Windows XP Service Pack 2 Update

[NDak 0]

Windows XP Service Pack 2 Update

 

Microsoft Corporation announced this week the delay of the distribution

of Windows XP Service Pack 2 via its Automatic Update service. The

delay allows enterprise customers more time to evaluate compatibility

issues. Microsoft has identified about 50 programs that encounter problems with

Windows XP SP 2.

 

 

We just got this in our student E-Mails, thought I'd let everyone have a head up about not downloading it.

Edited August 18, 2004 by NDak

[LoAmi 0]

:: smugly chuckles about not having to worry about that ::

[NDak 0]

:: smugly chuckles about not having to worry about that ::

::sticks his tounge out at the Linux user::

 

 

Here is another warning:

 

WVU OIT advises not to install Windows XP update

 

After a number of delays, Microsoft Corporation has released the

biggest update for its Windows XP operating system, Windows XP Service

Pack 2. While this update provides a number of important security

enhancements for Windows-based computers, it has not been established

if there are any conflicts with WVU campus systems.  WVU Network

administrators are evaluating the Microsoft automatic update process in

an effort to avoid possible problems.  The WVU Office of Information

Technology advises that you do not install this service pack until

compatibility testing with campus systems is completed.  OIT will post

an update on Mountaineer E-NEWS and MIX when the installation of XP

Service Pack 2 is approved for use with WVU systems. For more

information, contact the WVU OIT Helpdesk at 293-4444 ext. 1.

Edited August 18, 2004 by NDak

[Dumbass 0]

I am generally a big supporter of Microsoft products, but things like this are the reason my company has a ban on anything XP-related. Problem is it's getting harder and harder to find new computers running 2000P. We have had to resort to buying XP machines, manually removing XP, and loading 2000P by ourselves.

 

Of course anything is better than ME. If XP can be considered 2000 on steroids I would say that ME is like 98 on laxitives.

[Dumbass 0]

NT and 2000 are probably the most stable operating systems Microsoft had. As I said before, however, they are getting harder and harder to find.

[ladymatrix 0]

Yes companies that sell pre-built computers just want to have software and hardware that are of that time not how well it runs (thats why sometimes you get a lemon like my mom did O_O) and I agree about 2000 being most stable I've refused to use my moms XP computer and luckily best buy had a copy of Win2000 when I had to replace my harddrive.

 

Plus a lot of people arent too keen on trying out Apple products but Ive talked to a lot of people that have used em that dont really like em (yes some drawbacks little expensive but its worth it for how much work they put into everything and not a lot of software compatiblity) but I fool around with both (yes IM a spoiled child :D but they got me the compys I just had to buy everything else that i wanted)

[FredM 0]

Hey there,

 

First, when it comes to Windows 2000 Professional...I have to say I completely hate the OS. While I do understand it's functionality in some aspects, overall I find it more trouble than it's worth. This is my personal opinion, as I know many IT managers love it. However, in recent times I've seen it cause serious problems on several computers with compatibility problems (especially dealing with wireless systems). These exact same computers then had XP Pro tossed on and the issues have never been heard from again.

 

Second, as far as Windows XP is concerned, my company has run into a few minor compatibility issues with it. However, nothing that couldn't be solved with a simple download from a website. Personally, I find the OS to be one of the most stable Microsoft has ever produced. The only issue I have, if one exists, deals with it's internal "discussions" when working with a Windows 2000 Server.

 

You have to remember that XP was the first real merge between NT technology and that seen in "Windows 95/98/ME." Simple example, on the basic level, would be the file system use...FAT32 & NTFS. To that end, you can call it "2000 on steroids" but then you have to also call it "98 SE on steroids." The backend is NT with a college education and the front end is idiot safe. In all seriousness, in all the time I've been working with the OS, I've only seen one person come remotely close to actually almost crashing an XP machine due to total ignorance about what they were doing.

 

Third, as far as Microsoft Windows ME is concerned, the program is garbage. Microsoft themselves have said it, engineers have been quoted as such. While it did offer a few features that were nice, reliability is a serious issue (though I have had one machine which never encountered a problem with it). Minus multimedia aspects, Windows 98 SE beats it hands down. I think Bill Gates would have been smarter to not have ME and instead produce Windows 98 Third Edition.

 

What's funny to me has been Microsoft's forced delay of the final "phasing out" of Windows 98 yet their continued support for ME. They want to stop support for the program which was rather reliable (though it was just Windows 95: The Version That Really Works) and instead force people who can't support XP to use a piece of junk. Gotta love it.

[NDak 0]

i don't get why everybody likes XP so much. it's a complete resource HOG and it doesn't even work with some games that actually work on 2000! LIKE WTF??!

XP is a wonderfully stable system that is idiot friendly.

 

And most of your games, you can get a simple update patch from Microsoft to fix. I know a lot of the Hasboro games need the update patch to work. Heck I talked XP into running an old DOS, TOS game the other night. :)

 

I personally really like my XP Pro version that I run on my computer at home. At work we use Windows NT and XP both (depending on which network your on, IE: the golden goddess and her golden children in sales just got all new Dells w/XP Pro. ::grumbles:: )

 

For me, I like XP mostly becuase it is a stable system (for Windows) and its not a pain in the rear. The other thing is, I grew up on Windows products (my very first PC had DOS style :D ) So its very familier. I don't feel the need to learn to use a whole new system. Heck when I have to use the iMac's in the graphics lab at work I want to kill myself :P

 

Anyway...I just thought I'd give those of us on XP a little heads up about not d/ling the service pack yet. From my understanding the system my univeristy uses had major compatabilty issues with the service pack's secrurity updates, so most people shoulnd;t have that big of an issue with it. B)

Edited August 18, 2004 by NDak

[Webmaster 20]

For folks who were wondering about applications that might have some difficulty following the installation of SP2:

 

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...ct=windowsxpsp2

 

Most of these relate to the Firewall being turned on by default... so pretty easy fixes by just giving the program permission to bypass the it.

[Seiben 0]

i don't get why everybody likes XP so much. it's a complete resource HOG and it doesn't even work with some games that actually work on 2000! LIKE WTF??!

Whoa, easy there fella! Not everybody holds the same point of view as you.. no need to use bog capitol letters. Echoing NDak, I love XP for all of the reasons he listed. It's so easy to use, it's very reliable.. alot more than ME, which was totally garbage always crashing on me every 2 minutes. And about games, all you need to do is download the update patch. I've got plenty of old Windows 95/98 games that work fine on my computer. And with my XP Pro, in my computer, I Could do pretty much anything with just a few simple clicks of my mouse.. it's great. :)

[Tachyon 0]

Whoa . . . now that is a long list of programs. I just downloaded a security update for one of our computers (XP Home). We've got XP on this newest one, and the 98 on the other three.

 

I prefer 98, just because I'm used to it and it's much simpler than XP, but XP is more stable, mostly because it's newer. I just get frustrated because Microsoft is always bringing out updates to correct itself . . . and the updates never work. Oh, and because XP is made for networking, this infuriates me a lot. But I love XP because I can run a server on it, unlike 98 which might destabilize the operating system. I've got some games that don't work on XP, but then I just use one of my other computers.

 

We have 2000/ME at school, but the computers are also old which cause the network to be slow . . . and sometimes completely nonresponsive. As an operating system it strikes me as "98 for Networks", plus a few other improvements in stability.

Edited August 18, 2004 by Tachyon

[Webmaster 20]

The biggest reason as mentioned for "issues" is having the Windows Firewall turned on by default. That means certain apps might not be able to access the internet when it wants to immediately.

 

For example... Microsoft Office is listed there because some of it's help documentation is web-based. You might have to allow Office to bypass the filter for it to work. That's why it's listed... not because you won't be able to type papers anymore.

 

SP2 is a *major* upgrade for XP. Honestly I think it's a solid upgrade as well. It introduces several new features, fixes many issues, and makes the machine more secure by DEFAULT. (Because we know how many people don't bother using any standard protections.)

 

I have deployed SP2 to over 15 machines now with very minimal issues. The main reason major corporations and network administrators are asking people to hold off installing the upgrade on they're network is that they need time to test and configure things so that they work on they're specialized networks.

 

I have no problem complaining about Microsoft when I think they mess up... but I have to give this one to them. They took the extra time to make the release stable... they're taking time to roll out the release in batches (the main reason being to make support requests easier... not bandwidth issues as some might think), and they're focusing on user security. Personally I've been very impressed with the release.

[Darrik 0]

Ugg, no comprende.

[Tachyon 0]

The biggest reason as mentioned for "issues" is having the Windows Firewall turned on by default. That means certain apps might not be able to access the internet when it wants to immediately.

But can't we just go to our Network Connections and turn it completely off?

[LoAmi 0]

I'd have to agree that XP is the most stable home OS M$ has ever produced. Not sure how it compares to Win2K, because I just don't have enough experience. For security, XP was a total disaster. It kept every internal server running on a home machine on by default and security features (like the firewall) off. It allowed windows messenger messages (read: spam) to come in by default. I haven't seen what SP2 actually does firsthand. AFAIK, it does correct some glaring deficiencies (the firewall being off by default is one), but not others. The XP firewall still provides no outbound program protection, leaving XP machines vulnerable to spyware and trojan-horse based virus attacks. From the list of features in XP SP2, it looks like they're all useful and long overdue (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx). Some of them should never have been necessary as "security updates" in the first place (the IE add-on manager is a good example of that -- IE should never have let a website change IE settings and install software without the user's knowledge).

