Microsoft would like to remind us that Windows Vista Service Pack 1 support has ended, and if you’d like support on Vista, you really should upgrade (for free) from SP1 to SP2. It’s easy. Just run Windows Update.

Or, better yet, upgrade to Windows 7. (Microsoft’s suggestion, not mine. See?)

As self-serving as Microsoft’s suggestion of upgrading from Windows Vista to Windows 7 may be, I find myself in the rare position of actually agreeing with them on that. Yes, it costs money, but let’s face it, Windows Vista is a joke. It’s Windows ME2. Do you really want to be stuck on it?

Well, your choice. Either way, Microsoft’s point is that Windows Vista SP1 is officially dead to them.

No surprises there, as Microsoft probably wishes everyone would just forget that Windows Vista ever existed. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if support of Windows Vista ended with Service Pack 2 and Windows XP actually outlived it!

Speaking of, if you’re one of those people holding on to dear life to Windows XP (and I even fall into that category to some extent) the Windows XP support will end… One day… Maybe… If it isn’t extended again. I guess over in MS World, now that Windows 7 has finally given people something stable and usable to upgrade to (since Windows Vista failed miserably on that front) we’re all supposed to upgrade to Windows 7. (Except for those of us who can’t, of course.)

Here’s the really odd thing though. Microsoft claims that Windows XP will indeed die. It has less than 1000 days less of its extended support. Officially, on the 8th of April, 2014, Microsoft will no longer provide security patches, hotfixes, etc. for any version of Windows XP. I get that. It’s something of a bummer for those of us using it on low-powered low-memory laptops and netbooks where Windows 7 is a less-than-convincing “upgrade”, leaving us … well, SoL. Not to mention those of us just keeping old PCs alive! It’d be one thing if Windows 7 could actually run as well as Windows XP on an old or budget system, but it’s another thing entirely when it can’t, and in even more cases where Windows 7 can’t be installed on the box at all!

But things take an even stranger turn, because along come the rumors and innuendo of Windows 8. Microsoft exec Tami Reller just told folks at Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Conference 2011 that if a PC could run Windows 7, it could also run Windows 8. It’s an assurance to PC makers (and consumers) that anyone who is running Windows 7 now will be able to upgrade easily to Windows 8. You won’t have to worry about memory or processor speed at all. (Which could be a Microsoft first since it left the concept of Windows as a DOS shell behind!)

However, that raises an odd question in my mind: What about the army of folks still on Windows XP? Can they upgrade to Windows 8?

Why do I ask that?

Why do I think that they even could if they can’t upgrade to Windows 7?

Simple!

Windows 8, supposedly, will not just be available for your PC, but also for your ARM-based tablet! And let’s face it, Android tablets are not running Windows 7 for a reason. (Well, a couple of them.) It’s not just a matter of ARM vs. x86, but also of resources. Linux and Linux-based OSes such as Meego, sure. Windows 7? Nuh-uh!

And Intel is still pushing hard for Atom to replace ARM in Android tablet manufacturer’s minds. Will it? I doubt it. It’s like swatting a fly with a … hardcover book. But a Windows 7 tablet, that’d be spiffy … if it could run faster than molasses in January. Which it can’t. (I would know, as I have an Atom-based tablet. I technically can install, but if I thought it was already slow running Windows XP…)

But if Windows 8 could run well on low resources like on a tablet?

Because let’s face it, Windows is a resource hog compared to Android or iOS as an operating system goes. We’re even seeing some grumbling from WebOS tablet users that the OS itself is sluggish. The performance of the OS on a dinky little tablet processor makes a world of difference. One that Windows 7 just can’t even try to compete. So if Microsoft wants people to actually bother putting Windows 8 on tablets, it’s going to have to trim up that kernel. Will Windows 8 be split into two worlds: PC running kernel-heavy like Windows always is and tablet running kernel-lite like Windows CE or Windows PHONE 7? Or will Windows 8 actually be lean by design and work for anyone and everyone equally well with the same kernel for all?

If the latter then it would be a Microsoft first! Which makes me very doubtful.

But it would be an extremely welcome change, especially as a lightweight kernel from Microsoft that still ran PC software might even just give all of those aging computers running Windows XP an actual upgrade path! If Microsoft were interested in listening to what customers want (instead of just telling us what we need) Windows 8 could possibly be the savior of Windows XP users who would like to upgrade, if only Microsoft would make an OS that they could actually upgrade to.

I wouldn’t hold my breath on it though. Because that just isn’t the Microsoft way of doing things. Even if it would make sense. And sales. Lots and lots of sales.

Yes, that’s right, today is the first birthday of the release of Microsoft’s Windows 7 operating system.  It’s officially one year old.  And according to Microsoft, Windows 7 is “the fastest selling operating system ever.“  Well who am I to argue with that?  Actually, it’s quite possible, when you think about it…

Let’s put it in perspective.  Here’s a tweet from Microsoft:

“You told us what you loved about Windows XP and how to make it even better. We designed Windows 7 to simplify the things you do every day.”

Right then.  That perspective?  Well, notice how a certain Windows Vista isn’t being mentioned here.  Yeah.  That one.  The one that was Windows ME 2?  The one that the industry avoided like the plague when at all possible?  The one that even Microsoft seems to conveniently forget to mention has ever existed?  Yes indeed.  That one.

