I agree, sadly MS forgot the values which made them succesful in the 80s and 90s before Apple: excellent backward compatiblity and a stable OPEN platform (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html). Now they try to copy the apple walled garden model, dropping therefore well accepted interfaces and APIs to push more restrictive ones... :/

That might actually happen. While you can do what you want, you are also responsible for your actions. If your OS is being used as a basis for eg botnets attacks that caused financial loss, it might happen that you get fined. Being sued by the person being harmed itself is probably impossible due legal technicalities (at least here). That line of thought is pretty much how torrent piracy can still be "harvested" legally. They cannot prove that you uploaded something, but they take you in for being responsible that your internet access was being used.

Having an old and "harmful to society" OS can be (hyperbolically) compared to driving a car that runs on kittens and exhausts pure sulphur. Your actions cause harm and costs on the society itself, hence you pay a higher fee than those tree hugging hybrid car driving vegan corneaters. Or if you use that field you have to store battery acid. It will cost you.

Now, currently XP is still "good to use", but if it actually becomes a serious security risk, any user should feel obligated to switch or go off-line. Considering that there are free alternatives available (linux) and Windows is (comparatively) cheap it isn't an unreasonable demand. It might be more difficult for companies that have to switch whole program infrastructures, but those can (IIRC) pay for "extended services" for longer XP usage. (But compare this with what companies had to invest when it came to upgrading their vehicle fleets to accommodated new ecological guidelines or renovating office because of stupid "fire hazards" I think it is manageable).

It wouldn't surprise me, if in the next ten to fifteen years most countries would actually draft some legislation in this regard. As it is my understanding, that the biggest problem with internet crime is outdated security.

You're an idiot SimonG

If it was me, I would throw to jail everyone who thinks having your OS up-to-date is your only security measure. My last malicious software/whatever on my laptop was found 3 years ago. I have anti-virus software, firewall, anti malware and identity protection installed. I think it's more than enough for home user to feel safe.

And thankfully in Poland there is no criminal responsibility based on risk, but on guilt.

As long as you can keep your OS secure, everything is fine. The problem exists only if the fact that you are using an outdated OS is causing harm.
I'm not talking about criminal responsibility, but liability.

Edit: And you don't have "Omission"?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omission_%28criminal_law%29

You used the word "fine", so I misunderstood, sorry.

And I agree with you that this is not becoming a real concern, since most of the PCs today have newest Windows version pre-installed.

I just need to gather money to buy a new notebook >.< Because as I've said previously, I cannot upgrade to Windows 7 because HP dropped support for my notebook before Windows 7 came out.

edit: yeah, ommision. But you can be guilty of ommision (but it's still a form of guilt) only if you are legally obliged to do something. And I don't see legal obligations to upgrade your software to be mandatory anytime soon.

For example, do you regurarily update your phone os? do you always install the newest version of your internet browser? If you wanted to demand everyone to update everything because "security risk" you would be soon have gazillion more bankrupts in your country.

btw. is this your "balance security and liberty" vision again? Not so balanced, if you asked me...

We must have wildly different ideas about what "cheap" (comparatively or otherwise) for an OS is. I consider it to be overwhelmingly, and outrageously expensive for what it is which is precisely why I have not bought a copy in a good 10 years. Up until about a month ago it would have been double the cost of any of my other PC parts . When getting it packaged with something the cost is negligible, but when buying it for yourself (even an upgrade) my reaction has repeatedly been "what the f ever."

In Poland it's usually affordable to upgrade windows only when you're buying an entire new PC...

That sucks. Have you tried Win 7 despite that? I had it running on pretty old desktop hardware. Also, if nothing has changed, MS doesn't really care about "serial numbers" and all that nonsense ;-P.

The newest 64 bit drivers are for WinXp 64 bit, so I don't want to risk that. If everything goes fine, I will upgrade to the new machine late 2013 - early 2014 and then I will have Win7 preinstalled.

It's not that I don't like Win7. My father has a new notebook with Win7 and it's a blast. Especially after Vista failure.

It's a pretty significant one, you can ignore it all you like, but running out of date software is dumb. The majority of users will be compromised either by dumb social engineering ("YOR COMPTER HAS VIRUS DOWNLOAD TO FIX") or by running out of date software. By keeping your software up to date and not downloading PcAntiVirusWinFix2013, you eliminate the most common forms of compromise.

That is the point, that could actually happen. You are responsible for your actions. As long as you are not causing harm to anybody else, everything is peachy. But if you do not do reasonable steps to avoid such sings, you get held responsible.

And considering the technological advance, having a "secure" PC/Phone whatever might be considered reasonable.

As I've said like 20 times already, I know how to keep my OS safe from common troubles. I haven't had a single problem with it for over 3 years now. I regularily scan it for viruses, trojans, rootkits and others, and I have a firewall.

My friend on the other hand has a brand new Windows 7 with full updates installed. But he believes that "anti virus is not a necessary software, it only slows down my PC".

I wonder which one of us is more secure, especially when every time he lends me a pendrive, it's infected with some shit.
I will be too old for software then, mehopes ;p

The Win 8 update was 30$ ...

My first legit OS was Vista (for about 5 min, so I could get the Win 7 upgrade deal). After that I bought "updates". So for my desktop PCs OS journey has cost me 160€ in about 4 years.

Compared to what I spend on hardware and games, not much.

That's the point. As long as your OS is safe, there really isn't an issue. By using modern security tools you are actual "replacing" XPs need for updates. Which is also an alternative to updating I forgot to mention earlier.

The problem is never that someone has an old OS. But if having an old OS is causing trouble.

I have that firewall / antivirus routine since Windows 98 ;P I never trusted enough Microsoft with my security and wanted to have some extra layer just in case.

Even if I had the newest Win7 now, I would still be using at least microsoft security essentials. At least.