Excuse me, but the topic was about SP2 being fake and WinXP R2 being the 'real SP2', right?
Well the reloaded stuff is marketing. I thought I explained the marketing and reasons behind why they are doing it, but obviously you missed that.
SP2 is a service pack, a actual REAL service pack and it fixed real flaws. And a big change in a OS WILL break applications, it happens every single time to all Operating systems and I've had experiance with many different ones.
OS X, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Linux, Windows NT/2k/XP/9x, OS/390 + VSE/ESA etc etc.
Even Microsoft and all it's billions can't change that. But they did a decent job with SP2, it never broke anything I installed on my parents computer. My mom upgraded a different computer and it worked fine, many other people have had good success with it.
I still thing Windows and Microsoft, generally sucks, and encorage you and most other people to use something else if you can.
Nothingman talked about nmap back on the first page of this thread, but the list isn't that big IMO. There was a KB that was published with SP2 that listed apps that might stop working, but most of them were related to the firewall and could be easily fixed.
Cogman
Lifer
- Sep 19, 2000
- 10,286
- 147
- 106
I actually think MS did a pretty good job with SP2, and just because the released it "A few weeks" early does not mean that they released an Incomplete version. At that stage Im pretty sure Development had stopped and they where testing diffrent applications on it. So why did it come out early? I believe they either said "A: Screw it, the rest of these programs are hardly used by anyone, (IE a ten year old game that only a select few even know about) or B: Someone worked overnight and tested the remaineder for us"
The Major reason I dont believe that "OMG TEH DINDT FINISH IT" is because SP2 had be in development for a couple* of years now, The way major companys work is they assign X time to development and X time to testing. Generally development is finished when the testing stage starts and only minor things are changed/improved over the course of testing.
*It may not have been a couple of years, Might have only been 1.
The Major reason I dont believe that "OMG TEH DINDT FINISH IT" is because SP2 had be in development for a couple* of years now, The way major companys work is they assign X time to development and X time to testing. Generally development is finished when the testing stage starts and only minor things are changed/improved over the course of testing.
*It may not have been a couple of years, Might have only been 1.
"Half the programs" is a bit of an exageration considering most desktop linux deployments contain thousands of software packages. Though you are right in that there are a ton of Linux patches released.
If you were to compare the linux desktop install to Windows+Office+Acrobat+other common desktop applications your number and frequency of patches would probably be fairly comperable.
-Erik
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, regardless of how (in)accurate it may be.
I agree that there are BS'ers out there; but it's a little bit short-sighted for a "newbie" such as yourself to suggest that we are clueless simply because we occasionally joke about a topic. BS'ing in a forum like this is actually pretty hard to do because there are so many people here with a lot of knowledge and if you state something that is inacurate or incorrect they are pretty quick to call you on it. Generally when people dont know the answer they just dont say anything. I'm assuming you've only made this statement because you havent seen a lot of the inteligent posts many of us make on a regular basis.
Also it's true that this thread is a bit off topic now, but that generally tends to happen when people make vauge (and inacurate) threads.
-Erik
Originally posted by: drag
It'll almost fits the bill. To bad you don't have to pay for it, then it would be 95% accurate discription of OpenBSD, not the currently 85% accurate...
Oh as far as the current iteration of Windows XP reloaded.
read here
(early speculation says that it may or may not cost extra. I figure the cost version will be the next OS, "longhorn", but it would be more + be 64bit)
Does this link help?
Kappo
Platinum Member
- Aug 18, 2000
- 2,381
- 0
- 0
spyordie007 said what I was about to, but let me add some content here.
Particularly when the OPs opinion is so obviously biased...
Case in point, an ocassional M$ in a post will be overlooked as a lame attempt at humor. Having it in
every mention of the company in your post makes you sound like one of those trolls who isn't really
interested in discussing the merits of the company or its products. Not that I'm claiming that
about the OP, but it does distract from the issue that he really wanted discussed.
