Beware Windows Service Pack 2

[Nancy Waterman]

It will slow down 40% of computers and hose 15% of systems. It made a total mess of mine and had to be uninstalled. I thought I had a worm or virus causing it to increasingly dysfunction. Just wanted to warn everyone.

[salvorhardin]

1. Obligatory "Use Linux" post

Now back to your regularly scheduled political angst. :-)

[LifeDuringWartime]

70. obligatory "use a mac" post

although i have never used linux, i would like to try it out sometime

[BlueEyedSon]

2. I assume you mean WIN XP

I'm staying on WIN 2K for now....

[Magleetis]

3. It's working fine for me

on my home machine as well as my computer at work. It seemed to clear up some problems that I was having with Media Player 9. It took a while to install. So far so good.

[UAWONE]

5. xp

Works fine for me too .

[SemperEadem]

44. mine is working fine, too

no problems with sp2 on my 'puter.

[ArkDem]

4. I've installed on about 150 computers in the last 2 weeks with

nothing but execellent results. My staff is working dilligently to put it on out remaining 500 computers. The firewall and security center are especially helpful.

[onecitizen]

6. Too late..........

already did and having problems too. Part of my problem might be the telephone voice over program I installed from Verizon. Don't do that either. Totally does not work for me anyway. Good idea but has a lot of bug-a-boos. Between the 2 things, my lightening fast computer has slowed to a snail's pace. Grrr

[demnan]

7. I didn't have a problem

I installed on work and home computers. Nancy, is there a particular problem you're having? Perhaps someone has a solution for it.

[Kolesar]

8. I vaguely recall it depends upon brand of microprocessor

Don't quote me on this. From a water-cooler conversation, I recall that it depends upon whether the u-processor chip is AMD or Intel.

[jayfish]

10. Don't Even Go There. -NT-

Jay

[Kolesar]

13. You got me puzzled

Considering how much they cost, home computers deliver unsatisfactory user quality. They are not documented well, not supported well, and are shipped with known problems that are more than trivial.

The worst moment is when someone has to make a purchasing decision. "Which poorly-performing product do you wish to have problems with?"

[jayfish]

19. Just Trying To Head Off A AMD v. Intel Flame Fest...

but I'll see if I can answer some of your concerns directly. Being a hobbyist and having worked in the industry for a while I can tell you that most of the problems I see with computers, of all varieties, are facilitated, if not downright caused, by the operator. As for ducumentation... its sucks, but there are some reasons that is sucks. The first is that mfg.s have to dumb down doc's for even the simplest of programs because people either can't or won't read the stuff. I still have my DOS 5.0 manual and it is 668 pages (not including supplements). It is so good that you can still use it today even though DOS 5.0 has been dead for the better part of a decade. Do think anyone in this world of instant gratification is going to cozy up with a 668 page technical manual? I don't. There is still documentation around that is good , but it is usually in electronic format because it costs money to print a big, thick book that no-one is going to read anyway. As far as buying an off the shelf PC goes, my motto is buy your first one then never buy another one again. Once you have outlived it's usefulness you should be able to build your own. It's easier than most people think. Most of the time it is less expensive and you are your own tech support. Not only that, but you will learn more from doing it than even the best tech. manual can teach you. On The support end I have seen good and bad just like every other product ever made. One of the worst offenders used to be Gateway. One of the funnest phone calls I have ever been a part of was a Gateway Support call. They used to have it set up so that 1 support tech. would be talking to 4 different people with 4 different problems on the same line simultaniously... it was comical. I am of the opinion, myself, that PC's are not ready for prime-time but I have been hooked on them for years.

Jay

[Yuna]

27. Is that a joke?

"how much they cost"

Well, if you let your self be taken by a system manufacturer probably.

Let's look at OEM cost for a home built system:

Athlon XP 2.2Ghz 400FSB - $111
Nforce 2 Ultra M7NCD Pro $69
512MB DDR 400 RAM - $60
SATA 160GB Hard drive - $88
Geforce FX 5600 256MB - $94
PSU/Case - $50
DVD+R/W -R/W Dual layer drive - $64

Grand total for killer system: $536

If bought from manufacturer by ignorant computer users: $1500+

And that's the cost of a decent gaming system. If you just want a VERY fast system for word processing, email, etc you can assemble one for sub $300 that will beat the pants off anything a manufacturer would dare sell you for that cost. Not to mention better performing due to the fact the hardware is decent brand and has not been bastardized to prevent 3rd party use. As well as a pure setup not polluted with whatever useless end user garbage software they install on it.

Now, what were you saying about cost again?

[Kolesar]

32. Even $536 is too high for a product that will be obsolete in 4 years

What else can $536 buy? Half a mortgage payment, a whole winter seasons' heating bill, several months of food, a canoe, or a TV, VCR, and a DVD player. I bought a bicycle for $1000 three years ago and I expect it will be fully functional in ten years with replacement of the tires and chain.

