Re: SP2 - Why bother?

From: Gary (nobody_at_thisserver.com)
Date: 12/04/04 

Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 17:17:22 +1000

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
news:uvUjDwb2EHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> Checking on Microsoft's site for incompatible software and hardware
> was a good start on your part.
> However your failure was expecting Microsoft to have a comprehensive
> list of all compatibility issues.
> If you would stop for a moment, you would realize that would be
> impossible for anyone including Microsoft.
> If you have software that old, you should have checked with the
> manufacturer.

Software that old..............18 months? Is that old? 6 months, 3 days,
your definition of old is very loose.

> If the manufacturer was unavailable and/or current owner has no
> information, that should have been a big clue for you.
>
> Your problems are largely caused by your mixing hardware and software
> from various generations seemingly only for economic reasons.

A processor is faced with an instruction to do something, a video card mixes
pixels, and a keyboard draws characters on the screen. From the year one
double aught 3, computer hardware's fundamentals have remain, relatively,
unchanged, suffice some new and faster methods for making the software run
like it should, and not so slowazz.
>From what you're telling me, i should have upgraded my hardware (to which
level?) to run Windows XP SP2. Twin Athlon 64's with 4GB RAM......Raid
array........Static hard disk perhaps?? A SunSparc with Windows emulator?

> Perhaps if you also considered security this would not be an issue.

Ahem, only when the hackers and secuirity experts knocked down the doors
long enough did Bill Gates realise his software was not so secure. It should
have been tight from the beginning, lord almighty, logins required
permissions so tight you can't breathe, but yet you can walk through the
door when you're on the internet.
Still SP2 is not the whole answer. Security updates are still coming, Bill
still didn't get it right.

>
> Most people make no changes to their computer so the mismatch such as
> you have is not an issue.
> They only have to worry about spyware, viruses etc while you also have
> the mismatch purely due to your own choices.
>
> No one forced you to upgrade to anything.
> If you buy hardware requiring something, that is a choice you make.
>
> Buying that digital camera was another choice you made.
> The compatibility issues of that camera were also part of your choice.
> Hopefully you also complain to the camera manufacturer because of
> their lack of newer drivers.
>
> The fact something worked well in the past is no guarantee they will
> perform well with modern technology, or do you and your family still
> drive the very modern an efficient Ford Model T?

You put bread in a toaster, switch the toaster on, set the shade you want,
the taosting sensor knows what colour you want and the toaster switches off.
Toasters wear out due to fatigue, lack of maintenenance, power supply
problems and protection systems activating. This is the model T. It toasts
bread, that's what it's meant to do, so does an oxy acetelyne torch, an
infra red oven, or even an open fire.
You may think of a PC as complex. IS it? A Boeing 747's instrumentation
system is complex and dwarfs in comparison to a PC, which is a little toy.
Many industrial processes rely on dedicated 'fit for purpose' PLC's which do
the job of supervising complex, for example, chemical processes. PC's are
used as a window only to this process to show the operators the status of
the plant. I don't know of anybody taking a risk and controlling a whole
plant from a PC only. Oh, 'excuse me mr plant president, Windows needs a new
Service PAck, and I need to shut down the plant for an hour while Windows
decides to screw itself up totally and send all our workers home'. Yes, i
can see that happening for sure.

>
> Since you "don't quite understand the theory of installing SP2", it is
> probably in your best interests in keeping a computer as bought
> without any hardware changes until time to buy a new computer.
> That way you will avoid many of these issues in the future.
>
> These are all choices you make.
> No one has attempted to force you to make any of the choices you
> chose.
>

I usually have respect for people with credentials, and listen to what MVP's
have to say. In your case, with respect, you're not seeing what problems can
occur and insist that I have made the wrong choices. Where is this written,
in the "PC for dummies book" ?

Choices that I make, have associated risk, the risk of programs not working,
or not living up to the expectations of the hype they are given. That is no
choice at all, that is risk. Every time anybody in the world installs a
program or a piece of hardware, the choice is removed and the risk is set
in.
Any EULA absolves the software manufacturer from any liability and leaves
the risk of running the program to the user. In many cases, countless hours
are wasted since the customer purchased a piece of software, "made a choice"
and took the risk, and it blew up in their face.

And.........where is the "sp2" for Windows2000/Pro/Server.......? This OS is
still supported, where are the major security updates for this OS?
_________________ << the sounds of silence.

> --
> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
>
>
> "Gary" <anetuser@thisdomain.org> wrote in message
> news:Xns95B570DE7CCB3anetuserthisdomainor@207.46.248.16...
> > Greetings to all!
> >
> > I don't quite understand the theory of installing SP2, a vast
> > majority of
> > users sail through the installation, yet others, such as myself,
> > have had
> > endless problems.
> >
> > 1. The in situ upgrade from SP1 to SP2 failed. When I rebooted, the
> > PC
> > would not go past the BIOS boot up stage to Windows.
> > 2. I restored the whole old OS, programs et al with Powerquest Drive
> > Image to SP1 again to a blank disk. No problems, situation normal.
> > 3. Zero filled the C Drive and slipstreamed SP2. The machine
> > actually
> > booted this time and Windows was fine.
> > 4. Prior to all this install, i looked at the compatibility for
> > various
> > programs on the MS site, and no programs that caused problems that I
> > had
> > bought were listed, so I installed them one by one to see which one
> > didn't like SP2.
> > 5. Powerquest Drive image was one, the other was Diskeeper 5. Both
> > hated
> > being on SP2, caused freezes, slow responses and so on.
> > 6. Looked at SP2 fixes for both these programs, there are NONE,
> > Powerquest is now owned by Symantec, and Diskeeper 5 is too "old".
> > 7. This means upgrading , that is to BUY NEW expensive programs, yet
> > there could be more?
> >
> > So I am faced with the situation to fork out more dollars, for
> > programs i
> > know have worked fine since Windows2000 & SP1 to fix some holes in
> > an OS,
> > that should have been plugged long ago? Not on your sweet fanny!!
> >
> > I've thrown XP PRO in the trash, and went back to Windows2000,
> > something
> > I know works and the programs I paid for work on it as well. IF
> > there is
> > a significant reason for me to upgrade programs, then it's from my
> > own
> > choice, and not to be dictated and enforced by an inferior OS.
> >
> > Gary
> >
>
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HardBound and SoftBound (was "The State of Software")
    ... Why waste hardware effort on something that is a essentially a management ... Companies are often unwilling to pay the real cost of correct and safe ... There are lots of incentives to push risk off on the ... We have plumbing codes, building codes, fire safety codes, codes for ...
    (comp.arch)
  • Re: Complete freedom from Microsoft announced today!
    ... > It was a risk I did not think they would take - and I was wrong. ... > With Intel Apple was pushed into a corner by IBM. ... If Dell can pre-load Linux what, besides Apple, would prevent them from pre-loading OS X? ... > suffer from with trying to support so much hardware - likely ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Dual Disk SATA
    ... it's due to hardware issues. ... I'm entirely with you regarding backup. ... there is always a risk of backups not ... running applications off of the second SATA disk? ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: checkpoint firewall -1 sp3
    ... hardware / os 'improvements' occur, and you care 'cause they apply to your ... But if the box is doing what you need it to do, then why continually pay ... There is a cost / benefit / risk formula somewhere that each has to ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
    ... Even for Microsoft, that would be an error of the highest ... for them...you CANNOT have such a "casual" attitude to concurrency on ... You simply could not get Windows to operate at all, ... how can it only effect specific hardware? ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
Loading