FinalFantasy, You tell us to provide you with our backgrounds or supporting information for our arguments, but you provide nothing of your own to back up your original claims:
"I guarantee (SP2) was still in it's beta stages"
What evidence do you have that overrides the personal and professional experience of many
people in IT who have been patiently waiting for its release and were already of the opinion that
it had been tested and validated far more than SP1?
" at the time "M$" had just said SP2 was not going to be release for another "couple of/few weeks""
This was after almost a year of delays and updates while they made sure that SP2 was going to
address the major security and system issues that had been identified since XP SP1 had been released.
And on top of the "new" security initiatives that change the way they looked at developing and
testing their updates.
You also seem confused on rumored product announcements, XP RC2 and XP Reloaded IIRC, are
two different things. The idea behind XP RC2 was to release to retail a slipstreamed version of XP that
would already be updated to SP2. This is the same procedure MS has used in the past for releases
of Windows 95 and Windows 98.
"XP Reloaded" (again IIRC) was rumored to be an interim release between XP and Longhorn, where some of the features of Longhorn (that could still be supported on existing XP systems) would be back ported to the current platform.
Is it possible the two ideas can be combined in the future? certainly.
But Microsoft has held a disconnect between production and marketing teams for decades, where
each side comes up with ideas of what the "next" version of product X needs to do, then they work
out what is actually attainable within a set timeframe, and try to build that product for their next
release.
Or people don't answer immediately because they want to see which way the discussion is going
to turn before throwing in; Or, (as has happened before) they are waiting to see if the original
poster was just trolling, or actually looking for an intelligent response.
To answer the original post, I disagree. What we have right now is the "real" SP2, anything
released going forward for XP will be based on that code. Will they come out with new
security patches? Definitely, but we've already seen new patches come out that don't need
to be applied to SP2, because they underlying exploit was already fixed in the code before
it was discovered in an older version of the OS.
Particularly when the OPs opinion is so obviously biased...
Case in point, an ocassional M$ in a post will be overlooked as a lame attempt at humor. Having it in
every mention of the company in your post makes you sound like one of those trolls who isn't really
interested in discussing the merits of the company or its products. Not that I'm claiming that
about the OP, but it does distract from the issue that he really wanted discussed.
FinalFantasy, You tell us to provide you with our backgrounds or supporting information for our arguments, but you provide nothing of your own to back up your original claims:
"I guarantee (SP2) was still in it's beta stages"
What evidence do you have that overrides the personal and professional experience of many
people in IT who have been patiently waiting for its release and were already of the opinion that
it had been tested and validated far more than SP1?
" at the time "M$" had just said SP2 was not going to be release for another "couple of/few weeks""
This was after almost a year of delays and updates while they made sure that SP2 was going to
address the major security and system issues that had been identified since XP SP1 had been released.
And on top of the "new" security initiatives that change the way they looked at developing and
testing their updates.
You also seem confused on rumored product announcements, XP RC2 and XP Reloaded IIRC, are
two different things. The idea behind XP RC2 was to release to retail a slipstreamed version of XP that
would already be updated to SP2. This is the same procedure MS has used in the past for releases
of Windows 95 and Windows 98.
"XP Reloaded" (again IIRC) was rumored to be an interim release between XP and Longhorn, where some of the features of Longhorn (that could still be supported on existing XP systems) would be back ported to the current platform.
Is it possible the two ideas can be combined in the future? certainly.
But Microsoft has held a disconnect between production and marketing teams for decades, where
each side comes up with ideas of what the "next" version of product X needs to do, then they work
out what is actually attainable within a set timeframe, and try to build that product for their next
release.
Or people don't answer immediately because they want to see which way the discussion is going
to turn before throwing in; Or, (as has happened before) they are waiting to see if the original
poster was just trolling, or actually looking for an intelligent response.
To answer the original post, I disagree. What we have right now is the "real" SP2, anything
released going forward for XP will be based on that code. Will they come out with new
security patches? Definitely, but we've already seen new patches come out that don't need
to be applied to SP2, because they underlying exploit was already fixed in the code before
it was discovered in an older version of the OS.
Correction:
As was mentioned earlier "XP Reloaded" has always been the code-name for a marketing push (not an actual software release). The marketing push is supposed to happen after SP2 has been widely adapted (so soon).
I'm not sure where you got your information but this is incorrect.
As was mentioned earlier "XP Reloaded" has always been the code-name for a marketing push (not an actual software release). The marketing push is supposed to happen after SP2 has been widely adapted (so soon).
1. The title of the thread should be "Win XP SP2 incomplete version released?"
2. While a lot of people had perfect installs of SP2 and it worked fine w/all of their exsisting software/hardware/etc, I know that about 3 apps that my office uses were not 100% compatible with SP2. I know the firewall that came with SP2 was one of the issuses w/SP2, not being compatible with our apps (there were a few other security updates in SP2 that were incompatible) and it seems that the SP2 firewall is an issue with a lot of other peoples apps that SP2 was not compatible with. Of course the firewall is easy to turn off, but even then with some people that did not work and that is just one problem, and let's not forget about the VPN and Remote Desktop issues w/SP2. A number of our professionals use our VPN and Remote Desktop frequently and I do not even want to put SP2 on their machine. Sure there is a solution, but for offices that do not have an "in-house" IT pro, they have to spend money to have someone to come out and configure their machines so that they work...or...if they do have an "in-house" IT pro (who would charge less per hour) he would have to waste his time on configuring those machines when he should be putting his time to better use on another project. That's wasted money. http://techrepublic.com.com/52...&messageID=1637872 (Just some praises/gripes about SP2)
I guess that's my biggest gripe w/SP2...that I/people have to waste time and pull myself/theirselves off of other projects I/they should be working on. Sure...some of the blame should fall on the shoulders of the software writers, but MS (that better? ;D) should have been more assetive and contacted some of the bigger software giants to make sure that they were ready for SP2. It seems like MS said, "we're going to release SP2 regardless and if there are incompatiblities, we'll let the users spend their time/money to take care of it." Sure that's fine, but that not good customer service (I say customer service because they are providing a service and YES it is a free one [MS Windows Updates]). If anything MS has the bigger pocket, they should spend some of the $$$$$ they have and help the users out. Is this too much to ask for a company in MS's position?
But hey, MS is all about making as much money as possible and they are NOT required to take the extra step or go the extra mile to help anyone out. $h)t...if it was my company i'd probably do the same thing...so who am I to complain. MS is just too big now for anyone to do anything about any problems that arrise with any MS products, no matter how much any one person or groups or thousands of people complain. Like people say...if you don't like MS products, don't use em. ;D
Don't know if I said everything in the right way for you understand but I'm rushing to head out the door so.....that's my 2cents
2. While a lot of people had perfect installs of SP2 and it worked fine w/all of their exsisting software/hardware/etc, I know that about 3 apps that my office uses were not 100% compatible with SP2. I know the firewall that came with SP2 was one of the issuses w/SP2, not being compatible with our apps (there were a few other security updates in SP2 that were incompatible) and it seems that the SP2 firewall is an issue with a lot of other peoples apps that SP2 was not compatible with. Of course the firewall is easy to turn off, but even then with some people that did not work and that is just one problem, and let's not forget about the VPN and Remote Desktop issues w/SP2. A number of our professionals use our VPN and Remote Desktop frequently and I do not even want to put SP2 on their machine. Sure there is a solution, but for offices that do not have an "in-house" IT pro, they have to spend money to have someone to come out and configure their machines so that they work...or...if they do have an "in-house" IT pro (who would charge less per hour) he would have to waste his time on configuring those machines when he should be putting his time to better use on another project. That's wasted money. http://techrepublic.com.com/52...&messageID=1637872 (Just some praises/gripes about SP2)
I guess that's my biggest gripe w/SP2...that I/people have to waste time and pull myself/theirselves off of other projects I/they should be working on. Sure...some of the blame should fall on the shoulders of the software writers, but MS (that better? ;D) should have been more assetive and contacted some of the bigger software giants to make sure that they were ready for SP2. It seems like MS said, "we're going to release SP2 regardless and if there are incompatiblities, we'll let the users spend their time/money to take care of it." Sure that's fine, but that not good customer service (I say customer service because they are providing a service and YES it is a free one [MS Windows Updates]). If anything MS has the bigger pocket, they should spend some of the $$$$$ they have and help the users out. Is this too much to ask for a company in MS's position?
