>>It's wrong. Flatly wrong. It's an agenda, not a service response.

Almost everybody here would have known that MS was a highly profitable corporate before they wrote their first check for a MS license. IOW the agenda was agreed from day 1. Also note that MS has been providing service patches and fixes for XP years after XP was supposed to be Foxed, a destination that was heralded the day we bought the license. MS wasn't obliged to extend its sunset period either. The difference between XP and Fox was that MS ended Fox dead whereas it provided an affordable upgrade path for XP and extended support when the market hadn't responded as vigorously as it once would have.

If you wanted to use the same OS indefinitely, the alternative would be to pay a subscription allowing use of any versions whose subscriptions justify maintenance, or you can keep using XP just as some people keep using VFP,

FWIW it's just as well MS is dedicated to making a profit, or else the Open Source world would be largely irrelevant. It would be now if MS were prepared to forgo fees by following Google's path with advertising and other revenue opportunities built into their systems in exchange for the "free" lunch. Just saying.