The operating systems are no bargain. Apple is making money on theirs--I have never used a Mac, but I understand they are quality products. Microsoft, however, releases slightly-cheaper products full of security holes and incompatibility problems. Their website for support is rather lame, too. If other home electronics functioned as badly as these products, no one would buy them.

[Yuna]

33. So don't use a computer

or any other developing technology. A bike isn't being massively improved on every year now, is it? You're comparing apples and oranges.

"I have never used a Mac, but I understand they are quality products"

They're fine, but don't fool your self in to believing they are totally secure. Apple has already released several security updates for OS X - some of which patching flaws that could allow a remote user total control over a system. And don't think an apple computer you buy today won't be obsolete in 4 years either.

"incompatibility problems"

If this is your concern why would you consider buying an apple? 95% of software and hardware on the market will be incompatible with it.

I don't know what "incompatibility problems" you are talking about. Can you elaborate? That's actually something Windows has going for it - it's the most compatible OS available.

Do you mean trying to run software written when Win 95 was around on XP? Yea, that can cause a problem. There is a compatibility tool kit available from Microsoft that resolves such issues generally. You'll have to be educated on development to an extent to use it well, however.

[Kolesar]

37. Incompatibility means obsolescence in my experience

We have a laboratory with a dozen or so Windows machines of various ages. All too often when we wish to add a card or replace a failed piece of hardware, we find that new technology products are incompatible with our machines. We find that even power supplies are not available for five year old machines. We either have to not add the feature or replace the PC. Sometimes we get by with a motherboard upgrade, but often it means replacing the motherboard, drive, video, etc.

I cannot help but think that a machine could be sold to allow one to get on the internet, download some camera images, print and access one or two rotating media devices for less than $300. It would also be nice if you did not have to be a technician to keep it operating. That is a major struggle for some folks I know.

[Yuna]

40. Hmmm...

"All too often when we wish to add a card or replace a failed piece of hardware, we find that new technology products are incompatible with our machines"

You're telling me PCI cards are incompatible with your systems? Unless your systems are ISA based... and if so you are a REALLY understating how old these systems are. *Maybe* they don't have an AGP slot, but even that is unlikely.

Now are these manufactured systems? Sometimes a manufacturer will bastardize a system so that it is extremely difficult to upgrade it. That's not the fault of the technology though - it's the fault of a greedy manufacturer.

"We find that even power supplies are not available for five year old machines"

If they are truly five years old a 500W PSU will do just as fine as a 300W PSU.

"Sometimes we get by with a motherboard upgrade, but often it means replacing the motherboard, drive, video, etc. "

Well obviously a motherboard upgrade will mean replacing the motherboard. Now why do you have to buy a new hard drive? Are these drives IDE? If so there is no reason you would need to do that. Maybe if you are moving from SCSI to IDE or vice versa... I've yet to see a mobo that is SATA only as well. IDE is always available and will be for some time.

"It would also be nice if you did not have to be a technician to keep it operating. That is a major struggle for some folks I know."

I agree. If this is your problem, however, moving to Linux isn't going to help you. Although Linux devs are trying to make the OS as user friendly as Windows, it certainly is not going to hold your hand nearly as much as Windows. It is a degree more difficult to use.

Apple is probably more user friendly than Windows in certain regards, however.

Microsoft attempts to make Windows user friendly, but honestly there is a limit. If you are going to use a tool you should expect to take the time to learn how to use it correctly, and when it fails because of improper use and poor safety precautions it is the users fault, not the machines. Do you complain to Ford that you have to learn how to operate its vehicles before you can use them properly?

Many people complain about security issues in Windows. Again, a certain amount of safety precautions should be taken on the users part. For example, leaving your machine wide open to the internet with out using so much as a firewall. Now Microsoft is taking it on its self to do that for you - yet previously it still should have been the users responsibility to do. If they did not bother to educate themselves on the matter it is their own fault. It's like leaving your car unlocked. What do you expect to happen?

It seems people want to use the tool before taking the time to properly learn how to use it. Kind of like a 10 year old getting in the drivers seat for the first time and taking the car for a spin on the freeway.

[Kolesar]

43. Gotta wrap this up

Thank you for your technical & marketability summaries. They were well written.
I am going for a bike ride before it rains.

[LifeDuringWartime]

71. any mac will work on a windows network

and even though most software won't run on a mac, there is almost always an equivalent product that is as good or better

[Protected]

38. Obsolete for what?

Unless you want to play the latest games, a computer from 1998 (300mhz+) on up will run a word processing program and a web browser just fine.

Oh, by the way, your TV will probably be obsolete by 2009.

