...

View Full Version : XP Service Pack 2 Timebomb?



molecularman
08-18-2004, 01:42 AM
I was just reading the MS site comments about having to check your website for SP2 compatibility. It sounds bad. I recommend everyone go over there and have a read - the impact on IE will be considerable :eek:

tsguitar2004
08-18-2004, 01:46 AM
Do you have a link?
-ts

molecularman
08-18-2004, 02:29 AM
http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windowsxp/sp2/what-it-means.mspx

:eek:

Nightfire
08-18-2004, 11:47 AM
Just looked through it quickly. I see nothing bad about it? malicious active x blocked, downloads only happen when the user wants it to, one popup per page, can't position windows off screen. What's bad about that?

sage45
08-18-2004, 06:56 PM
Same here... I do not see anything bad with what they have outlined...

-sage-

mcrilly
08-19-2004, 07:37 PM
It's Microsoft, it has to be bad/evil/annoying/stupid

Nightfire
08-19-2004, 07:41 PM
It's Microsoft, it has to be bad/evil/annoying/stupid
:rolleyes: Did you even read what the article said?

mcrilly
08-19-2004, 07:43 PM
Is there a need to? IT'S MICROSOFT! THEY'RE EVIL!!!

Nightfire
08-19-2004, 07:47 PM
Is there a need to? IT'S MICROSOFT! THEY'RE EVIL!!!
I suggest next time before you say anything else to make you look stupid, read the article

mcrilly
08-19-2004, 07:49 PM
And I suggest you get a sense of humour ;O)

WA
08-20-2004, 12:50 AM
Ok guys, lets keep the conversations friendly here:)

missing-score
08-20-2004, 02:45 AM
Yes, there are many times i think microsoft can be evil and annoying, and im not particularly fond of Internet Explorer, but I have learnt that you cant just go around saying "MS are stupid".

While i dont use IE and dont use MS Office, I do use Windows XP, MSN Messenger and Media Player 9. So I cant say all MS stuff is bad otherwise I should be on Linux with the relative programs.

Anyway, I read the article and it all looks good to me, 1 popup per page is handy, athough if theyre doing that they could have jus put in a popup blocker like firefox. The rest of the stuff seems to make sense.

Mhtml
08-22-2004, 02:12 PM
Eh, am I the only one who saw mcrilly was joking?

The Merlin
08-23-2004, 12:20 AM
When are they gonna release SP2 and why haven't they yet? :)

ReadMe.txt
08-23-2004, 12:41 AM
i was under the impression that they already had, and no Mhtml - i noticed it too.

so what do you use in place of MS office m-s?

missing-score
08-23-2004, 01:35 AM
whoops, i didnt notice the joke there :o

celestine
08-23-2004, 07:44 AM
From what I know, SP2 will be released on 25th August 2004, although some users can randomly download it via Windows Update.

I got the Network version and installed it, works fine with my laptop. Had a bit of problems with the StyleXP software I'm using and that's it. No driver mischaps or anything nasty. But then, my laptop's only about a year old, there might be problems on older PCs though.

Link to download: SP 2 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en)

Grant Palin
08-23-2004, 06:26 PM
Looking at that linked page, I notice that the currently available version of SP2 should only be used for multiple computers. Is that what you're all doing, or are you downlaoding the current release anyway, for a single computer?

Is there a reason to download SP2 independently as opposed to getting it via Windows Update?

oracleguy
08-23-2004, 07:42 PM
Had a bit of problems with the StyleXP software I'm using and that's it.\

Me too, you can get the latest version off their site and it supports SP2.

Grant, yeah you could use the network download for one computer if you wanted. That's the version I got but I have multiple computers plus I like to keep it on CD.

Grant Palin
08-23-2004, 08:09 PM
Grant, yeah you could use the network download for one computer if you wanted. That's the version I got but I have multiple computers plus I like to keep it on CD.
Just so you don't have to download it again in the future? I guess that makes sense since it seems to be quite a big file.

