Re: Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- From: "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 07:50:40 -0400
Not everyone, or even the majority can or would approach PC
use like you've described. SP2 beyond it's visible changes was
also re-compiled to avoid Buffer Overruns. This by itself makes
SP2 a viable upgrade. It's fine that you take measures that you
feel negates the need for SP2. However, your posting may keep
some XP users from adopting Service Pack 2. Keep in mind
that the majority of XP users aren't IT people and the concepts
of Cookie Mgmt, Firewalls, etc is "Greek" or "Geek" to them.
Software, especially Operating Systems evolve to meet ever
changing needs. I've never understood this attitude that installing
Service Packs is something to avoid.
"t.cruise" <t__cruise@[NoSpam]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OSwtCxghFHA.2072@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>I know that this response will bring some flames, and many groans. I am
>still using SP1a,
> with a decent firewall, and a decent antivirus program. Most of SP2 deals
> with security
> issues, which the below mentioned utilities, AND safe computing negate
> taking the chance
> that my system will be one of many which have not played nice with an SP2
> upgrade. I use
> broadband cable and have not been infected with
> viruses/worms/adware/malware/hijacking
> since installing the free Zone Alarm Standard firewall, and the free
> personal version of
> AVG antivirus more than a year ago. As for the native XP firewall
> included with SP2, it
> still does not monitor traffic in both directions. Yes, SP2 comes with a
> few other bells
> and whistles, but I do not need them. My system is clean, and runs fine.
> If you have a
> decent firewall, and decent antivirus program, and practice safe net
> surfing (no Kaaza, no
> accepting Active X controllers unless you know exactly what they are, and
> if you REALLY
> need them, no opening email file attachments unless you know exactly what
> they are, no
> installing Search toolbars with spyware/malware, etc.. You will be safe.
> I will forego
> SP2 until I purchase my next system, which will probably have Longhorn,
> the next version
> of Windows. I already use Cookie Pal for managing cookies, and the free
> version of
> Ad-Aware SE for scanning for spyware/adware/malware/data miner cookies,
> and use AdShield
> for popups. An SP2 install would be superfluous for me. Also, I have
> read many posts,
> complaining that installing SP2 has slowed down some systems. I know that
> MS will stop
> supporting SP1a next year. By that time I will be ready for a new
> Longhorn system. SP2
> may be fine for many, but I pass...
> --
>
> T.C.
> t__cruise@[NoSpam]hotmail.com
> Remove [NoSpam] to reply
>
>
>
> "Ken" <kenandeva@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1121077712.219276.139530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Hi. I've been an XP Home SP1 user for quite a while now. I've been
>> hesitant to upgrade to SP2, because I've heard that some common
>> software does not work properly on SP2. Is there any truth to this?
>> Should I stop worrying and just upgrade?
>>
>> Note that my typical usage includes Eudora email, Mozilla web browser,
>> MS Office Pro 2003, some rudementary Eclipse/Java and Visual C++
>> programming, Norton AV 2005, and Adaware.
>>
>> Also of note is that I am about to change my Internet service from
>> dial-up to DSL, so perhaps there are some firewall considerations.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Ken
>>
>
>
.
- References:
- Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- From: Ken
- Re: Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- From: t.cruise
- Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- Prev by Date: Re: Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- Next by Date: Re: partitioned drive
- Previous by thread: Re: Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- Next by thread: Re: Time to upgrade SP1 to SP2?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|