Microsoft and OEMs, conspiring to keep the user down

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,587
10,225
126
Well, I had the unfortunate experience, of using HP (user-burned) restore CDs, to restore an old HP computer running XP Home (SP1).

I put in a fresh HDD, booted off of the first CD, and away I went. Initial restore was not painful.

But then, the trouble started. I had a SP3 CD in my toolkit, so I applied it.

I then uninstalled Norton AV 2003 that was bundled in the restore discs.

Then I went to download updates from Windows Update. Only, as soon as the Automatic Update service had started, it was taking up 99% CPU time.

I search for a solution to the problem, and came upon some MS "Fix-It" tools. I tried running it, and it said it needed Net 2.0 or higher. So I clicked on the link it showed me to download Net 3.5 SP1. Only, that was a network-based installer, and when I tried running it, it kept timing out downloading what it needed, because of the CPU time problem, it make network communication nearly impossible. So I searched for a Net runtime standalone download, and came up with a link to MS and the 4.0 version. So I installed that.

Guess what, the fix-it displayed the same error. Net 4.0 was apparently too good for the fix-it program.

So I thought that the problem might have been because of the Norton being uninstalled AFTER installing SP3, when that program wasn't written for SP3.

So I did the restore again, this time from the restore partition on the HDD, and it went much faster. So I un-installed Norton AV 2003 first.

I thought that possibly, the fact that I didn't go to Windows Update until after I installed SP3, might have screwed things up.

So I tried going to Windows Update with SP1, guess what, I got a page pointing to a KB article, probably about how SP1 was unsupported. Only, the POS IE6 wouldn't even display the page properly. In fact, it wouldn't display most pages properly. They would start to display, but then would error, and the page would disappear.

So I tried going to Firefox.com, and it loaded. Hooray. Unfortunately, instead of a download link, it said my Windows was unsupported. Boo. No way to download SP3, and no way to download a modern browser to download SP3.

Thank goodness I had SP3 on CD with me.

Why does MS leave XP users in "update limbo" like that though?

Anyways, I installed SP3, still had the same 99% CPU usage problem. But it went away when I stopped the Automatic Update service. So I downloaded Firefox, the Fix-it, clicked the link to download Net 3.5 SP1, and installed it. It said to try again what the problem was, and instead of listening to it (after it "fixed" the problem), I rebooted.

That seemed to do the trick, as I was then able to get to Windows Update and to proceed to do updates.

But what a mess, bootstrapping XP up to the newest patch level.
 

escrow4

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2013
3,339
122
106
First problem is XP. Throw it in the bin where it belongs. Its 2013 not 2001.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
20,997
16,243
136
I've had to do an XP <SP3 install recently (retail copy of Windows) and I didn't have any problems with it. I'm pretty sure that one was RTM before any updates.


Having said that, I set myself up a XP SP3 VM recently (Oracle VirtualBox), and the only problem I had with it was that the Automatic Updates service was saturating the CPU (PhII X6 3GHz, virtualisation enabled, one core allocated to XP... should be enough!). It eventually churned through the updates though.

I think the OP was asking for trouble by using a recovery disc provided by the OEM though because of all the crapware that comes with a typical big-name OEM install.
 

Mushkins

Golden Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,631
0
0
XP SP1 has no official support anymore, i'm not surprised Windows Update and IE6 didnt get you anywhere.

You could've just downloaded the standalone SP3 installer from the technet website instead of going through windows update. But yeah, expecting support for this is like asking why you cant do windows updates on a Win98 machine anymore. We're now *three* versions of windows past XP, its time to move on :)
 

sornywrx

Member
Jun 16, 2010
175
0
76
I was thinking you had to go SP1->SP2->SP3 and couldn't install SP3 on a system with SP1 (thus skipping SP2). Not totally sure on that though.
 

Dahak

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2000
3,752
25
91
I was thinking you had to go SP1->SP2->SP3 and couldn't install SP3 on a system with SP1 (thus skipping SP2). Not totally sure on that though.

I vaguely remember that too. But I usually have SP2, SP3, net Framework 2,3 and IE 8 all on a flash drive so I usually don't remember all the time if sp1->sp3 does not work
 

sornywrx

Member
Jun 16, 2010
175
0
76
I vaguely remember that too. But I usually have SP2, SP3, net Framework 2,3 and IE 8 all on a flash drive so I usually don't remember all the time if sp1->sp3 does not work

Yup, I have SP1 (for those very rare times I run across a machine that doesn't have SP1 and has Windows "Whistler"), SP2, SP3, and all that other stuff on my flash drive. I'm about 75% sure you have to do SP1, SP2, then SP3 and can't skip.
 

sornywrx

Member
Jun 16, 2010
175
0
76
You can skip from sp1 to sp3. Just need to have sp1 OR sp2 installed to install sp3 properly.