But hey, MS is all about making as much money as possible and they are NOT required to take the extra step or go the extra mile to help anyone out. $h)t...if it was my company i'd probably do the same thing...so who am I to complain. MS is just too big now for anyone to do anything about any problems that arrise with any MS products, no matter how much any one person or groups or thousands of people complain. Like people say...if you don't like MS products, don't use em. ;D
Don't know if I said everything in the right way for you understand but I'm rushing to head out the door so.....that's my 2cents
MrChad
Lifer
- Aug 22, 2001
- 13,507
- 3
- 81
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. I don't see how Microsoft could go any further to help customers out with SP2 deployment.
Here are just some of the resources they've provided:
http://support.microsoft.com/windowsxpsp2
http://www.microsoft.com/techn...maintain/winxpsp2.mspx
They've detailed all the changes: both features and underlying operating system functionality. They published knowledge base articles with extensive lists of programs that MIGHT conflict with SP2 changes. They provided deployment strategies for IT departments to help smooth the transition. They even helped corporate customers prevent SP2 from automatically installing. They tested the service pack for many months with multiple beta and RC releases, gaining valuable feedback from users, developers and administrators. They provide FREE phone support for service pack related issues.
Tell me how they are "not going the extra mile."
I eagerly await your latest angst-filled post from your parent's basement. FIGHT THE EVIL M$!
- M4H
- M4H
I dont see how the firewall could be causing you issues. With the ability to manage it via. group policy it doesnt take more than a few min. to configure it network-wide and Microsoft has extensive information about how to use it for easy management. Configuring it or disabling it should resolve all issues related to it the firewall or remote connectivity.
Also the vast majority of VPNs work just fine with SP2, it's a very small subset that have any issues at all.
Also the vast majority of VPNs work just fine with SP2, it's a very small subset that have any issues at all.
Wow...hehe...and this is coming from who? Looks like you have a lot of time to post, but do you even have a mangement level position job yet? I'm 20 years old and I RUN a 15 computer, 2 laptop, 2 server (1 data/1 exchange) CPA firm already, besides being skilled in finance (sounds like one of those future CIO/CFO to me...jk..hehe) and a MBA is on the way soon and I'm black...now what were you saying? (Everythings true, but don't take me seriously...I'm a light hearted guy)
I guess being young is part of the reason why I might have unrealistic expectations from MS and I don't understand a lot of issues that happen with MS from an vereran IT pro's point of view. Guess I'm just curious to see if anyone agrees if M$ (jk ;D) can be doing things in a more effective/effecient manner that's easier on the consumer (mainly IT pros). But it's up to MS on how they want to spend their money...and like I said before, if I was in the same position as MS, what would I be doing to maximize profits yet at the same time keep the consumers CONTENT...not necessarily happy...probably the same damn thing...hehe
But hey...I'm learning already. Just like NOW I see your point on people's perception of someone using M$ "excessively", but I just thought it was common/funny (for my entertainment). I'm young...I got a lllllllooooooonnnnnnngggggg way to go before I'm in any of your positions (jk...I don't know how old you guys are ;D)
While that is true, there are instances where disabling the firewall has NOT worked for users and yes the VPN issue is NOT that wide spread.
Oh well...I'm probably going to upgrade my office to SP2 by the end middle of Nov. anyway. The test machines I set up with SP2 have be doing okay and the users have not notified of any additional problems...lately. Might as well get over with sooner then later.
BTW...YOU ARE RIGHT...I agree the SP2 that was release is not a "fake" SP2...of course it's A service pack, but I just should have said it was incomplete, when MS said it was complete.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter