Repent, the End is Nigh

Windows XP has gone into the void—why have companies only just started caring?

The Legacy of Windows XP

Shiny and new operating systems have always intrigued me, so I was always the one to stay on top of the new OS’s that came out for whatever machine I was using. I love learning new things, and I was (and still am) convinced that an upgrade to an OS was a chance to learn and improve on the tactics I have already been using on my current machine. It brought new life into the products I owned, and I appreciated it.

The operating-system-formerly-known-as-Windows-XP took a nose-dive into unsupported territory after April 8th, 2014. When I heard this news, I glanced over the article. I don’t think I even read it, to be honest; probably just the title. An operating system that is almost 13 years old has to be used by such a small subset of users that really don’t feel like keeping up with the times that their cries would probably be muffled by all the people who yell at them to “upgrade already”.

However, if we take a look at browser statistics, there are upwards of 10% of all users that think very differently.

Looking at the numbers

Windows XP has seen a downward trend over the last year, but I could not believe that at the start of 2014 there was still \~12% of users still using the OS to browse the web. Just a few months ago, the traffic from all Mac and mobile devices was still lower than all of machines that still ran XP.

Looking at that type of data almost puts me in a panic for the companies that still run XP. In many cases, entire plants and server structures rely on the OS to work every day, all because their management wanted to ride the XP train as long as they could, most likely in an attempt to save money. I have worked at companies that still have their critical functions set up with their XP computers. That is a potentially scary place for a lot of employers—their entire infrastructure relied on Microsoft supporting an operating system that they have no real investment in anymore.

I’m particularly interested in how companies can move forward and get rid of the mentality that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, and move onto the mentality that if it can be done better, why not do it? If enough people—or better yet, enough companies—think this way, it will make a fundamental shift in the way a lot of people think about the business of getting things done. One thing that I’m concerned about is: how can upgrading be dealt with?

To Update, or not to update?

When people are given the choice between updating and staying on the same operating system, I think that consumers end up always getting the short end of the stick. Change-logs are often filled with technical jargon that filters out all the people who want to know what they are getting in the fancy new release. Many companies stick with telling the people to update only when a critical function they want implemented is added, which is most likely a terrible thing to do since most updates have security updates or workflow changes that make things more efficient and safer. 

I’m going to have plenty of enemies here, but as for the corporate world, the least that a company can do is update to the latest operating system that they have running on their machines. Unless it is absolutely critical to their day-to-day function, I think it should be necessary to upgrade, if only for the sake of not getting left behind. Specific programs that have support dropped should be quarantined to computers put under lock and key and only used when absolutely necessary, and definitely only when offline. Many of the key viruses that are distributed are done so online, so taking the critical machines off that need to use older firmware would definitely be a good start.

However, as much as I think about it I can’t come to grips with the fact that everyone should update at the same time. Take iOS, for example. Whenever Apple comes out with a new version to update, it is impossible for a user to revert back to an earlier version should anything go wrong. Sure, this encourages developers to keep supporting newer and newer software, but what happens if the software is no longer reliable, or is abandoned? Newer users won’t be able to use the older software because it cannot run properly on their device.

There are many things that can go wrong with staying on older firmware; updated software is usually better, the restriction associated with not being able to have faster workflows, the security updates that come with newer firmware, etc. On the other hand, updating to newer firmware and abandoning the old seems harsh, and kind of totalitarian of the companies that create the software. The mantra of today is “update or die”—although this might be a true thing that people must live with everyday, it doesn’t make it any less depressing when thinking about it.

Final thoughts

I came this far in the argument to say this; I have no concrete solutions. I’m not sure what should be done, because everyone is fully within their rights to upgrade or stay on a firmware they are comfortable with. That isn’t going to change for the foreseeable future. I think that developers just have to make a compelling argument through the software they create to convince people to stay current, but there will always be abandoned limitations to the ways that people can update.

Sometimes money is the determining factor and sometimes its the software that runs on the operating system that is to blame. Whatever the case, I think that this XP situation should be studied closely to decide what would be the best way to move forward. We could learn a lot from how the market and people reacts to the OS’s retirement.

This post is adapted from a post I had already written previously on Medium, but I found it relevant with all of the latest operating systems that are getting their due--iOS, OS X, Windows 10, etc.