 

Oh, and, I have slowed down XP machines to a crawl just by leaving them on for over 24 hours (the only virus they were infected with was WinXP itself).

[willingham 0]

since I'm a computer person here, I guess I have to say my two bits.

 

First of all, I think Win 98 is the best of the Windows OS. Pretty much all programs were compatible. They still are.

 

Secondly, I had a lot of complaints about Win ME about it's not compatible and other stuff. Bottom line, don't get it.

 

Thirdly, Windows XP SP2 is pretty much only for people who have too much spyware and viruses. If you don't have any of those problems, deactivate your Automatic Update now.

 

And Finally, if you want a good OS, go with Mac OS X and X.2, because they will give you a better performance and maximum compatibility. Plus, Gates hasn't touched our school yet :).

 

I'm done now. If you don't understand it, contact me by clicking the e-mail button

[Tachyon 0]

And Finally, if you want a good OS, go with Mac OS X and X.2, because they will give you a better performance and maximum compatibility. Plus, Gates hasn't touched our school yet :P.

But Apple's now a creature of Microsoft . . . :)

[Atragon9 0]

since I'm a computer person here, I guess I have to say my two bits.

You have no idea how many "computer person"s are part of this forum, believe me!

 

Hmmm, does that make us double-geeks?

[LoAmi 0]

Thirdly, Windows XP SP2 is pretty much only for people who have too much spyware and viruses. If you don't have any of those problems, deactivate your Automatic Update now.

 

And Finally, if you want a good OS, go with Mac OS X and X.2, because they will give you a better performance and maximum compatibility. Plus, Gates hasn't touched our school yet :).

I disagree with that. WinXP SP2 is an important security update that fixes basic design flaws (not "bugs," which are introduced inadvertently, but actual purposeful design flaws) in the operating system and some of its components. One of those was including a firewall, but deactivating it. Another was defaulting Outlook Express to run any attachment that came in email. Another was allowing IE components to be added without the user's knowledge. Other design flaws in XP: Windows Messenger... ActiveX... The "Universal Plug and Play" server (used by few, on by default). All of this from a company that patented the insecure web browser (I'm not kidding, go to The US Patent and Trademark Office, look up patent # 6,662,341).

 

By the way, without an outbound protecting firewall (never used Sygate, I know ZoneAlarm works, there's an edition that's free-as-in-beer), WinXP still won't do much about spyware. And, most people who have spyware don't even know it (if they did, would they let it run?)!

 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "compatibility" when referring to Mac OS X. Compatibility with what? Older Mac software? (If you're switching OS's, who cares?) Windows software? (AFAIK, Mac Windows emulators are basically a licensed copy of Windows running on a virtual PC or a hardware card; at best, they're as "compatible" as the actual copy of Windows; they are possibly more secure).

 

Not to get into a religious OS-war, at least GNU/Linux doesn't require you to throw away your old, perfectly good hardware.

[Holden 0]

:P

ha ha ha ha ha.... Macs rule!

:)

i am writing this while facing a huge XP issue of my own: IT WON'T LOG ON! I would love to re-install XP, but i dont know what will be deleted and if my CD-ROM drive will run...I had it replaced because XP didn't recognize it after about 2 weeks...oh well...

[Travis Kroells 0]

You have no idea how many "computer person"s are part of this forum, believe me!

 

Hmmm, does that make us double-geeks?

Being myself a man that uh...knows no about computers, let I explain me reasoning for Xp.

 

Me happy when computer works. Me created massive mushroom like cloud with "voosh" sound, and sick burning and such when computer not work.

 

(This is probably how the computer illiterate sound to IT guys)

 

((...I dont even know what Linux is))

[Dumbass 0]

I KNEW IT!!!

 

Kroells is a Pakled!!

 

"XP is strong. It makes things go."

[Images 0]

Hey, my A-Level examination results came in today! Guess what I got for IT?

 

An E!

 

Well I guess thats what a year of IT lessons spent watching "magical trevor" and looking up naughty pictures got me. :)

[Dumbass 0]

Hey, my A-Level examination results came in today! Guess what I got for IT?

 

An E!

I have no idea if that is good or bad.

[Images 0]

The grades go from top to bottom

 

ABCDE then U which means failed :)