>No, but I can. I'm not sure thats fair. Yes you can, but I'm guessing you aren't the type of person to be caught running software 7 years after its EOL. Or p

>No, but I can. I'm not sure thats fair. Yes you can, but I'm guessing you aren't the type of person to be caught running software 7 years after its EOL. Or put it this way, Office 2003 was discontinued in 2007. Thats like running Debian 3.1 today (Sarge, 5 stable releases ago), and complaining about continued support. RHEL2.1 was EOL'd in 2008 (RHEL6 is the "old guard" now). If you wouldn't expect continued support for Debian 3.1 or RHEL2.1 in 2015 there's, I don't see why its a problem for Microsoft or how it makes open source any better. Sure, yes you could patch Debian 3.1 yourself, but ultimately how fruitful is this effort, and how many people can be expected to to write kernel patches? Even if Microsoft said tomorrow Office 2003 was open source, how many individuals could you expect to have the know to patch their installations?