[RebelYell]

17. I installed SP2 on my laptop and desktop

Laptop has AMD, desktop has Intel. No problems. I found that keeping your Office software up to date helps with XP updates. I learned that the hard way.

[Yuna]

29. Wrong

All 32-bit CPUs be they AMD or Intel are 100% backwards compatible. There is NO difference between the two as far as functionality is concerned. Both brands will execute 32-bit code 100% flawlessly.

Now if you want to talk about performance, dual channel RAM, hyper transport, 64-bit functionality, chipsets, etc it's a different story. But again, no difference in stability between the two.

[Kolesar]

39. So both processors are "equally stable" wrt the OS upgrade

One will perform as well as the other:evilgrin:
Note that I did say "don't quote me"

[Yuna]

41. Performance

Depends on the CPU architecture and clock speed.

[ladjf]

9. I had the same problem.

Fortunately, I had backed up my entire C drive to another hard drive. So I was able to copy over the service pack 2.

[w13rd0]

11. Largest problem...

...drivers for hardware without "MS-approved" digital signatures. That'll frell ya up quick. On "standard" boxes, I've had little problem with centralized use and deploy. So the running total for me is: 1 in 6 critical failures, the rest are ok. Not odds I'd want to bet my life on, but can be managed if you have a lot of time to waste struggling with an overpriced OS that should, considering the dollars behind MS and the "maturity" of the OS, work flawlessly out of the box except for the VERY rare system. Would you trust homeland security or your privacy to the failure rate of MS products?

[Nancy Waterman]

12. Far from perfect

For the record, MS has never released a version 1 of any of its software that did not create problems for "some" people. My husband has put SP 2 on 5 computers: one toasted and 5 OK. In those 5, 2 had signifcant performance hits (mostly slowdowns). One difference to be aware of is that SP 2 sets up differently in XP Home versus XP pro.

[wtmusic]

14. Beware Windows n/t

[boxster]

15. Do you have any sources for your 40%/15% stats?

I've read a lot of articles about the complaints and haven't seen anything remotely approaching those figures.

Our company has upgraded hundreds of systems for several different clients in a variety of environments and had very few problems.

[ArkDem]

18. 78% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[nolabels]

42. and 22% believe all of them

:D

[Cronus Protagonist]

80. The remaining 63% have no clue about statistics

It's a known fact.

You might be a Republican if...
http://cronus.com/quiz

Commentary by a Republican...
http://cronus.com/republican

The REAL Republican Platform...
http://cronus.com/platform

Bush's Illustrated Resume
http://cronus.com/bushresume

Isn't That Strange?
http://cronus.com/oil

:)

[Brian_Expat]

16. It completely hosed my eight-month-old high-end Toshiba laptop

I was so pissed off I reinstalled from scratch the original XP installation from CD, downloaded SuSE Linux for free from the web, then reformatted the PC and am now running Linux at home.

Microsoft hosing my PC was the last straw in a long, long hate-hate relationship.

[A_Possum]

76. Same here, same laptop

Toshiba Satellite, a beautiful machine.

Had to uninstall the patch, called Toshiba, they claimed to know nothing, nooothhiiiing.

[Marnieworld]

20. I'm a systems admin and it's not caused a single problem

For me or any of the users I support. Beware of people making blanket statements about a product because they are having a problem. Ya think that maybe it's you or something that could be fixed?

[MadHound]

21. Obligatory "Get a Mac" post

n/t

[jayfish]

22. I Know That The Mac And Linux Folks Don't Want To Hear...

this but their systems are just as vulnerable to exploits and problems as PC's. They just don't have the installed base so you don't see it in the news every-time something comes up with them. Windows isn't the best out there but neither are the rest of them.

Jay

[MadHound]

26. You're partially correct

But only partially. Yes, since Macs aren't as widespread as PCs, 99% of the viri and trojans, etc are written to effect Windows machines. We Mac users catch a break on that. However the actual Mac OS is more stable. First off, MS is making a product that is designed to run on several types of machines, each a bit different. Loss of stability and reliablity there, whereas the Mac OS is designed for a specific machine. Secondly, MS designs it products with defects built in, so that one is forced to constantly upgrade. Third, MS likes putting in back doors and other security liablities in order to exert more control on it's product and the machines running it.

Macs simply are designed to be more stable. I have worked with Macs for fifteen years now, and no matter what version I'm using, I have rarely had it freeze up, had to reboot, and never, ever had to reformat a drive. I'm not saying that these things don't occur, but they happne at a less frequent rate on a Mac.

[Yuna]

30. "Secondly, MS designs it products with defects built in"

Compare the number of MacOS updates versus Windows updates in the same time span.

The MacOS (both pre and after OS X) receive many, MANY more upgrades you must BUY than Windows. OS 6, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, OS X (panther, cougar, many other code names they've used on that) etc.

