Re: wuts so good about sp2??
From: Linda B (B_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 11/11/04
- Next message: SlowJet: "Re: MS Messenger not the service"
- Previous message: GAT: "Speech SDK 5.1"
- In reply to: SlowJet: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Next in thread: DanS: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Reply: DanS: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Reply: SlowJet: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:23:04 -0800
Wow, that was incredibly overstated... and incorrect. SP2 is a series of
patches and fixes rolled into one, designed from the ground up to increase
security in XP (most assuredly *not* a "completely new OS"). The 'pro' is
increased security, the 'con' is that some programs utilize methodology that
SP2 deems "unsecure" -- therefore these applications won't function properly.
Most designers have already released or are working on patches for their
programs to make them work with SP2.
In the end, it's a matter of preference. If you already operate your
computer in an intelligent manner (keep it up to date, firewalled, AV'd,
etc.), then you probably don't need SP2. If you're Joe Q. User who doesn't
know all the ins and outs of his machine, SP2 may serve you well. Personally
I never install a major update until it's been out in the field for 6-12
months, just to iron out all the bugs.
Oh, and by the way: automatic update was available long before the release
of SP2...
"SlowJet" wrote:
> Windows Xp with SP2 is a completely new OS.
> Windows 2000 was based on NT (Not DOS or 9x)
> Applications designed and coded for ancient OS's are only compatible up to a
> point where the external Application code can not function according to the
> new rules of the OS.
>
> Even as of yesterday, a post about he AGP driver, a VIA chipset board. The
> fact of the matter is that MS had to tighten down the AGP driver because
> several Video card makers were going off on their own exploiting subtle
> parts of the standards.
> The new AGP driver 3.5 standard is now in affect.
> Of course the reply to the OP was hey do this and that and then,, the old
> way and it will not work any more.
>
> So that's one example a driver standard change and they have changed several
> times since 98, ME, and even 2000.
>
> Couple that with the fact that all DOS Windows, 9.x, and ME had no security
> in the OS and the file system only had basic permissions which could be
> overridden by any user.
>
> The facts are that many complaining are trying to use XP SP2 as if it were
> still win 98 or me.
> It is not and the majority of even new programs have not even yet been
> written correctly for XP SP2 standards.
>
> This was not a whack for MS to make your life miserable, but rather a long
> over due fix that was making the lives of millions miserable due to errors,
> vulnerabilities, and lake of Internet security from the exponential growth
> in methods to disrupt and crash thousands of computers coming from all over
> the world.
>
> Everything has changed about computers for the SOHO user, corporations and
> government have been running with the newer model for years. Most of the
> SOHO users will not notice a difference because they have newer computers
> with newer applications and use the basic methods to compute (word
> processor, e-mail, browser, chat, file download)
>
> The truth is that older hardware and older applications just are not going
> to keep up much longer even though there are several mechanisums in the
> Windows OS to accommodate the older standards, and the OS can run unsecured
> and unprotected, it is a matter of time before the system will get hosed up
> and need to be re-installed. (Not to mention the spread of problems to
> others.)
>
> But the Windows XP with SP2, a two-way firewall, and AV, and a Adware
> blocker, is once again stable, reliable, and safe from the Internet, and
> secure from hackers and overrides.(Nothing is secure from bad hardware.)
>
> If that's too good for someone then by all means do your own thing but in
> the process it would benefit millions to state the truth of why you are
> doing it, such as ignorance, jealousy, ego, self rightous indignation,
> hatered for MS, etc) rather than saying the SP2 for XP sucks, broke my old
> hardware, crashed my 5 year program, stops the internet, can't write to my 4
> year old disk(that's way to small) that hasn't had more than 2 GB on it
> ever, etc.
>
> The truth is the users just don't know what they are doing and some of them
> should have never arbitrary updated. However, there comes a point in a
> culture when even the best intentions will still be ignored by the masses
> (i.e. the America elections vs. the rest of the world's people) and thus
> someone just has to say WHEN.
>
> WHEN was August 25th, 2004 and it was called Windows Automated Update.
>
> The past is on the shelf, are you staying there with it or moving on down
> the road?
> Choice is good, but there are also bad choices from which we learn life's
> lessons. And there is a time to take out the garbage and buy new clothes.
>
> SJ
> "keisuke" <keisuke@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:C9BBB12E-4978-44CE-A33B-0DCC3251ABCA@microsoft.com...
> >i have a router, a good virus program, and i don't even use the windows
> > firewall, what is so good about sp2?? there seems to be alot of problems
> > with
> > compatibility with other programs, and i have a startup problem or a
> > freeze
> > every so often. most of my friends don't have sp2, and they don't seem to
> > have any issues... what are the consequences of uninstalling it??
>
>
>
- Next message: SlowJet: "Re: MS Messenger not the service"
- Previous message: GAT: "Speech SDK 5.1"
- In reply to: SlowJet: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Next in thread: DanS: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Reply: DanS: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Reply: SlowJet: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
