Re: wuts so good about sp2??
From: SlowJet (SlowJet_at_noTY2this.com)
Date: 11/11/04
- Next message: Mark N: "Missing "safely remove hardware" icon"
- Previous message: Jack Gillis: "Re: managing user accounts in XP Pro"
- In reply to: Linda B: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Next in thread: NoNoBadDog!: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:55:07 GMT
BOLOGNA :)
Thousands of lines of code were changed.
It was complied by a completely new compiler.
The files were renames name with differnet sizes.
The install process replaced almost all system files.
The patches post SP1 were merily pieces of the greater project to ward off
chaos.
Programs are not unsecured, that are coded incorrectly.
The OS and file system and the security programs create and maintain
security.
Most designers? There has been very little SP2 NET XP specific programs
coming from the field. NET 1.1 SP1 is only weeks old.
IVP6 is a test status.
Software DEP for the Windows OS and Windows Programs is on default. Turn it
on for others and some may crash, meaning those program can crash you system
at anytime and be used to pipe malware and viruses.
One can prefer and do whatever they like but most would want the most
reliable, safest, and secure OS and programs because anything less makes no
sense.
I think statistics will show that the largest users of Windows XP are indeed
not computer experts and care nothing about the specifics of computer code
or hardware operation.
Never say never, as sometimes things change and old thinking doesn't apply.
SP2 is what it is and will never change. There will be and has been a few
POST SP2 updates. There have been new drivers. There have been new program
versions. But installing SP2 now or 12 months from now will be confronted by
the same issues.
Windows Automatic Update was never used for a Service Pack until XP SP2.
Windows users are pretty much stuck with SP1 or SP2.
Take your pick. Next windows is about 2006 and I would think it will be full
of bugs so make it 2007 SP1.
I would think that most XP SP1 computers will be pretty much dead by then
anyway.
8P
SJ
"Linda B" <Linda B@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:37BDB011-0F02-4AB2-8443-BCFDF9970881@microsoft.com...
> 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: Mark N: "Missing "safely remove hardware" icon"
- Previous message: Jack Gillis: "Re: managing user accounts in XP Pro"
- In reply to: Linda B: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Next in thread: NoNoBadDog!: "Re: wuts so good about sp2??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