Let's look at Microsoft on the other hand since 1995 on home user 9x front - Win 95, 98, 98SE, ME. That's 4 as opposed to the mac above.

On the business (NT) front: NT 4, 2000, XP. That's THREE.

XP can be added to the home user front after ME, as it was the first NT based OS for the home user. (also marking the discontinuation of the 9x series)

[MadHound]

46. LOL, you obviously have never dealt with a Mac friend

This statement right here gives it away: "The MacOS (both pre and after OS X) receive many, MANY more upgrades you must BUY than Windows." I MUST buy, no sorry, I've never HAD to buy upgrades, and neither did they come out more frequently than Windows upgrades. Hell, I'm still running a Power Mac 6100 on OS 7.5.1. I did one upgrade to it, and didn't HAVE to do that. It still functions fine, gets out on the 'net, it is just a bit obsolete, a little too slow for my taste. Of course it is an eleven year old machine.

My new machine is an eMac I bought a little over a year ago. Still running the original OS, a split OS, X/9.x. And I haven't HAD to do any upgrades.

I also notice that you're not including all of the bimonthly security upgrades that MS sends out, nor the service upgrades they send out, nor all of the patches, virtually a new one every week. And yes, many of them you HAVE to get, otherwise your machine starts getting squirrely. LOL, give me a Mac anyday, I would rather be doing things on my computer, rather than having to constantly doing things to my computer. But hey, to each their own.

[Yuna]

49. You seem to ignore all the qualifiers in the original post

First of all you now say you haven't "HAD" to do any upgrades. No one HAS to do any upgrades. I was merely listing upgrades that you COULD make.

"I also notice that you're not including all of the bimonthly security upgrades that MS sends out, nor the service upgrades they send out, nor all of the patches, virtually a new one every week."

I was under the impression by "upgrades" you were referring to pure OS revisions. (Win 95, 98, 98SE, ME, etc. OS 6, 7, 8, etc) Now you have added security updates. (which are classified more appropriately as patches, not "upgrades") One could also argue that the fact Microsoft issues so many security updates while Apple does not merely indicates that Microsoft is more aggressive when it comes to seeking out and resolving security issues. :)

"LOL, give me a Mac anyday, I would rather be doing things on my computer, rather than having to constantly doing things to my computer."

Windows XP will automatically install all available updates when they become available in the background - with OUT user intervention if so desired.

While on your Mac I your options for "doing things" is rather limited considering most software and hardware on the market is unavailable to you.

"HAD to buy upgrades"

No you have not HAD to. But as a windows NT user in the last many years if you *wanted to stay as up to date as possible* you only had to buy THREE revisions of Windows. (NT 4, 2000, XP) All updates for those operating systems have been free of charge. Apple, on the other hand, unless you are doing something like moving from OS 8 to 8.1 will chage you a bundle for every new OS revision. Microsoft may charge 100-200 for it's home/small business operating systems, but at least they don't have you doing it multiple times over a series of years.

Let's also not forget that Apple operating systems are very poor for compatibility. If you choose not to upgrade to a newer OS you may very well be unable to run most newer software. Where as on Windows the vast majority of software can be run whether you are using Win 98 or Win XP.

[MadHound]

55. Like I said before friend,

You have obviously never worked on a Mac, for your statements are ludicrous. Let's see, where to begin. How about here; you state firmly that Windows has had fewer upgrades than Mac since '95. Well, your listing of Mac OS's 6, 7, 8, etc dates back to '88. Hell, back in those days, MS was still operating on a DOS operating system, and had no clue about doing a GUI. Another point, you insist on including x.5 or some such as new operating systems, they're not, they are more analogous to service packs, minor upgrades as opposed to major reworks. So yes, since 1988, Macs have had five major upgrades. Let's see, off the top of my head I can think of ten major MS upgrades, and I'm probably missing some.

And it is a good thing that Windows XP will automatically install updates in the background, because there are a bunch of them, and it would be tiring having to install them every week. I think it is quite telling when an OS has to constantly be updated in order to take care of bugs, conflicts, glitches, etc. And while my Mac can do the very same background installation trick, it rarely has to, for it has far fewer bugs, glitches, etc.

And my software options are not limited at all. Most software is and has been made in both Windows and Mac versions, and in fact there is much software out there that runs better on a Mac, such as the Adobe suite of products(originally designed for a Mac). For those programs that don't have a Mac version, it is quite easy to install a PC card, or install the program Virtual PC. Gee, then I can run 3 OS's on my Mac, Mac OS 9. Mac OSX, and Windows. Can you do that trick? I don't think so. In addition, as for as compatibility goes, Mac bends over backward to make its product compatible with PCs. If I sent you a document done in MS word off of my Mac, it would be the same document on your PC. Same with most other major programs that are cross platform

As far as cross OS compatiblity goes, you're talking out of your ass here. Any program that runs on Mac OS 6 can run off of any Mac OS up to Mac OSX. And if you install the split OS emulator, you can run said programs on Mac OSX. Fancy that, since I'm running programs copied off of some 5.25" floppies, originally designed for Mac OS 2 on my eMac. Can you run old DOS programs from seventeen years ago on Windows XP? Somehow I doubt it.

