About Service Pack 2 Fears...

T

Tordek

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 9, 2003
Messages
1,765
You know,

Its getting really annoying how many people fear installing sp2 in their systems... Ive heard several comments like:

NOTE: Please notice how i use words like MOST and ALMOST EVERYONE in my comments, i know that many people dont really fit into my judgements below...

" I'll wait until all the bugs get worked around..."

What bugs?!?, DEP? Yes it can be a pain for people with a64 (it was for me), but most apps are getting it together and dep crashes are less and less... Note that MS hasnt done anything wrong here, EVERYONE knew that sp2 was coming, and not preparing their software for it is irresponsible in the least of cases.

" It borked my machine, so i went back to sp1 "

According to what ive seen, almost everyone who did a clean install and the runs sp2 setup or streams sp2 into a win xp cd and installed it, didnt have any problems with it...
I believe that most of the people who run into probs with sp2 either are not that versed in OS instalation and troubleshooting or had already borked installs....

" It has too much """ FRILLS """ that i dont want to have "

What Frills???
Security Center, its there for your own good, if you dont like it, turning its warnings off is 3 clicks away from you.
Firewall, this is by far the best thing that has ever happened to win xp security. It just outright works PERIOD. There is nothing more to tell here.
DEP, I have to accept that MS didnt put the option to turn this off anywhere in the gui. But, if its really bothering you (read above) there is an easy way to turn it off. Just google it...

" I dont trust MS "

This was discussed almost to the point of exhaustion in another thread here. One statement i like from those discussion is:
If you dont trust the company, then dont use their software... If you are using Win XP, you are trusting your system to MS, no matter what you say....

" M$ sucks "

I wont waste thread space by even discussing this... Just grow up people...

Thats it, I end my ranting here.... just one thing:

SP2 is not an optional update, is something everyone has to install... Is something everyone should install...
I really like that MS is forcing this on everyone... Actually i believe that they should have forced SP1 on everyone... I know of a lot of people with machines still running pre sp1 windows installs...

Thats all, thx for reading...
 
There is one good reason to not update to SP2 yet, and that's only if you have software that has a known compatability issue with SP2 and you're waiting for a patch. Most should be out already though...
 
i have a problem with sp2 where if i do alot of uploading with something like emule, it fills up the "buffer space" and then i cant connect to mirc or surf with internet explorer. rebooting doesnt work i have to completely shut down my computer and restart it to clear the buffer apparently. big problem with sp2.
 
" I dont trust MS "

This was discussed almost to the point of exhaustion in another thread here. One statement i like from those discussion is:
If you dont trust the company, then dont use their software... If you are using Win XP, you are trusting your system to MS, no matter what you say....
Click to expand...

That's a philosophy, not the answer to questionable trust.

You can use a software for a singular purpose but you don't have to use their other features because you don't trust them. Example: security. You can use Windows XP to handle all your photo editing / gaming but you don't have to trust their IE browser or whatnot.

-J.
 
Exactly. If you install a GOOD firewall like ZoneAlarm (yes, I know some passionately hate it, but, believe it or not, it's actually a pretty good firewall, especially since it can control at an application level preventing some applications from using the same ports that you've opened for another) use decent antivirus software (even the free AVG should be a start) and use a REAL browser such as, well, ANYTHING else, then you should not be absolutely forced to upgrade to SP2. I don't like that. I upgraded by choice before I found out they were planning on actually forcing everyone to upgrade. Now, I do agree that the average Joe (who is Joe? Contraction of John Doe maybe? lol d-: ) does need this since he doesn't know what a firewall is or why it's not such a great idea to ignore the warnings that explorer.exe was just replaced with an incorrect file and all he has to do is put his windows disc in and hit the ok button to fix it. And they give you an option to disable the forced update, but, it's only temporary. After a certain period, it's going to update whether you like it or not unless you go the extreme route and disable the service itself (which I did since I don't like automatic update running all the time.)

Now, I admit that most of us have absolutely no reason not to update to SP2 (at least, that is currently known,) however, there are some legitimate reasons not to upgrade. Especially for businesses or something like that for example, since many could be running that software that doesn't work right (it's primarily in a business situation where they can't afford to upgrade or switch to something else since they have to do it for hundreds of computers) or just plain the fact that you might have to reconfigure every single computer one at a time to work correctly. Outside the business world it should be pretty rare that you need to not upgrade, but, wouldn't it at least be nice if you had the OPTION? The option should default to yes, upgrade, requiring you to go through some steps to force it to not upgrade, but, you get the idea.

Besides. Everyone admits that installing SP2 over a "dirty" Windows can be a bad thing. And, without a doubt, that's what this forced automatic update will do in the greater majority of cases. Not everyone can afford to make a clean install in any big hurry.
 
There's a difference in "not trusting MS" and "not trusting their firewall to protect you." I can understand not thinking a piece of software is doing the job it was intended to do as well as others. I believe the whole debate in the other thread was not trusting MS but still continuing to use XP. The equivalent would be like saying I don't trust the firewall but I will continue to use it, but whine about it. Oh pardon me, I meant M$... :p
 
OldPueblo said:
There's a difference in "not trusting MS" and "not trusting their firewall to protect you." I can understand not thinking a piece of software is doing the job it was intended to do as well as others. I believe the whole debate in the other thread was not trusting MS but still continuing to use XP. The equivalent would be like saying I don't trust the firewall but I will continue to use it, but whine about it. Oh pardon me, I meant M$... :p
Click to expand...

That's a bad "equivalent" example...

Don't trust Microsoft : Continue to use Windows XP.
Don't trust firewalls : Continue to use the firewall.

Eh, think about it. MS is a company that makes many software products while a firewall only serves a single purpose. I don't see how they go together. If we break Windows XP down further:

Don't trust Windows XP : Continue to use Windows XP.
Don't trust firewalls: Continue to use the firewall.

That still makes it a bad comparison because Windows XP has tons of features that serves many purposes while a firewall still serves only one. You're telling me that I shouldn't trust any of the features that MS offers within that OS, even its' integrated Notepad? What the heck?

Don't trust Windows XP's security : Continue to use Windows XP.
Don't trust firewalls: Continue to use the firewall.

As you break it further down, it still doesn't make for a good comparison. The firewall still offers one purpose while if I don't trust the security portion of Windows XP, I can still use it for other stuff such as what I stated last post, photo editing and gaming. Is there any other reason to use the firewall besides its purpose? No. Bad comparison again.

So, all in all, bad... bad... bad thought.

And grow up. Use MS.

-J.
 
GeForceX said:
That's a bad "equivalent" example...
Don't trust Microsoft : Continue to use Windows XP.
Don't trust firewalls : Continue to use the firewall.
Click to expand...
I think he meant a particular firewall vendor, not all firewalls...

GeForceX said:
And grow up. Use MS.
Click to expand...
I think he was joking...
 
I like SP2... everything works for me and everything seems faster....


whats the problem?
 
chinoquezada said:
I think he meant a particular firewall vendor, not all firewalls...


I think he was joking...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification Chin, I guess not everyone read that other thread. :) And yes I meant in my analogy specifically not trusting the SP2 firewall but using it anyway AND complaining about it. Not trusting MS but then using their operating system is a bit of an oxymoron because you are essentially handing them total control over all of your hardware. A specific application is a different story of course because many applications can go into one OS. For the record, I love SP2 and its firewall is a wonderul app. Not the end all be all, but great for the average joe.
 
OldPueblo said:
Not trusting MS but then using their operating system is a bit of an oxymoron because you are essentially handing them total control over all of your hardware.
Click to expand...
Not at all. I use M$ stuff because it's the eaiseat way to do what I want to do. But I don't trust M$ one bit.If there was a flavor of Linux that allowed me to run my Windows applications, I'd drop M$ like a hot rock.
 
O[H]-Zone said:
Not at all. I use M$ stuff because it's the eaiseat way to do what I want to do. But I don't trust M$ one bit.If there was a flavor of Linux that allowed me to run my Windows applications, I'd drop M$ like a hot rock.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean. I don't trust my roof even though I live under it, my bank even though I put my money in it, my car even though I drive long distances, my shoes, the air I'm using to breath, etc. I mean I still use them, but hey what does that have to do with trust? :rolleyes: I think the word you are looking for is you don't LIKE Microsoft...
 
OldPueblo said:
I know exactly what you mean. I don't trust my roof even though I live under it, my bank even though I put my money in it, my car even though I drive long distances, my shoes, the air I'm using to breath, etc. I mean I still use them, but hey what does that have to do with trust? :rolleyes: I think the word you are looking for is you don't LIKE Microsoft...
Click to expand...
No. The words I'm looking for are:
"I don't trust M$"
Those words work perfectly to describe how I feel.
If you need to tell me whom I trust and don't trust to make your point valid, you've already failed.
 
Well, I installed SP 2 and was impressed with the firewall feature, but frankly, I hate change. The last straw was when I went into my documents to edit some of my web pages, and every single time I opened up a javascripted page in an Explorer window, I got an alert. I could shut down the internet alerts, but I was getting hassled about my own web site content just running from my local C drive! I could not, for the life of me, disable these constant nag notices. I add content every day, and this was just "security" overkill.

I'm willing to bet that I missed something obvious, but my hackles were raised and just went ahead and uninstalled SP 2.

Three days later I got hit with a trojan and a bundle of spy and adware. I botched my registry editing and was forced to do a system restore.

So my feelings are definitely mixed. Did I mention that I hate change? ;)
 
spazmo said:
Did I mention that I hate change? ;)
Click to expand...

Just as long as you change your underwear... :p And Mr. Zone, what would you call a person that extensively uses something that they don't trust? I could throw out few, but I think you would take them as personal insults, though I'm not the one that created the words or their definitions. I really don't care what you do and I don't know why I spent so much time with you. I guess I like you. :)
 
I atleast like the pop-up blocker but ever since SP2 my boot times have increased. Before as soon my desktop came up was able to open IE and surf now I have to wait for about 40 seconds. Not a pain but very annoying I cant figure out what SP2 did to cause this. :mad:
 
Easy solution, don't use IE. Security problems of all IE natures go away. And don't tell me anything stupid like other browsers don't work with your web content. I HATE people who refuse to write standard code in favor of that god awful proprietary crap MS came up with just so they could try to set their own standard (yes, it worked, but we don't have to like it.) In all the years I've been using alternatives (give it a shot and you find that you feel no need to go back to the junky browser with no features -- unless security holes is a feature) I've only heard of ONE big security risk with these browsers. It was a hole in Mozilla that allowed someone to use mime types to somehow or other trick it into running a program under some pretty special circumstances. That was immediately disabled and warnings sent all around. Really, it turned out the problem wasn't entirely their fault. Mainly it was because it was trusting the OS to properly run things and they realized that you can't do that. Anyway, their problem was basically immediately solved and I never heard of anyone taking advantage of it like people do with IE the moment a new hole is found. Plus, it took MS THIS long to fix even those basic holes that started popping that stuff up. Not to mention every single average joe in the world is going to ask their friends how to turn it off and eventually one of their friends will show them how. Joe does NOT like stuff popping up that requires concious thought to answer it. I don't know why, but that's just how things are so there's no way around it for us. Heck, even with important things. My sister kept turning off her firewall just because she couldn't click the "remember my answer" button when the program kept asking whether or not it should allow a program internet access. The viruses were so bad we had to reinstall.
 
^ When it was just Netscape and IE, MS had them owned in every way. That's why everything was written for IE. Oh yeah, plus the fact that 99.999% of PC's come with IE.

Now there's FireFox. Which owns all. There is no "other browser" anymore. :)
 
Okay if SP2 is so great... WHY WONT MY COMP LET ME UPDATE!?
LoL
I'm running XP Pro and I keep getting this msg just trying to update

Update for Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773) Failed
Monday, September 20, 2004 Windows Update website

Any ideas?
 
Sayth said:
Okay if SP2 is so great... WHY WONT MY COMP LET ME UPDATE!?
LoL
I'm running XP Pro and I keep getting this msg just trying to update

Update for Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) 2.0 and WinHTTP 5.1 (KB842773) Failed
Monday, September 20, 2004 Windows Update website

Any ideas?
Click to expand...

I swear there was a KB article about it failing on some machines, but you can download it manually here http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;842773. Sometimes they just get stuck. You can try deleting the contents of the WUTemp folder in the root of C: and the contents of the temp folder under local settings under your profile in "c:\documents & settings" and then try windows update again.
 
Hungfoo said:
i have a problem with sp2 where if i do alot of uploading with something like emule, it fills up the "buffer space" and then i cant connect to mirc or surf with internet explorer. rebooting doesnt work i have to completely shut down my computer and restart it to clear the buffer apparently. big problem with sp2.
Click to expand...

Oh wow this sounds about right. Have u had any problems a mic working? or pages failing a lot or pages sort of load super slow looks like halfway then bam fail and u got to refresh?
 
Hungfoo said:
i have a problem with sp2 where if i do alot of uploading with something like emule, it fills up the "buffer space" and then i cant connect to mirc or surf with internet explorer. rebooting doesnt work i have to completely shut down my computer and restart it to clear the buffer apparently. big problem with sp2.
Click to expand...

I forgot to respond to this one as well. Not to say you aren't having an issue or anything, I just thought you'd be interested to know that I use emule as well (right now in fact) and its acted no different for me before or after SP2. Could be a coincidence maybe...
 
im not sure of what sp2 is having a problem with exactly. i also have this samsm.exe which was installed after i installed sims 2 and it likes to access the internet even when im not running sims 2. needless to say i downloaded sims 2 and this may be a new virus that nobody knows about yet. someone else has this same deal happening in another thread. also, when i removed my d-link router, it seemed to work again. i havnt experienced the problem YET. im kinda afraid to turn on emule cus im sure if i do have the prob, that will trigger it.
 
My problem is that whether I install it on-line or oflline, it won't work. The installation goes fine, the computer reboots and then it asks me if I wish to turn on automatic updates (or something like that). Then the user accounts page loads up and here is where my problem begins. No matter what user account i use, after selecting it, the computer will reboot. No windows. My only cure is to load in safe mode and uninstall SP2. Anyone have an answer to this, I'd appreciate it. Tried it four times, with and w/o anti-virus and it jsut won't work.
 
Myabe I'm really fortunate, but I've had absolutely no problems what so ever installing SP 2 on two different desktop machines. On my main rig, I've left eMule running for over a week with constant uploading and I've never had any slowdowns you guys are talking about.
 
I discovered that Zone Alarms was the cuplit in my installation errors. I've now installed SP2...but am having a PITA time trying to get onto my electronic bill-pay site. URG! Microsoft :mad:
 
mdaniel said:
I discovered that Zone Alarms was the cuplit in my installation errors. I've now installed SP2...but am having a PITA time trying to get onto my electronic bill-pay site. URG! Microsoft :mad:
Click to expand...

*cough* Opera/Firefox *cough*
Who said that!

^_^

Anyway, I suspect that generally the issue with ZoneAlarm is it's not good to have both the ZoneAlarm AND the ICS/Firewall service enabled at the same time, and SP2 gladly turns that ICS/Firewall service on without even checking for known firewall services first. Well, certainly this was the only problem I ever experienced with SP2.
 
I work in the semiconductor industry, specifically in a cleanroom. The IT department sent out and email warning everyone to NOT install SP2.

I attempted to install it on two computers at home and afterwards neither one would boot.
 
Did you install them to a clean installation or even slipstream it?

The general consensus is that SP2 will majorly screw up dirty installations in rather a painfully large percentage of the cases but that a slipstreamed copy will work in nearly all cases. I haven't installed it on very many PCs myself (just my own in fact) so I haven't verified if this is true or not, but, it does make perfect sense.

In fact, it may be best if people don't install SP2 dirty. It may truly be best for people to just use a real firewall and stop using that securuity breach waiting happen known as IE until they can get around to installing clean. That's a huge part of what bugs me about the fact that MS is forcing installation via automatic updates and everyone immediately says to upgrade without further thought into the matter.
 
Lol, you have to give me time to finish my editing cycle before responding. d-: I think my average number of edits must be at least 4 or 5. ^_^

Anyway, I admit to being surprised. Slipstream is as clean as you can get. If you have troubles in two difference cases (btw, is the hardware the same or noticably different) then I'm inclined to think that SP2 has some serious troubles with something in them. Might be useful to know just what it was.
 
computer 1specs are in my sig.

The 2nd computer was an AMD 1.3ghz, 768mb PC133, 15gb Maxtor, Asus A7V133 motherboard. Soundblaster live, ATI 7500 AIW.

I generally always do clean install with a new SP or when I upgrade a piece of hardware. Or just every few months for a bit of spring cleaning.
 
Only common factor I can see is the fact both are Asus boards. I can't imagine those two boards have much in common really though. Oh well, I'm completely lost on that one. Maybe someone else has a better idea I suppose.

At the rate things are going with all the complaints and everything, I'm thinking MS might in the not so far off future release a SP2a or something. Lol.
 
I'm not too worried about it. There's nothing in SP2 that I really need.
 
Well I've installed SP2 on only 2 PC’s but it installed perfectly on both. The only real problems I had where the windows firewall like to turn on automatically so it was messing with my zonealarm. But after turning the windows firewall off I had no problems. The other was on my fiancé’s pc. Windowsblinds version 4.2 doesn’t display the themes correctly with SP2 but a simple upgrade to version 4.3 fixed that problem. Also these were not fresh installs.

Also I kind of like SP2 it seems to run faster on both PC’s. The built in firewall is great for the average person. (My fiancé for example). Since they usually do not have a firewall installed.

The best thing to come out of SP2 is the security center. I like that it tells people updates are available and need to be installed. Microsoft is moving in the right direction with that. I'm sure all of you still remember blaster and how the fix was available for it before it hit but it was so devastating because the average user never updates windows. So in my OPINION SP2 is a smart move by Microsoft.
 
I'm not too big a fan of SP2. I installed it in beta and couldn't get a couple games to run, so I dropped it. No other problems besides then, I understood that some stuff wouldn't work cause of the nature of the beta release.

Now, since I've updated the "real" release, I've had nothing but problems. For whatever reason, Norton won't let auto-protect come on. And then the Security Center reminds me every 30 seconds, regardless of me turning off the notifications.

My computer has been mucking up, it's really time for a format. I'm going to reserve judgement until I install everything clean though, as I do like the firewall.

That being said, I consider myself a fairly "power user" level, and I don't need all the notifications and warnings and rickita-rackita to tell me what's going on, but I do believe that most average users will benefit from the update. My family, for instance, cannot remember to even defragment regularly. This SP2 will cater to people like that, and for people like us [H]ard kids, we will be able to find work arounds for the things that we don't like, I'm sure.

Overall, despite my experiences with SP2, I'd say it's a good thing for the majority.
 
I installed in for a client, it actually went OK

WinMe (EGADS!) ---> WinXP ---> SP2
the only problem I had was with the firewall, it wouldnot let any programs at all connect to the internet at all, even when specifically added to the list. i turned it off, and added Kerio PF.

I use 2K @ home and will continue to do so until XP-64 is released.
I dont trust M$ when it comes to security, but I love the OS otherwise. My main gripe is my friends and family who are not tech-competent are always having problems. Im the one that has to go fixed borked SP2 installs, or cleanup hacks and such.

Heres how I fix them, and keep em running good
Install 2K fresh, install SP4, install either mozilla or firefox, install KPF, and AVG
remove IE startup stuff (shortcuts, start menu, et all)
And they no longer have problems.

If they insist on XP (some do) I do a clean format and install, and have no problems, except with the firewall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top