I suppose if you had to reinstall Windows XP someday, and you had those service packs on a CD, you could install those right away, and have more protection in place when getting the regular Windows Updates...that seems like a good idea, actually.

celestine
08-24-2004, 05:07 AM
yeah. the network version is bigger than what they'll be releasing via Windows Update. You can install it on 1 PC or several but the main advantage is you get to burn it into a CD for keeping. Can't do that with the windows update version. :)


Me too, you can get the latest version off their site and it supports SP2.

thanks, going to grab that right away. :)

Roy Sinclair
08-24-2004, 06:10 PM
The Network version is preferable simply because you can burn it to a CD and thus if you reinstall XP later you can also reinstall SP2 before you connect to the web. I read about a recent study done on a University network where they found that a freshly installed PC hooked unprotected (no firewall) to the campus network lasted about 15 seconds before it was compromised using known exploits. If you are connected to any high speed network it's likely the bad guys can own your PC faster than you can get it patched to keep them out.

Grant Palin
08-24-2004, 06:15 PM
The Network version is preferable simply because you can burn it to a CD and thus if you reinstall XP later you can also reinstall SP2 before you connect to the web. I read about a recent study done on a University network where they found that a freshly installed PC hooked unprotected (no firewall) to the campus network lasted about 15 seconds before it was compromised using known exploits. If you are connected to any high speed network it's likely the bad guys can own your PC faster than you can get it patched to keep them out.

Having it on a CD does make sense. I remember the long wait for downloading SP1! I think I'll get that again and burn it to a CD as well.

I downloaded SP2 last night. From what I've heard, it's a good idea to have some time set aside for this, so I think I'll wait until the weekend before trying to install it.

Are there any dependencies or requirements for SP2? Does it require anything else to be installed first? I'm guessing SP1 of course, but anything else?

I remember reading an article on Slashdot a while ago about a study like that. Quite interesting reading, actually.

Roy Sinclair
08-24-2004, 06:24 PM
SP2 includes what was updated in SP1 so there's no dependancy on having SP1 installed first.

Grant Palin
08-24-2004, 07:58 PM
So I don't even need to worry about keeping SP 1 around?

runescapelava3
10-24-2004, 09:43 AM
Eh, am I the only one who saw mcrilly was joking?
nope... it actually gave me a laugh. Lol. :D

Makes me wonder if M$ makes viruses for it's own OS just so you have to update it.
:confused:
oh well.

bcarl314
10-25-2004, 04:32 PM
Ahh, I skipped this service pack (SP2) and went straight to Service Pack 3 (http://www.linuxiso.org)

:D

Roy Sinclair
10-25-2004, 10:31 PM
nope... it actually gave me a laugh. Lol. :D

Makes me wonder if M$ makes viruses for it's own OS just so you have to update it.
:confused:
oh well.

MS doesn't need to, they've got enough people who hate them to cover that base and then there's the greedy people like the spammers, the ignorant like the crackers and the underworld like the Russian Mafia developing viruses and spyware and the like to help keep the churn high.

codegoboom
10-26-2004, 12:13 AM
I wonder if internet security software manufacturers create their own market by proliferating the very virii which they subdue...

Where's the oversight?

Roy Sinclair
10-26-2004, 10:17 PM
I wonder if internet security software manufacturers create their own market by proliferating the very virii which they subdue...

Where's the oversight?

Many people have wondered that too but it seems the world holds a large enough supply of the clueless to also provide a never ending stream of new and wannabe virus writers and viruses. Like MS, these vendors don't need to create their own, there seems to be a ready supply.

nodeffect
10-30-2004, 06:35 AM
just an advice from me... do a clean install b4 installing sp2... better still.... install a clean full windows sp2... i heard alot of problems if u dont do that

Serex
11-01-2004, 05:55 AM
simply dont install it at all =/

KeZZeR
11-01-2004, 11:43 AM
SP2 works absolutely fine, the majority of problems have arisen due to people going from SP1a to SP2. They also hadn't configured the OS after the SP2 install so you have that annoying security center popping up and so forth.

In my opinion it's best to slipstream SP2 into the XP Installation and write it to CD. This is perfectly LEGAL! Personally I did it, i have a legit copy and slipstreamed SP2 into the install so when i do install windows it's a direct SP2 install which makes it nice and tidy. You can do this with both XP Pro and Home.

The main load of problems which are caused by microsoft is more on the user side because they simply don't configure their OS's meaning all the default crap for people with no clue keeps popping up such as error reporting, the security center and so forth.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum