<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/19774/Windows_XP_SP3_s_Aches_Pains_and_User_Complaints</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:56:04 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>None yet</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315303</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315303</guid>
			<description>None of the users whose systems I installed SP3 have complained, or noticed any difference.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 23:28:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Angel Blue01)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: None yet</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315364</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315364</guid>
			<description>Well, as one of the users that did experience issues, I can certainly tell you that SP3 isn't a total bed of roses.  I installed the final RC (in fact, a few days before the release was marked as Gold). System boot up took at LEAST ten minutes, sometimes longer.  Once in the system, it ran like a dog.  Like I had installed XP onto a Pentium 133 with 64mb of RAM on a 5gb HDD.  That bad.  I put up with it for a few nights and said screw that and rolled back the install.  I had expected the rollback to **** up, but thankfully it didn't.  After that experience, I certainly won't touch SP3.  SP2 for this lad.  SP3 offers SFA advantages anyway.<br />
<br />
Dave</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 12:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (melkor)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: None yet</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315367</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315367</guid>
			<description>Well, I had a couple of problems with SP3 on my machine(s) but since I know what I'm doing, I was able to iron them out. Sorry you couldn't.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 12:44:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (PJBonoVox)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: None yet</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315378</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315378</guid>
			<description>we've had several issues with it. The dreaded endless reboot, among other things. <br />
<br />
Didn't SP2 have the same issue when it first came out?</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 13:25:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (helf)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>When SP3 (or Vista) install doesn't go well... </title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315468</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315468</guid>
			<description>... switch to Linux or *BSD... <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 23:05:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (obsidian)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: When SP3 (or Vista) install doesn't go well... </title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315550</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315550</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">... switch to Linux or *BSD... <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" />  </div><br />
<br />
Ha!  My upgrade to Ubuntu 8.04 was worse than my WinXP SP3 update.<br />
<br />
Thankfully, with a little bit of digging, everything is working relatively well.  I wish I could say the same for my Leopard installation.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I feel bad for those who suffered with the SP3 problems.  Some of it was apparently avoidable.</description>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2008 04:21:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (bousozoku)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[4]: None yet</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315553</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315553</guid>
			<description>SP2 pre release had lots of issues, I think the final release was pretty stable from memory.  <br />
<br />
I wasn't going to spend hours fart a$$ing around to try and resolve something that just shouldn't have happened.  Linux updates all the time, and it rarely screws up systems like this!!!  <br />
<br />
Dave</description>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2008 06:05:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (melkor)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[5]: None yet</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315593</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315593</guid>
			<description>yeah, I've only had an update hose things in a linux distro once. But it was spectacular <img src="/images/emo/tongue.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 03:36:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (helf)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