Sorry friend, but I suggest you do two things. First, do some research on Macs so that you know what you're talking about and don't come off like a fool. Second, go try out a Mac, get to know it. I think you'll find out the the ease of use is much better than a Windows box, with less down time to boot.

[Yuna]

61. Hmmm

"Well, your listing of Mac OS's 6, 7, 8, etc dates back to '88"

Totally irrelvent considering those operating systems (especially 7 & 8) were still in use in 95 on a large amount of macs.

"Another point, you insist on including x.5 or some such as new operating systems, they're not, they are more analogous to service packs, minor upgrades as opposed to major reworks. "

Are you kidding? The leap to 95 from 3.1 was a major milestone. Same for NT 4 to 2000 and 2000 to XP.

Sounds to me like your complaing the OS's are on the same code base. What, do you think an entire OS should be scrapped and you should start from the begining with every revision? Please. You obviously know nothing about development time. Even OS X was based on someone elses code base.

" So yes, since 1988, Macs have had five major upgrades. Let's see, off the top of my head I can think of ten major MS upgrades, and I'm probably missing some."

Not on the same line friend. On the NT line there have been THREE. NT 4, 2000, and XP. Period.

On the 9x end user line there have been 95, 98, and ME.

Apparently you don't grasp the concept that the NT line was based on pure 32-bit code and marketed solely (until XP) to a different audience. By your logic you might as well include Word revisions.

" it rarely has to, for it has far fewer bugs, glitches, etc. "

Given the fact MacOS has such a small userbase this is not surprising. If every Windows user switched to Mac today next week you'd see a 2000 page list of bugs. You can't find many bugs when so few people are using the OS or explicitly looking for them.

"it is quite easy to install a PC card, or install the program Virtual PC"

Oh nice. So you use a hardware implimentation to run PC code. Nice. Why not just build a PC and be done with it? You're still using PC hardware. On the flip side Mac software can be emulated on PC very easily.

I also find it amusing you talk about how great Mac is, yet you conceed you run Windows on your mac. Reminds me of the Linux fans talking about how great linux is, while they run Windows from within Linux.

"Can you do that trick?"

It's called dual booting friend. Multiple operating systems can easily be installed on a PC.

"As far as cross OS compatiblity goes, you're talking out of your ass here. Any program that runs on Mac OS 6 can run off of any Mac OS up to Mac OSX"

Wrong. You totally inverted my statement. I can run a program written right now with Windows XP in mind easily on Windows 98 unless it's utility software.

Whereas if I wanted to run a program written for Mac OS X on ANY earlier version of Mac OS I would be screwed. You can run newer PC software on an older version of Windows (thus no need to upgrade if you don't want to) - not true on a mac.

"Can you run old DOS programs from seventeen years ago on Windows XP? "

Sure can. A 3rd party program called VDM allows just about any old DOS program to run in XP just fine.

[MadHound]

64. You still don't know where of you speak,

And it sounds like you're spewing just to cover that fact up. But what the hey, eh?

You were bragging about how few OS's Windows had, and saying that since Windows95 came out, Mac has gone from 6 to OSX. I was simply correcting your misconception that OS 6 came out in '95. Same deal with the x.5s etc.

And you weren't talking about NT by itself, you were talking about the whole MS line of OS's. Now then, if you only wish to talk strictly about the comparison between the time when the NT first came out, well then, the Mac OS has been upgraded only once, from 9 to X. Wow

And yes, I do have to emulate for those few programs that are Windows only. Ooh ooh. At least I have that capability, can you emulate a Mac OS on a Windows box. I don't think so. And yes, there is some software out there that is Macs only. Guess you're missing out eh.

And the reason that there are fewer bugs and glitches on a Mac is because you aren't trying to cram a one size fits all OS onto different machines, whereas with a Mac, you have an OS tailored for one machine.

And let's see here, I run Microsoft Office 6.1 on my eMac at home with OSX. So yes, I guess there is backwards compatibility on Macs, fancy that.

And I find it funny that you criticize my use of a PC emulator, yet admit that you have to do the same thing when running DOS programs.

Look, this is all fun and games, and you can continue to run PCs if you want. I don't get the appeal, but hey, to each their own. I'm sticking to the tried and true, my trusty Macs. And I'll continue to laugh at PC users each and every time some Windows crisis comes up. If you ever get tired of working ON your machine as opposed to working WITH your machine, then go out and get a Mac. Until then, enjoy doing updates, patches, dealing with spyware, viri, being scared to open email, working around glitches and bugs, rebooting, blue screen of death, etc etc ad nauseum. Meanwhile, I'll just keep on going strong with my Mac. Cheers!

[Yuna]

66. Let's see

"can you emulate a Mac OS on a Windows box"

Sure you can. www.emulators.com lists a few, though BasiliskII independent of that site is great IMO. I can run just about anything.

"And let's see here, I run Microsoft Office 6.1 on my eMac at home with OSX. So yes, I guess there is backwards compatibility on Macs, fancy that. "

I would suggest you look up the definition of backwards compatibility...

"Meanwhile, I'll just keep on going strong with my Mac"

Go ahead and do that. If you ever choose to run anything other than business software (i.e. popular 3d games and the like) I'll see you on this end where we have the best of both worlds.

[Brian_Expat]

83. I have to agree with MadHound here

The MacOS (both pre and after OS X) receive many, MANY more upgrades you must BUY than Windows. OS 6, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, OS X (panther, cougar, many other code names they've used on that) etc.

Let's look at Microsoft on the other hand since 1995 on home user 9x front - Win 95, 98, 98SE, ME. That's 4 as opposed to the mac above.

First of all, Mac OS 6 is from the late 1980s, before Windows was even on the radar screen. Apple provided OS 6 upgrades free of charge to anyone who bought in a bunch of blank floppy disks.

Mac OS 7 was charged for when it came out in 1991, since it was a quantum leap, much like the change from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95.

7.5 was a free upgrade that you could download off Apple's web site in 1995.

8 was the equivalent of Windows 98 -- a major overhaul -- and was charged for, much like Windows 98 was.

8.5 was a free upgrade.

9 was charged for, much like Windows 98 SE.

X is an enterprise-level OS and comparing it to XP is sorta silly. Of course, each upgrade of X has been a MAJOR feature boost and remarkably, most of it runs on older hardware that a comparable XP upgrade wouldn't run on.

On the business (NT) front: NT 4, 2000, XP. That's THREE.

Wrong-o.

There's NT, NT SP1, NT SP2, NT SP3 (and on and on and on). There's also 2000, a few 2000 SP versions, XP Pro (now with two service packs) and Windows 2003 (with a pending service pack).

If anything, Microsoft releases FAR more updates of its OS software than Apple, they just don't change the name as often as Apple have.

[noiretextatique]

56. unfortunately, most accounting software is PC

as an accountant, a Mac doesn't work for me, but it's perfect for my poetry. i recently purchase a Mac laptop because I'm so frustrated with XP problems on my desktop. i'm going with Linux on the desktop.

[MadHound]

58. That's what emulators are for

Go get either an orange PC card, or Virtual PC. Then you can run a Windows eviroment and Windows programs on your Mac. I've got it on my home computer for a couple of work databases and it works like a charm.

[Yuna]

62. Unfortunately

With an emulator you have to deal with errors and slow down. Hope you aren't planning on doing any 3d work that demands performance either.

[MadHound]

65. Look bub,

You have demonstrated that you have no experience with a Mac, so tell me how you would even know how well an emulator works on a Mac? Or do you secretly work for MS and are just trying to scare up business by scaring people and talking out your ass?

I've worked with a PC emulator for years now, mainly because I'm in a profession where there are specialized programs written for Windows only. When I take my work home, I have to have either a Windows box or an emulator, and not being made of money, I chose an emulator. Funny thing is, the emulator I run on my home Mac runs faster and better than the Windows box I have at work. Go figure.

So don't go projecting your crappy MS performance onto something you have no clue about, it just makes you look petty and mean spirited.

[Yuna]

74. Really?

Run Doom 3 on your nice little emulator.

Let me know when you do that, or get get beyond anything related to word processing and the like.

[noiretextatique]

63. thanks! eom

[MisterP]

67. obligatory Lovecraft quote:

"Missionaries are dreadful nuisances and should be kept at home."

[Stephanie]

23. Ummm - what is it?

Is this something I am going to get with Automatic Updates? Or would I specifically have to go to MS site and download it?

[JohnyCanuck]

47. You'll get it (eventually) with automatic updates.

I understand that for users using the auto update feature Microsoft is trickling out the SP2 updates a bit at a time since the large size of the downloads involved would make it impractical to do in one fell swoop especially for those on dial up.

You can order from MS a SP2 CD for free with all the updates included so that it can all be installed all in one go.

Order SP2 CD

Even if you do get SP2 installed via automatic updates, it's good to have the CD on hand in case a problem crops up that causes you to have to reinstall the OS for any reason. The SP2 CD would include all the earlier fixes and patches including SP1 so that after you reinstalled the OS you could just run the SP2 update from the CD without having to spend ages (for dialup users especially) downloading updates from the MS web site to bring your system up to date.

[Stephanie]

50. Oh, okay. But if it ever came to reinstalling the OS

then that machine is going right back to the store for service.

So I can get my auto updates with no worries, right?

Thanks for the explanation.

:hi:

[Yuna]

52. It shouldn't cause you any problems

If it does you should be able to uninstall it.

Think about it this way - this update has been going out to computers all over the world (millions of them) over the past many days, and so far one of the only complaints I've heard about it "hosing" a system is this one. If there was any major issue such as that it would be all over the news.

[Yuna]

51. A windows service pack

is a collection of literally thousands of updates in a single "bundle". These have been released for the NT line of Windows for some time. (which includes 2000/XP) Currently 2 service packs are available for XP. Newer service packs include all of the updates of previous service packs.

You will get it through automatic updates.

[Xithras]

24. It'll make slow computers slower, but that's not MS fault.

XPSP2 loads up a couple of new TSR's when your computer boots (like the new firewall) that burn off some RAM and CPU cycles. If your computer was borderline or had performance problems before, these new applications will push it over the edge and slow your PC down dramatically. XP users with CPU's slower than 1Ghz will be hit the hardest.

As for crashes and hosing, out IT department has now installed SP2 on more than 1000 computers across our campuses, and has seen 40 to 50 hosed installations. Without fail, EVERY SINGLE ONE of them was caused by either 1) Undetected spyware or viruses 2) Disk corruption 3) Background applications and services that interfered with the install.

Before installing SP2, scan your ENTIRE computer for viruses, run AdAware to get rid of any spyware you might have installed, run Scandisk to fix any data integrity problems you might have, and kill every running task and background service on your PC that isn't absolutely required for the installation of the service pack. If you do all of these, the odds of you suffering a catastrophic crash during the SP install are essentially nil.

[jayfish]

25. Exactly Right. -NT-

Jay

[askew]

53. The service pack 2 has been working pretty well on my computer

considering that my Toshiba laptop is a piece of crap (horrible service, horrible product will never buy one again - but that's another story). Anyway, I run Adaware each week, but what is Scandisk?

[Yuna]

54. Scandisk

was used back in the Windows 9x days to correct minor file system issues. (i.e. a file has been marked deleted in the file allocation table, yet the 2 megs of space it took up is not free)

On Windows XP scandisk has been replaced with chkdsk. You can run it from a command prompt with the syntax CHKDSK <drive letter> <variable> for variable you should use /f in order to have it fix any errors it finds.

[askew]

69. Thanks.

I thought it was another freeware software I had to download.

[Xithras]

72. Sorry, Scandisk = old habit

I've been using Scandisk since the DOS days, and old terms die hard. Chkdsk is the correct modern tool.

[noiretextatique]

57. thanks for the advice

perhaps spyware is the problem i'm having with xp (pre SP2).

[MichaelHarris]

28. I'll go out on a limb here and ask

did the systems that "messed up" after install the service pack by any chance have anti-virus software running at the time?

[RichardRay]

31. Not for everybody, although it could happen

My department administers 300 computers. We've started our XP SP2 roll out. We're having no problems. It might have helped that we tested critical applications on a machine with SP2 installed, corrected a couple of problems with noncompliant drivers, figured out what settings were appropriate, etc. before we went crazy installing it on everything in sight.

It seems like this threads EXTREMELY small sampling has a couple of other sysadmins who've done OK with it in larger installations. I'd guess they did a little testing, too?

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[Yuna]

34. As far as "hose" systems

SP 2 has a myriad of security changes.

Unfortunately a good deal of these changes are quite simply preventing code execution. (which is a good thing, because some end users are too stupid to click NO when they are asked rather or not they want to install something www.iownyou.com wants to install)

Some users may interpret this as the system no longer being functional. "Why can't I run this anymore?" "Why doesn't this web site work anymore?" Most of the time it's not that you can’t - it's that you have to go about it differently, or change the way you do things.

There is also some 3rd party software that does not adapt well to a service pack being installed. This could very well cause system instability.

Most modern 3rd party software will be updated in the near future if any compatibility problems with SP2 exist.

Your best option is to slipstream SP 2 and do a clean install. This will eliminate 99% of possible problems. THEN you can go about installing your 3rd party software. Should a problem occur it will be simple to identify the cause. Nancy, if you slipstream SP 2 does your system still have issues?

[Brian_Expat]

84. Excuses, excuses, excuses

Some users may interpret this as the system no longer being functional. "Why can't I run this anymore?" "Why doesn't this web site work anymore?" Most of the time it's not that you can’t - it's that you have to go about it differently, or change the way you do things.

I've owned many, many, many, many computers in my life.

TRS-80s. Atari 800s. Atari STs and TTs. Commodore Amigas. Apple Macs.

Most have had major, major OS upgrades over their lifetimes and NEVER have I had a major OS upgrade completely nuke the system and stop it from operating. Until I started using Windows.

It is downright irresponsible for Microsoft to release mandatory "updates" that completely and totally hose the system. That doesn't require a "change" in the way I work, that requires a full re-install, and the idea that I should have to bear the brunt of Microsoft's shitty code and change the way I work because Microsoft cannot fix the Swiss cheese security of Windows is what's wrong with Microsoft's way of doing business.

It's a company ripe to take a big fall.

[UTUSN]

35. It Downloaded Itself, Taking 6-7 Hours

So far it doesn't seem to have done anything, but seems like things are a bit slower.

[Yuna]

36. Although it is not visible to an end users

Except in a few GUI modifications and a few functionality additions (i.e. the pop up blocker) SP 2 install literally *thousands* of updates on your system. (all Microsoft service packs for Windows generally do) The vast majority of these updates will never be noticed by an end user, but rest assured it has done quite a lot.

[AntiFascist]

45. MSNBC is working OK....

Except I'm a little worried about Chris Matthews.

[Zech Marquis]

48. so you're telling us

that the SP 2 is actually causing MORE problems than solving the previous watershed of issues withn XP?! In that case, :argh: your PC and get a Mac--it costs more, but you won't have the XP headaches to deal with.

[bleedingheart]

59. Our company issued a warning to clients not to install it until

we had it working with our stuff. Apparently there are a few big glitches..

[ibegurpard]

60. I haven't installed it because I read that it could interfere with a lot

of games that I have on my computer.

[Xithras]

73. What games?

n/t

[RichardRay]

68. XP, SP2, Mac, Windows, programming standards, etc., etc.

Windows programmers have never been subject to the same kind of discipline that Mac programmers have, so a lot of Windows applications do things via performance enhancing 'tricks' that aren't explicitly illegal, but aren't explicitly legal either. In contract, Apple has always made it very clear that programmers could either do it their way or suffer the consequences, including loss of access to developer resources, etc. That means that MS has a much more arduous testing problem before them, probably not surmountable at any cost, let alone one that they can pay.

So, when they have a major update like SP2 they just write it as if everybody were complying completely with the rules. They have done a lot of good things in SP2, especially around malware protection at the desktop level. In my shop we've had enough problems with malware that we moved towards SP2 very quickly, but with appropriate testing for our specific needs to make certain nothing went up in flames.

As the network and Internet environment gets more hostile operating systems are going to become more complex and harder to work with. If I were a home user without the experience and resources I have I don't know what I'd do.

Good luck to the rest of you :-).

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY
(IT Director with two sysadmins working with me :-)

[Massacure]

75. I'm not having a terrible problem with XP SP II, though it is a RAM hog.

I only have 256 Megs of RAM. Now that I installed it, my harddrive has to be used to swap data with the RAM, making some things slower. I'm lucky I have 128 megabyte graphics card for my games. My 800 megahertz processor won't hold out forever though. :(

[Zomby Woof]

77. no problems here

Although I will say I disabled their new firewall in favor of my own, and I have great anti-virus software and other security features I would consider superior to theirs. But my system is running the best it has in months.

I have to scoff at all the Fisher-Price bots that scurry out of the woodwork to push their cheesy plastic toys... lol.

[PATRICK]

78. My son say...

it takes up an incredible amount of RAM to restore vanity features(for one thing) sacrificed to optimize XP. People with fewer problems probably have very powerful computers and capacity to weather this bloating afterthought by Gates.

He rants on this better than I do.

[walldude]

81. Probably true

I'm a gamer and I have a pretty beefy system for playing games. When SP2 came out I did a fresh install of XP then added SP to make sure everything went smoothly. I have had no problems except for the annoying security center which I quickly disabled. I have helped people with SP2 problems and most of them have had bloated systems, loaded with all kinds of useless crap. Look at your task bar icons. Do you have 12 or more icons on your task bar? Then your system is bloated. You don't need all this stuff running in the backround constantly, and if you do then I suggest having at least a gig of ram. Find a family member or friend who is a techno weenie(like me) and have them take a look at your system, there is all kids of hidden stuff running that you probably don't need. Your best bet is to have as little running as possible on start up, then you can open things as you need them. Keep your machine lean and mean...

[PATRICK]

82. Yup, my son stripped our

icons bare and other things like that. I suspected it mainly was for the purpose of making room for his stuff, but it does work fast.

[demwing]

79. A Big Issue w/ Service Pack 2 Installation

Is not removing your antivirus software first. Least thats what I remember from my tech support days...

Luckily with XP you can use system restore to back out of your problem, uninstall the AV, set a new restore point, and reinstall the service pack.