1. Computer problem? Tech Support Guy is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations. Click here to join today! If you're new to Tech Support Guy, we highly recommend that you visit our Guide for New Members.

Is end-of-life Vista more dangerous than end-of-life XP ?

Discussion in 'General Security' started by lunarlander, Feb 14, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
  1. lunarlander

    lunarlander Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    10,490
    Hi,

    I am wondering if end-of-life Vista is more dangerous than end-of-life XP. My reasoning is that Vista more closely resembles Win 10 than XP. So as MS was saying, attackers may reverse engineer patches meant for recent OS's into exploits that work on the end-of-life one. So it seems to me that Vista looks more dangerous than XP.
     
  2. lunarlander

    lunarlander Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    10,490
    Any thoughts on this is much appreciated.
     
  3. Johnny b

    Johnny b

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Messages:
    4,443
    First Name:
    John
    Hi lunarlander :)

    Having skipped Vista and gone straight from XP to Win7, I can only fall back on speculation.
    Neither is in much use and Vista less than XP.
    With security apps focusing more on the newer Vista and that many of the weaknesses of XP supposedly corrected in Vista, I suspect a security comparison favors Vista.
    Plus at such low usage numbers, reverse engineering might not seem as profitable as focusing on hacking into newer systems.
    Eventually, 3rd party security solutions and support for Vista will fade away, in time leaving it more vulnerable than today. That seems to be what's happening to XP just as it did with Win9x.
    IMO, in time, when 3rd party support fades away for any OS, it becomes more and more dangerous to depend upon as a secure environment.

    For internet usage, I've switched at this time, to a Linux distro. But time will catch up with it , too, and I'll need to consider new versions or even different OS's as weakness appear.


    John :)
     
  4. lunarlander

    lunarlander Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    10,490
    I see your point, security apps support would mitigate problems on Vista.
     
  5. Macboatmaster

    Macboatmaster Trusted Advisor Spam Fighter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2010
    Messages:
    21,970
    As it was such a failure as an OS and indeed Microsoft themselves said it was one of their worst mistakes - and the use rate is less than 1/3 of XP it will IMHO die a far quicker death than XP
    Indeed Firefox will stop supporting in September 2017

    The reverse engineering to find the security hole that the patch fixed and then exploit that security weakness on the unsupported OS, as that of course cannot have had the patch, is no more of a concern for the home user than the general risk of running an OS that is unsupported. Vista will be no more open to exploit than any other unsupported system.

    However because it was so unpopular as I said - browsers, AV`s, drivers for attendant hardware etc will cease supporting it far quicker than they have done XP
     
  6. lunarlander

    lunarlander Thread Starter

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    10,490
    I rather liked Vista because of all the security improvements. It was more secure than XP in many ways.
     
  7. Triple6

    Triple6 Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    52,901
    First Name:
    Rob
    I agree that it being more in common with Windows 7 and newer may indeed be a bad thing. But Vista isn't that common, most people moved on from Vista to 7 and newer or stuck it out with Windows XP, I think I've seen numbers putting Vista usage under half a percentage and most people are not attached to Vista like they are to XP.

    I've never really considered Vista a failure, I definitely do not prefer it to Windows 7 or newer though but on good hardware I did prefer it to XP t times. The problem I see with Vista was that it brought so many changes and required more powerful hardware. But manufacturer's stuck it on cheap low end computers and didn't get their drivers ready for it; NVidia drivers caused a massive amount of problems and the public opinion sank it. But Windows 7 would not have been the success that it was if not for the changes that Vista brought about, in many of the same ways ME and 8.1 helped develop and evolve Windows 7 and 10.
     
  8. Macboatmaster

    Macboatmaster Trusted Advisor Spam Fighter

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2010
    Messages:
    21,970
    I do not disagree with that - what I was trying to convey was that it was unpopular. very hungry on resource use, a less efficient manager of the use of resources including ram, than was indeed XP.

    Because it was so unpopular - is the reason it will die quicker - from the aspect of third party support than XP has done
     
  9. Sponsor

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 733,556 other people just like you!

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Short URL to this thread: https://techguy.org/1185340

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice