Microsoft was ‘irresponsible’ to release XP fix

This may be a controversial opinion, but surely Microsoft was wrong to release a fix for Windows XP (News, Issue 505, page 6). I know Microsoft doesn’t do this very often, and it said that the fix shouldn’t be seen as a change in policy. But that doesn’t mean many companies and organisations still using XP won’t see it as a change in policy.

If I was head of an IT department that was strapped for cash, I would now think twice about upgrading, because I’d feel confident that Microsoft would protect me from ‘cybergeddon’.

Does it go too far to call Microsoft’s action irresponsible? It may have prevented infection in the short term, but long term it could have disastrous consequences if it results in the continued use of XP. Microsoft should learn the lessons of recent political misadventures: don’t perform U-turns. I like certainty in my computing affairs. I want red lines separating safe progprograms from unsafe. Byby releasing this fix, Microsoft has muddied the waters.

I’ll never use XP again because I know the risks, but what about people who don’t read Computeractive, or are simply less technically minded? They might be misled into thinking that XP is safe after all. Deep down, perhaps Microsoft just wanted a bit of good publicity. Maybe it feared that after the Wannacry attack it would be condemned if it didn’t act. But it’s not like withholding a vaccine during an epidemic. Nobody dies as a result of these ransomware attacks. We do get through them, maybe a bit poorer and inconvenienced, but the attacks are not so serious that Microsoft should feel obliged to rush out fixes for defunct operating systems. Why should Microsoft have to provide a safety net for companies who are too inept to run an up-to-date version of Windows? Patrick Dyke