Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

x64 Edition Updates Until 2015?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Here's my concern: I am aware that extended phase support for Windows XP x64 Edition goes down the drain with 32-bit Windows XP on April 8, 2014. But Windows Server 2003 is in extended phase support until July 2015. And Windows XP x64 Edition shares more in common with Windows Server 2003.

So for an extra year, will I be able to manually download Windows Server 2003 updates and use them to patch my system running Windows XP x64 Edition? I enjoy using 64-bit Windows XP and my system is pretty snappy with it. So the longer I can run the OS, the happier I am.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Jody Thornton
(Hamilton, Ontario)


How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,528 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Yes but you can't do it directly. You need to extract the update, edit update.inf and "patch" update.exe. Unfortunately I don't know how to patch the update.exe for x64 :/

post-47483-1123010975.png


#3
5eraph

5eraph

    Update Packrat

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined 04-July 05
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

A file comparison showing how it can be patched has been posted on RyanVM.net, tomasz86. Editing the INF should not be necessary. :)

Edited by 5eraph, 13 February 2012 - 07:22 PM.


#4
tomasz86

tomasz86

    www.windows2000.tk

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,528 posts
  • Joined 27-November 10
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Right :blushing: I thought that there are differences in [Version] between 2K3 and XP x64. That's why I talked about editing the update.inf.

post-47483-1123010975.png


#5
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Darn! I was hoping for a more drag and drop solution. but you did answer my questions, and that was very helpful.

Now it means I have to decide on an alternate lightweight OS that can run select Win32 apps, and yet not be a pig like Windows Vista or Windows 7.

Cheers,
Jody

#6
5eraph

5eraph

    Update Packrat

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined 04-July 05
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

A three line script can make it drag and drop once you have the patched file. It only needs to do the following:

  • Extract the update package.
  • Copy the patched update.exe into the extraction directory.
  • Run the patched update.exe
:)

"%~1" /u /x:"%~dp0%~n1"
copy /y "%~dp0update.exe" "%~dp0%~n1\update\"
"%~dp0%~n1\update\update.exe"

Edited by 5eraph, 13 February 2012 - 10:27 PM.


#7
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
Well I've bookmarked Ryan's board and this thread to revisit later.

Of course, no one knows if as of May 2014, Microsoft will change other parts of the updates to make sure XP x64 is blocked out.

Thanks,
Jody
:)

#8
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

I suppose the status of updates never changed here, eh?  I suppose the .INF editing would still be necessary?



#9
5eraph

5eraph

    Update Packrat

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined 04-July 05
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

No changes. Patching update.exe still works consistently. Haven't needed to edit the included INF yet. We'll see.

#10
TrevMUN

TrevMUN

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 53 posts
  • Joined 26-March 14
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Since my thread was getting hijacked by this topic I'd just thought I'd move what responses I'd have from there to here ...

 

With the concerns raised that Microsoft may lock XP64 users out of Windows Update, wouldn't it be possible to use Windows Update Downloader to grab the Windows Server 2003 patches anyway? From there, modification of the patches should be pretty easy, right?

 

Granted, it'd be wise to make a backup/system restore before applying any patches, but.



#11
5eraph

5eraph

    Update Packrat

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 1,168 posts
  • Joined 04-July 05
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

That's one possibility. But I don't have much experience with the Windows Update Downloader. I always check the Microsoft Security Response Center and use their link to the latest Security Bulletin Summary on Patch Tuesday, which is posted on or just after 10am US Pacific Time on the second Tuesday of the month. On that page (for example, 2014 March) I expand "Windows Operating System and Components" and look at the rows for "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2" and "Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2". Then I follow the specific bulletin links at the top of the columns to their download locations.

I check the lists for both operating systems because they're sometimes different. Only the XPx64 row will include updates for Media Player 11, because WMP11 is not supported on Win2003. And the Win2003x64 row sometimes includes updates that are relevant to XPx64 and still offered on the Windows Update website for XPx64 despite their absence from the XPx64 row in the Bulletin Summary. Microsoft's left hand often doesn't know what the right hand is doing...

