Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="ChristineBCW, post: 328, member: 20"] Here's a Google list of links for the phrase "[URL='https://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft+announces+end+of+XP+support&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb']microsoft announces end of XP support[/URL]". The first three entries are Microsoft's much-watered-down comments but within the first lines, or parapraphs, the comments have been re-written to say, "exposed to vulnerabilities". In Jan 2014,[URL='http://www.infoworld.com/article/2610402/microsoft-windows/microsoft-keeps-chipping-away-at-windows-xp-s-end-of-life-deadline.html'] InfoWorld started tracking all of Microsoft's responses[/URL] to their "open threats" by listing their new, watered down statements and backtracking attempts. But I don't remember any article that DIDN'T contain the comments about "you'll be exposed to XP's vulnerabilities" coming out of Redmond or wherever else Ballmer was standing at the time. By April, 2014, Microsoft was enlisting other speakers and writers to generate the dire warnings so the "open threats" were no longer spilling from MS employees or publications. Except that nagging nuclear-explosion pop-up which [URL='http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/Microsoft-to-end-Windows-XP-support-April-8-5298608.php']SFGate posted on their front page[/URL]. I do love Microsoft claiming "five times more vulnerable". Not 4.7, not 6.3, not 8, not 3. But FIVE. Wheeeee... I wish you could get them to cite THAT figure's source! (Actually, it comes from the Joseph McCarthy School Of Marketing. We all know how valuable THAT degree program is, right?) It's actually harder to find an article without Microsoft quoting "XP vulnerabilities" in it. [/QUOTE]

Verification