Maybe I was thinking of going from no SP to Sp3... You wouldn't think that'd come up much as Whistler wasn't around very long before SP1 came out but I work on so many old crappy machines for people that I've ran into a few Whistler machines even as recently as a few months ago.
 

nemesismk2

Diamond Member
Sep 29, 2001
4,810
5
76
www.ultimatehardware.net
I've has a few problems with the bootstrapping XP up to the newest patch level etc. I purchased a new windows xp sp3 and it took ages to get all of the patches etc but it was worth it because it's just going to be used for my fav games. :)
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
20,997
16,243
136
I remember trying to skip XP service packs recently, possibly from RTM to SP3. It just crashed repeatedly soon after running setup.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
First problem is XP. Throw it in the bin where it belongs. Its 2013 not 2001.
Pretty much this.

I understand holding on to what works if it ain't broke... but when it IS broke, time to move on.
 

Gintaras

Golden Member
Dec 28, 2000
1,892
1
71
First problem is XP. Throw it in the bin where it belongs. Its 2013 not 2001.

XP isn't and wasn't a problem...XP was an upgrade to Win2K - which was best ever OS MS made, so was XP - Win2K with childish colours on default install, but very good OS, as good as Win2K...

Problems MS started with release of Vista - when all conspiracy started. Older programs could not install, older hardware - no drivers - other manufacturers wanted money from computer users as bad as Bill Gates - "More Is Never Enough"...

Win 8? Microsoft started to go after people with iphones....

XP didn't require much hardware upgrades, while hardware technology went way ahead of OS and software requirements...
PC with WinXP for casual user was more than enough 512Mb RAM...Vista? jumped way ahead...Don't you think, that hardware manufacturers don't want to sell product? inventions?

Don't forget...now "outside your windows" not Capitalism, now, "outside your windows" - Corporatism...

I don't have much problems with Win8 except that I couldn't use older HP printer given to me...I don't have their Metro(iphone) desktop...
There are other flaws...but I wish, I had Win2K or WinXP today...

Pretty much this.

I understand holding on to what works if it ain't broke... but when it IS broke, time to move on.

not right...older computer enthusiasts used to say:
"If It's Not Broke - You Aren't Pushing Hard Enough"

Don't be surprised if pretty soon you'll need to pay for updates, SP's...and if you don't - your PC stops working....

...but, 100 people @ MS thinking how to make it a reality, while 100,000 computer users are thinking how to get around that...
 

Anteaus

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2010
2,448
4
81
XP isn't and wasn't a problem...XP was an upgrade to Win2K - which was best ever OS MS made, so was XP - Win2K with childish colours on default install, but very good OS, as good as Win2K...

Problems MS started with release of Vista - when all conspiracy started. Older programs could not install, older hardware - no drivers - other manufacturers wanted money from computer users as bad as Bill Gates - "More Is Never Enough"...

Win 8? Microsoft started to go after people with iphones....

XP didn't require much hardware upgrades, while hardware technology went way ahead of OS and software requirements...
PC with WinXP for casual user was more than enough 512Mb RAM...Vista? jumped way ahead...Don't you think, that hardware manufacturers don't want to sell product? inventions?

Don't forget...now "outside your windows" not Capitalism, now, "outside your windows" - Corporatism...

I don't have much problems with Win8 except that I couldn't use older HP printer given to me...I don't have their Metro(iphone) desktop...
There are other flaws...but I wish, I had Win2K or WinXP today...



not right...older computer enthusiasts used to say:
"If It's Not Broke - You Aren't Pushing Hard Enough"

Don't be surprised if pretty soon you'll need to pay for updates, SP's...and if you don't - your PC stops working....

...but, 100 people @ MS thinking how to make it a reality, while 100,000 computer users are thinking how to get around that...

I wish people would stop distilling it to such simplistic levels. There were numerous technological advancements that occured in both hardware and software that necessitated an equivalent advancement in OS capability. No one denies that greatness that was XP, but even if MS suddenly started selling XP again I would never degrade my technology to circa 2008 (XP,SP3).

As to the comments regard capitalism, nothing is keeping you from using Linux. I'm certain that like most Windows users, you use it because the software you need is only available on Windows. If that is the case, it's hypocracy to accuse MS of capitalistic attitudes when you embrace it and support the software industry by buying software designed for Windows. So other software companies deserve to profit and not MS?

I can't remember the last time I saw a BSOD. MS must be doing something right. XP crashed far more often than either Windows 7 or 8.