Edited by 5eraph, 26 March 2014 - 04:10 PM.


#12
Flasche

Flasche

    A bottled message!!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Joined 20-January 14
  • OS:ME
  • Country: Country Flag

I dont understand why this is such a big deal. Windows 9x has been dead for nearly 8 years and its still useable. Sure M$ might of forgotten about you, but not the 3rd parties. XP is still 2nd most popular OS out there. And since windows XP x64 is the 2003 code which still has time I don't understand the panic.


Seeker Of Truth by E. E. Cummings                                                                                           Quote (Me)

  • seeker of truth                                                 "If you want to reach and discover the true meaning of order; You must go through chaos first."            344d0f9.jpg
  • follow no path                                 
  • all paths lead where
  • truth is here
 

#13
bphlpt

bphlpt

    MSFN Addict

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,823 posts
  • Joined 12-May 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

I dont understand why this is such a big deal. Windows 9x has been dead for nearly 8 years and its still useable. Sure M$ might of forgotten about you, but not the 3rd parties. XP is still 2nd most popular OS out there. And since windows XP x64 is the 2003 code which still has time I don't understand the panic.

 
The "big deal" is that Jody, and others, believe that using an OS that is no longer officially "supported" is not as secure and therefore puts them more at risk to viruses, hacker's attacks and other malware, and they want their computing environment to be as safe and secure as possible.  That is a perfectly valid desire and they are correct in their belief.  But I, and others, believe that the amount of additional risk they will be subjected to is so minimal as to not be a factor for the average user, provided that the OS and other software they run meet their needs with the hardware they use, the other software is kept up-to-date, and they protect themselves with a good router with a hardware firewall, use an up-to-date software firewall, anti-virus and anti-malware, and most importantly pay attention and be a smart computer user and don't do anything stupid, since the biggest weakness in computer security is always the user.  As the users of Win9X and Win2K will attest, the daily use of "unsupported" OS will get more difficult as time goes on, but in general it is more likely to be because of harder to find drivers for newer hardware, changing web standards making older browsers not fully functional on newer web pages, or evolving media standards making it harder to play newer media smoothly, than because of security issues.  I don't at all mean to say that security issues are not important, especially these days, but following the above advice should minimize the impact for the average XP user for quite awhile.
 
Cheers and Regards


Posted Image


#14
TrevMUN

TrevMUN

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 53 posts
  • Joined 26-March 14
  • OS:XP Pro x64
  • Country: Country Flag

I don't think it's right to call it panic so much as concern, but that's not to say that Microsoft hasn't been really ramping up the scare tactics to try and get the remaining XP user base to convert.

 

I'd mentioned in my thread that XP users are being met with increasingly obnoxious amounts of scorn. A lot of people, tech journalists and common users alike, are convinced that the moment April 8 rolls around, every XP machine is going to be nothing more than botnet fodder or a steaming pile of malware. However true or untrue this might turn out to be, XP's current status in the global PC market does warrant some concern. It can't enjoy security through obscurity because it's still commanding a third of the market share right now (according to Avast! at least); malicious types are still going to see XP as a juicy target if they find an unpatched exploit or vulnerability.

 

Granted, I'm aware that XP64 enjoys some added insurance in the form of shared architectural security improvements with the other x64 OSes, and it has a few quirks of its own that has prevented malware from sinking its hooks into my machine, but I do like the idea keeping any leaks plugged regardless.

 

As a side note, I don't really consider an OS dead until it simply can not serve any useful function for a modern user. Reading these forums has been eye-opening when it comes to seeing what you guys can do with systems everyone's given up for useless.

Heck, after reading some of the topics here, an IT friend of mine thinks that "Firefox on Windows 98" should be the Tamarian idiom for teaching an old dog new tricks.



#15
oldskool

oldskool

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 46 posts
  • Joined 09-April 14
  • OS:2003 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Cumputers don't get viruses on thier own.  The people using them give them viruses.  I would never blame the OS for getting a virus if I Caused that to happen.  I think people have been brainwashed by microsoft into thinking that cumputers just magically go up in flames or somthing without security updates i honestly do not know.  I have ran computers without patches and AV for years and never get viruses or get attacked.  Why becasue I know what I am doing. 
 
Honestly there are tons of people out there that just don't get virus it has nothing to do with security updates or antivirus.  It has everything to do with bad user habbits or lack of technical knowledge in knowing what is going on with things and how viruses or malware find their ways onto PCs.  And in every scenario it requres the user to initiate it.
 
Simply best advice is dont use Internet exploder.  use firefox and keep it updated, install add block plus and no script.  Disable Java plugin unless you for somreason need to run java.  Turn off file sharing.  Disable all of those useless services.  Don't install things that you don't know what they are or whats in them.  Passowrd the account.  If you can get a good harware based fire wall block all ports except ports like 80 or instant mesaging etc, then that means the only way u can get anything is through those ports. Use a router between u and the internet at the very least.  All of these things will keep you from getting any viruses or malware even without patches.

 

 

Do not ever think just becasue you are running a supported OS that you are safer than me.  I can run with no updates no AV and not get virus all while other people who run windows 7, or 8 have massive spyware infections or viruses.  From installing things even when they are promted and warned by the OS simply cuz they don't know what they are doing.


Edited by oldskool, 10 April 2014 - 11:48 PM.


#16
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

I dont understand why this is such a big deal. Windows 9x has been dead for nearly 8 years and its still useable. Sure M$ might of forgotten about you, but not the 3rd parties. XP is still 2nd most popular OS out there. And since windows XP x64 is the 2003 code which still has time I don't understand the panic.

Just a couple of things I wanted to say on this, because it irks me how a couple of you are extremely fatigued about ad nauseum conversation on Windows Updates/XP EOL.  Here's wny I keep bringing it up (along with many others mind you) and contribute to several update threads.

 

First off, the way I see it, Windows XP's EOL is "THE BIG STORY OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS" right now.  I think of it as the same weight in computers as 9/11 or JFK was to news (I'm exaggerating a tad, but there is a comparison).  Days after the attacks, I still only wanted to hear, talk about or find out more about anything that had to do with the events of September 11th.  Some of us become fixated on a story and want to follow it's development, and visit EVERY MINUTE detail of it.  With our XP topic, I find that I hear different details about different elements of the story as time moved closer.

 

Those that disagree with what I've stated, instead of disparaging my having the level of interest I have in watching Windows XP's EOL unfold; skip the thread.  If I wish to discuss it in fine detail, thread after thread (again others seem to as well), why can't I?  Really, I'd like to know that.

 

Besides, what other really interesting things are happening in Windows right now?  Windows 8.1 Update?  What else?  Not despite my lack of interest in that, I won't chime in one of those threads and tell them to stop whining or get a life (Yes I know jaclaz apologized, but at the end of the day, I'm sure he'd wish I'd shut up about XP EOL; but I won't because sometimes the most obscure details come from asking things repeatedly.  Different people tell you different things, and sometimes when you cross-reference something, you get clarification.)

 

Besides, I've already switched to Vista, so I'm watching the EOL occur from afar.  But if it turns out XP users end up faring better than expected, I may switch back to XP x64.  I simply like to reasearch things through and through.

 

 

**** UPDATE ****

 

Just to further validate my viewpoint, in a related story with MSE support, we were originally told that MSE support for XP would die on April 8th.  Then we have been told that support for MSE on XP will remain until July 2015.  Now, the MSE page has been removed and is unavailable (at least accoding to a thread on this forum).  So see?  Things are constantly in flux.  That's why speculative questioning (even if repeated) is interesting to me.

 

Cheers,

Jody

:)


Edited by JodyThornton, 12 April 2014 - 08:43 AM.


#17
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,830 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

(Yes I know jaclaz apologized, but at the end of the day, I'm sure he'd wish I'd shut up about XP EOL; but I won't because sometimes the most obscure details come from asking things repeatedly.  Different people tell you different things, and sometimes when you cross-reference something, you get clarification.)

 

 

Just for the record, the message I was trying to convey was simply that it is futile to "worry" (please replace this with "concern" or any other synonym you might prefer :)), since whatever will happen is well outside our sphere of influence, i.e. when (and if) some "news" will be available, then we will talk about the news.

When there are no news, I personally see very little coming out talking of them (since they do not - yet -exist).

More like in "A watched pot never boils" than anything else ;).

 

More specifically, in the post that seemingly still offends you, 

http://www.msfn.org/...e/#entry1072674

and for which I repeat my apologies:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171385-xp64-on-ddr4-is-it-doable/?p=1072856. 

the proposal was to "suspend" the speculative talking for the short period between March 26, 2014 and April 8, 2014, nothing more.

 

jaclaz



#18
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,405 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

:zzz:


Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#19
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

But see submixc, how is that response any more productive than mine?  So you're not interested.

 

And no, jaclaz, I'm not "offended".  Everything's fine.  I'm not mad at anyone.  I'm just a person that gets vehemently behind something.  I'm never a fence sitter.  But all is good.

:)



#20
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,405 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Again, :zzz:

Just to further validate my viewpoint, in a related story with MSE support, we were originally told that MSE support for XP would die on April 8th.  Then we have been told that support for MSE on XP will remain until July 2015.  Now, the MSE page has been removed and is unavailable (at least accoding to a thread on this forum).  So see?  Things are constantly in flux.  That's why speculative questioning (even if repeated) is interesting to me.

 

No, they are not. It's only Saturday after Patch Tuesday and this is all "speculative" FUD. As for the MSE, that -appears- to be based upon several factors, since I (and others) was able to get there from here -and- prove it's the SAME DOWNLOAD! Maybe you didn't actually READ the whole thread? PAGE IS STILL THERE! (jeez, dude!)

 

:ph34r: :ph34r: ... :zzz: :zzz:

 

edit - "Patience is a virtue." ;)


Edited by submix8c, 12 April 2014 - 09:15 AM.

Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#21
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

The point is you brought it up the MSE issue yourself prior to knowing that it was back.  Don't you snore at me for stating my point.  You DO offend me.  You're nothing but a smart a--

 

Off I go, which I'm sure will make you just happy.  I've felt I've contributed to this board, but people who act like you just make being on forums a complete displeasure.

 

"Duh!" and "Jeez Dude" (such bright responses)

 

Bye!



#22
submix8c

submix8c

    Inconceivable!

  • Patrons
  • 4,405 posts
  • Joined 14-September 05
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

No, I did not. -X- did (his topic).

http://www.msfn.org/...ls-grab-it-now/

However, you did here.

http://www.msfn.org/...e-and-security/

 

Yes, it might.


Edited by submix8c, 12 April 2014 - 09:32 AM.

Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!

Posted Image


#23
Flasche

Flasche

    A bottled message!!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Joined 20-January 14
  • OS:ME
  • Country: Country Flag

Just to let you know you can still get MSE from filehippo http://www.filehippo...y_essentials_xp . Till which after download Windows updater will give you an option to download the latest which they removed from XP download at M$ site.


Seeker Of Truth by E. E. Cummings                                                                                           Quote (Me)

  • seeker of truth                                                 "If you want to reach and discover the true meaning of order; You must go through chaos first."            344d0f9.jpg
  • follow no path                                 
  • all paths lead where
  • truth is here
 

#24
JodyT

JodyT

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Joined 05-April 11
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Well thanks Flasche.  I was just trying to make a point, but submix8c basically says you can't do that.  It's people that act the way he does that sours the board.  Too bad really.  It gives the feeling of you have to be in the "MSFN Club" or else.  Just even look at the s--head's last response to me.

 

Take care to all of the worthwhile folks on here.



#25
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 14,830 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Just to let you know you can still get MSE from filehippo http://www.filehippo...y_essentials_xp . Till which after download Windows updater will give you an option to download the latest which they removed from XP download at M$ site.

Well, just for the record, right now you can still get it from MS's own "direct links" that - X - posted on the mentioned thread:

http://www.msfn.org/...ls-grab-it-now/

 

and it is also on the Wayback Machine.

 

jaclaz






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users