And Windows XP?  Well it retailed way back on 25th of October in 2001, so it’ll officially be 9 years old in  just a couple of days.  And it’s still used heavily.  Why?  Certainly not for any love of Windows XP.  I mean it’s a good operating system, but even the best in the world doesn’t last 9 years strong on its own merits.  No.  It’s still so heavily used because migration to Windows Vista just wasn’t happening en masse.  Those long-delayed migrations as people avoided Windows Vista are finally underway as people learn to trust Windows 7.  So it comes as no surprise then, with the absolute flop that Windows Vista was, and how positively ancient Windows XP is while people still cling to it for fear of Vista, that Windows 7 sales are just absolutely skyrocketing now that people have a non-Vista solution.

So Happy Birthday Windows 7!  You’re not only the savior of Microsoft’s OS dominance, but you’re also now a whole one year old!

As for Windows Vista?  Microsoft probably wishes people had never even heard of it…

Today marks the end of Microsoft’s support for Windows XP SP2.  It’s a sad day, though we are reminded that support for Win XP SP3 does continue.

But for those of you who are still working on your migration to Microsoft’s latest darling, Windows 7, you just got a little more breathing room.

As was previously declared, your right to downgrade your shiny new Windows 7 box down to Windows XP Professional would end in 18 months from the Windows 7 launch, or until the release of the first service pack for Windows 7, whichever came sooner.  This put it at the date of October 22, 2010.  In other words, in a couple of months.  And right on track, the first beta of Windows 7 SP1 is heading out as we speak, regardless of how generally useless as it is to most people because it contains no new features, just the same security updates Windows 7 users already have.  But the death knell for Windows XP was ringing.

In typical Microsoft leniency towards Win XP however, they’ve decided to listen to customers, and delay that order.  OEMs were afraid that a date-based limit on when boxes could be shipped with downgrades to Windows XP Professional would be confusing to users, since so many people were still demanding them.  (For migration purposes, of course.)  And yet again, Microsoft listened, breathing yet more life in the the operating system that wouldn’t die.

Yes, that’s right.  In fact, according to the blog, there seems to be no new deadline for Windows XP.  Though we are reminded in a round-about way that again the official support for Win XP SP2 ends today on July 13th, 2010, and Win XP SP3 support ends in of April 2014.

Here’s a bit of interesting news from Microsoft: The Windows XP Mode for compatibility to Windows XP on Windows 7 Professional boxes will no longer require virtualization hardware to be built into the CPU of the box.  A long-standing question of just why this was required in the first place finally has an intelligent answer:  It no longer is a requirement.

Right then.

I mean sure, we can all understand that it may be advantageous to use a processor that has Intel’s Virtualization Technology (VT) or AMD’s Virtualization (V) in it if we’re going to be running some kind of virtual PC.  That’s what the technology is there for, after all.  So it should provide some boon.  But should it be necessary?  Well, it never has before for running a virtual PC from the likes of VMware and such.

And that’s exactly all that Windows 7′s Windows XP Mode is.  It’s just a virtual PC running Windows XP from a Windows 7 Professional machine.  (Or Windows 7 Enterprise or Windows 7 Ultimate.)  It sucks up 1GB of RAM, 15GB of hard drive space.  It’s nothing all together special in concept, just a nicely packaged solution.  But VMware, for example, could be used to do this very task if one didn’t trust Microsoft’s virtualization software for some reason.

So why then did Microsoft require hardware virtualization to run their solution before?  One can only wonder.  But at least now it is no longer requisite, and people everywhere can then use the Windows XP Mode under Windows 7 with pretty much any old PC, just like it should be.

Which should make a lot of IT departments happy, as now they actually have a cheap and usable solution to supporting all of those aging Windows XP applications in their emerging Windows 7 world.  Not to mention the folks at home who have been afraid to upgrade.

Isn’t virtualization wonderful?

There’s been a newly discovered flaw in Microsoft’s Virtual PC (and similar virtualization technologies such as in Microsoft Virtual PC 2007, Virtual Server 2005, and the Windows XP virtualization mode used by Windows 7) which is a grave security concern in that it allows a hacker to use memory management in Microsoft’s Virtual Machine Monitor to bypass security features like Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Safe Exception Handlers (SafeSEH), and Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) on virtual Windows PCs.  Meaning any old vulnerability which these technologies closed the hole for, Virtual PC’s bug reopens those holes, making these PCs entirely hackable again through their hypervisor.

Fortunately this bug is in the Virtual PC software, and not in Microsoft’s more high-end Hyper-V enterprise-class server virtualization software.  And just as fortuitous, it only affects virtual PCs.  Anyone running Windows without virtualization is still safe.

But the thing is, Microsoft is downplaying the security concerns, claiming that it’s not a vuln in and of itself, as it is merely a means to “exploit security vulnerabilities already present on the system, rather than an actual vulnerability.”

That seems rather a touchy point to make, as it amounts to the same thing.  Whether it is an exploit which allows you to take control of a machine, or an exploit which allows you to bypass the security that prevented you from using a known exploit to take over a machine, the end results is rather the same.  And when it’s your software that has the hole in both cases…

Core Security Technologies, the finders of the Virtual PC bug, disagree with Microsoft’s attempt to downplay the severity.  A disagreement which has gone on for over half a year behind closed doors with Microsoft, until, finally disgruntled with Microsoft’s lack of concern, Core Security Technologies released a public security advisory apart from Microsoft.

So the vuln is now known.  But the question remains, is it a real danger, or is Microsoft right in downplaying its impact on security?