Re: SP2

From: Jack (Jack_at_abc.net)
Date: 09/14/04 

Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:46:34 -0700

And WHY should any vendor have to change their products so as to comply with
a SP? Even though I disagree with it happening even then, I can understand
why it happens for a totally new OS. But requiring vendors to subscribe to
compliance with a upgrade to an existing OS is dead wrong.

I'll say it again!! The upgrade should not render anything useless that was
working just fine under the OS that was upgraded! If it does, the upgrade
is to fault - not the vendor item!

The absolute, unchecked, monopolistic arrogance of Microsoft is being
displayed on this one - in spades!

"Ronnie Vernon MVP" <ronv@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%23B$DB0emEHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Jack wrote:
> > You may be told that some, or even many, of your hardware and/or
> > software items may not be compatible with SP2. That may well be.
> >
> > However, if MS is going to release a service pack to an operating
> > system it ought NOT to render any item, software and/or hardware,
> > that is/was usable pre sp install, unusable. And that includes any
> > item installed under the 'Compatibility Mode'!
> >
> > Over the years I have installed nearly every upgrade, patch, security
> > item and service pack that MS has offered - including XP sp1 and
> > every security item since.
> >
> > I've NEVER had so much as a burp caused by any of them. IMO MS
> > screwed the pooch on this one!! There appears to be WAY too many
> > hardware/software/personal settings and configurations/internet
> > connection methods/ etc for them to be able to release a sp that only
> > works with some of them - and that is what they have done!
> >
> >
>
> Even Microsoft, with all of it's resources could not possibly test every
> software application, much less every possible combination of hardware
> drivers, software and other peripherals that are available. The makers of
> the software who advertise that their product is compatible with XP or XP
> SP1 must bear some of the responsibility for the problems that occur. Many
> have been dragging their feet and waiting until the last minute on this
> upgrade.
>
> These vendors and developers are given an abundant amount of time and free
> resources to test their applications prior to the launch of any major
> upgrade for any MS operating system.
>
> Also, in many of these cases, SP2 is doing the job it was intended to do
by
> securing systems that were very unsecure, prior to the installation.
>
> --
>
> Ronnie Vernon
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Shell/User
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: MSN Messenger forced upgrade
    ... >> Apparently Microsoft is forcing its MSN Messenger 6.1.01xx users to ... >> upgrade to MSN Messenger 6.1.0203. ... >> smells suspiciously like some sort of security vulnerablity that they ...
    (NT-Bugtraq)
  • Re: Java and avoiding software piracy?
    ... but in practice every few weeks Microsoft upgrades ... over your hardware and much less freedom to administer your machine as ... through a hardware or OS upgrade. ... as being an advantage to anyone except the vendor. ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: How many sites still on V1.5 or earlier?
    ... seem to require a version upgrade with every OS upgrade ... If a vendor keeps his products up-to-date with the latest OS, ... I think customers should be able to install the latest version of the ... Only if I installed a more current version of the ISV software than the ...
    (bit.listserv.ibm-main)
  • Re: Very OT - Computers
    ... I am interested in Dell. ... overpriced by the vendor. ... as brightly when you find out the maintenance cost for special paper, ... future for less than an immediate factory upgrade. ...
    (alt.home.repair)
  • Re: The future for Legacy?
    ... but they are the "tweaks" to the program that the heavy ... If the vendor continues to tweak ... the program to meet the needs of the heavy users, ... don't need to upgrade every ...
    (soc.genealogy.computing)