

For the next year or so, Microsoft will officially offer support for four versions of Windows for desktop and notebook PCs.

Windows XP, the oldest of the bunch, celebrates its 12th birthday this fall. It kicks off a year-long farewell tour next week, counting down to April 8, 2014, when Microsoft officially ends its support. XP lived longer than any version of Windows ever, getting multiple extensions on its retirement date to placate customers who said no to Vista. But April 2014 is the end of the road.

XP will not get a last-minute reprieve.

Let me say that again, in boldface this time: Microsoft will not extend the support deadline for XP. If you're still relying on XP, you should have a plan to switch to a supported platform, whether it's from Microsoft or someone else.

April 8, 2014 is a deadline, not a death sentence. PCs running XP will not stop working when the clock runs out. In fact, XP diehards won’t notice anything different except an eerie quiet on Patch Tuesday. Newer Windows versions, including Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8, will continue to get security patches and bug fixes via Windows Update, but not XP. When the extended support period ends, so do those updates. (Large enterprise customers who have custom support agreements with Microsoft and who are willing to pay dearly for the privilege might be able to get custom updates after the official end of support. But consumers and small businesses will not have that option.)

None of this should be a surprise. As I’ve noted before, Microsoft has a well-established support lifecycle for its software products. It’s basically an agreement that the company makes with everyone who commits to Windows. The terms of that agreement don’t change often, which is an important assurance for business customers who tend to be conservative in their approach to upgrades.

Six months after the launch of Windows 8, it’s become obvious that Windows 7 is the new Long Term Support version. And I'm starting to get more questions from readers who are concerned that Microsoft is going to try to kill off Windows 7.

In a word: Relax. It’s not time to start a “Save Windows 7” movement yet. I've put together a chart listing the end-of-support dates for all supported versions of Windows and Office. Here’s the full list, which is accurate as of April 4, 2013.

windows-office-support-dates-apr-2013-v2

* Chart updated since original publication with dates for Office 2013, as published here.

For all of those products, Microsoft provides at least five years of mainstream support, followed by another five years of extended support. These lifecycles apply equally to business and home versions of Windows and Office. Service packs have separate end-of-support dates. For example, beginning next week you’ll need to be running Service Pack 1 to get support for Windows 7. (There’s an exhaustive FAQ if you want to dig deeper into this stuff.)

Generally, “supported” means you have access to at least one type of assisted support option (possibly paid) and no-charge security updates through channels like Windows Update and the Download Center.

The calculations start with the general availability (GA) date for each product. The official date of retirement for support is the second Tuesday in the first month of the quarter following that anniversary (which also happens to be Patch Tuesday). That grace period typically means a few weeks or months of extra support tacked on at the end of the five- and ten-year support cycles for each product.

For Windows 7, you can do the math yourself. The GA date for all Windows 7 editions was October 22, 2009. Five years after that date is October 22, 2014. The next calendar quarter begins in January, 2015, and the second Tuesday of that month is January 13. So, that's when mainstream support is scheduled to end. Extended support for business all editions goes an extra five years, until January 14, 2020, which happens to be the second Tuesday of that month. (Those calculations don't work for Windows XP, whose end-of-life date was extended artificially.)

To find the end-of-support date for any Microsoft product, use the  Microsoft Product Lifecycle Search page, the product family index, or the full A-Z product index to get the official answer. When you find the entry for a specific product, you can see the general availability date, the retirement dates for mainstream and extended support, and retirement dates for service packs.

Topics: Enterprise Software, Microsoft, Windows

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

Talkback

139 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Too bad they can't swap versions to expire

    Swap Win8 for XP and Office 2010 for 2003, for starters.
    JustCallMeBC
    • Why would they do that?

      XP is, architecture-wise, ancient. There have been so many improvements in the years, and you think they should just go backwards?
      Michael Alan Goff
      • One person's improvements

        Is another's forever buggy pile of bloated rubbish.
        JustCallMeBC
        • ... not to fix bugs

          Because going back to a codebase from 12 years ago will totally fix bugs.
          NeoBoot
          • Actually, Microsoft did something like that before

            When deciding what to do about the next OS after Windows NT 4.0, Microsoft decided to go back to the more stable 3.x version of NT and build Windows 2000 and later XP from that rather than the 4.0 version, which had moved to many things to kernel mode to speed things up at the expense of security and stability. (Before some of you whine-object about how stable your NT 4.0 servers were, you are remembering patched versions running only a few server apps on a given server.)

            Microsoft could easily go back to Win2k or XP and build an updated, compact kernel from either, and then give users a couple of GUI interfaces. (The best version of XP has long been the hacked, nLited version of it called TinyXP There is also TinyVista and Tiny7, but not nearly as impressive.)
            JustCallMeBC
          • Not true

            Windows 2000 was built on top of NT 4, not 3.x. The movement of User and GDI to kernel mode is still there today (win32k.sys).

            The only time anything remotely similar happened was the Longhorn reset, where they threw out the 2003-era PDC preview versions (which had been built on top of XP in parallel with Server 2003), and started over on top of Server 2003.
            PB_z
          • No

            I actually heard it from someone who was in know on this -- Win2K was derived mostly from NT 3.x and *not* 4.0. This basically explains the differences between NT 3.51 and 4.0, and why the 4.0 path was ended:
            http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc750820.aspx
            JustCallMeBC
          • Yuhong Bao

            Look for win32k.sys in your system32 directory.
            yuhong2
          • Longhorn was OK

            It was built on the same platform as XP. Vista was horrible, something NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME and NOT built on something stable. 7 is vista revisited. 8 is vista enhanced (Like ME was an enhanced version of 98.. awful.)
            BRING BACK LONGHORN!
            "PCs running XP will not stop working when the clock runs out." Good point. People who don't NEED new computers will KEEP THEIR XP and be damn glad there are no more updates to screw them up. I forsee using XP even five to seven years from now, no problem.
            janitorman
          • Old versus new

            Yeah buddy, they got to the Moon with 8mHz of processing power! Everything since has been anticlimactic. Bells and whistles, sound and fury signifying nothing! Newer most definitely does not mean better. The code bloat of the Windows Gui is legendary. The basic GUI does nothing that we couldn't do in DOS 6.2 with a little clever programming.
            David Beachler
        • What specific bugs are plaguing Windows8?

          or the bloat for that matter.
          Emacho
          • Well a quick Google

            Found a Forbes article from this past Sept that started off:
            "Windows 8 Bugs Hurt Microsoft, Intel Chief Said to Say By Tim Culpan & Ian King - Sep 26, 2012"

            "Intel Corp. (INTC) Chief Executive Officer Paul Otellini told employees in Taiwan that Microsoft Corp. (MSFT)’s Windows 8 operating system is being released before it’s fully ready, a person who attended the company event said."

            More recently I found a more recent complaint date March 27 on a Microsoft discussion forum about some odd-sounding problem with right-clicking on something causing a long wait icon (that rotating circle thing.) The complainant also noted that this was longstanding issue that other Win8 uses have been complaining about for while but was still not fixed.

            There, good enough for you?
            JustCallMeBC
          • Pre-release bugs?

            Is that the best you can do?
            jvitous
          • What part of

            "More recently I found a more recent complaint date March 27 on a Microsoft discussion forum about some odd-sounding problem with right-clicking on something causing a long wait icon (that rotating circle thing.) The complainant also noted that this was longstanding issue that other Win8 uses have been complaining about for while but was still not fixed" did you not understand, bright eyes? March 27 was less than 10 days ago.
            JustCallMeBC
          • Right clicking taking forever...

            The user has a bad shell extension.

            The context menu loads a shared library provided by each shell extension, and asks it do you have any menu items to add to this item, and should the menu items you are adding be shown as disabled.

            Some extensions aren't fast. TortoiseSVN and friends, for example, can hang -- as can most Internet backup software that hangs on the menus. And so what happens is that you right click, and they try to hit some website before they return yes or no -- and that website happens to be down, inaccessible, w/e and so they run to time out.

            and that entire time -- minutes -- Windows Explorer is hung.

            That's not new for Vista, it's not even new for XP. That symptom, the most common cause, and solution remain unchanged all the way back to Windows 95.
            davebac
          • Sure

            At best you're disingenuously explaining it away as an old problem with all Windows, although I've only see it a couple of times on Windows 7 PCs and even then not nearly as bad as it was described for Win8; at worst, you're trying to blow off how Microsoft can't be trusted to fix problems, however common. Bad shell extension? How is it that Linux, with it's multitude of desktop choices and environments from Gnome to Xfce, doesn't have these sorts of problems?
            JustCallMeBC
          • Dude..make your own opinions..and be accountable for them

            ..answer the question. What are these horrible bugs and bloat issues that you are going on about?
            Chewber
          • Can you not read

            "dude"? What part of my reply to "Emacho" did you not understand? Also the download sizes for Windows 8, 7 (64-bit versions) and XP are: Win8 - 3.33 Gb; Win7 (Enterprise) - 3 Gb; and XP Sp3 - 580 Mb. Compare this to the standard 64-bit Ubuntu 12.10 download of 763 Mb for the ISO.
            JustCallMeBC
          • That's it?

            No offense, but that's probably a very limited prolem, which may or may not be caused by 3rd party software. Regardless, XP was plagued with problems at launch. It wasn't even a recommended OS for gamers until SP1 and Enterprise didn't get on board until SP2. Some were sticking with 2000 well beyond SP2.

            I've run every version of windows since 3, there's nothing slow about the most recent OS or it's predecessor. if you applied some hotfixes, Vista was fine by the summer of 2007. If you didn't, then summer of 2008 when SP1 came out. By the time 7 came out, the differences in performance between Vista and 7 weren't noticeable without benchmarking and even then it was close.

            7 IS faster than XP, unless you run ancient hardware and 8 is faster than 7.
            The only complaints generally lobbed against 8 is the new UI. Whether this was a good decision by MS or not, remains to be seen, but it has nothing to do with not going back to a 12-13 year-old kernel.
            notsofast
          • Words alone

            Do not a valid point make. Windows 7's networking problems, especially regards to file transfer speeds to/from older versions of Windows is very well documented, requiring a geeky recipe of things to change, from autotuning to fiddling with NTML settings, to help mitigate. Which begs the question: were/are Microsoft's programmers to incompetent to have Win7 automatically correctly match up protocols with older Windows PCs, or was this a deliberate attempt to sneakily frustrate users to upgrade all their PC's? I recently discovered that Win7 also has problems accessing printers attached to some NAS's, including this Thecus unit I had set up. XP has no such problems, so again -- incompetence or underhanded behavior? There is no third option.
            JustCallMeBC