Starting next Tuesday, April 12, computers running Microsoft Windows XP without Service Packet 2 installed will not be able to block the upgrade.
Mandatory Service Pack 2 Downloads by April 12
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
even for microsoft… this patch breaks a lot of applications, and i know my call log will be enormous on tuesday and wednesday from users with broken applications. *sigh* microsoft 999,999,999 me 0
SP2 helps XP’s security in a major way. It breaks A FEW apps, yes, but weighing in the advantages and disantvantages of the whole thing, it’s a GOOD step to upgrade.
Besides, THAT’S why admins had 8 months before this upgrade got rolled in: so they can fix any app problems they had. If they haven’t done so all this time, they should be fired, it’s not MS’ problem. MS gave them 8 months time to fix their broken apps. Now, it’s time for SP2.
Well, in corporations where the “FEW” is installed in more then 2000 computers…
“FEW” can have a “HUGE” impact.
(P.S.- Update may not be possible to install, either because the company is non-existent or because have even more problems).
I think that you are forgetting a MAJOR point here. _I_ should own my computer, not MS. If I want to run it with a particular version of XP that I bought (with SP1, NOT SP2), then I should be able to do so. I own the hardware, I own the software (no I am not claiming to own all of the rights to it), why should I have to change the software that is running on my computer? I bought a particular piece of software (XP with SP1) and now MS is saying that I cannot use it anymore, they are making me change it. Why should they have a say as to what _I_ run on my PERSONAL computer? How is this NOT a violation of my personal freedoms?
Viva GNU!
Why on earth does MS want to make this mandatory? Call me cynical, but MS must have some other alterior motive behind this. When I buy a product, I like to do with it that which I choose. I’m glad I recently switched to GNU/Linux.
Jon,
While I agree that we system administrators have had considerable time to look at the issue, I think you have your facts a little skewed.
One, ‘FEW’ does not describe the number of apps that have known problems with SP2. Not only that, there are many more (I’ve experienced problems in my environment) that are not listed, but still have issues.
Second, it isn’t like we have direct access to source code in order to fix the problem. True, software makers should be responisble for fixing their applications, but they are not always speedy in doing this. And, in an enterprise environment, you can’t just switch applications on a whim. Even with 8 months of notice, switching from a critical app would be difficult and very costly.
I agree that Microsoft-users need this patch, and my environment is ready for it (for the most part), however, I don’t like any software vendor forcing patches down my throat. No matter who that vendor is.
Sheesh, but of course you can control what happens with your computer, or the computers in your company, you’ll just have to pay for a SUS server from MS to be allowed to do what you want.
Now ain’t that great.
>> Why should they have a say as to what _I_ run on my PERSONAL computer
Because you are probably the same person who complains when a virus takes down your system or Malware runs wild on your SP1. They who does the media blame for the stupidity of the users in most cases, thats right Microsoft. This is not only a good move from Microsoft, but a good move in general, not because this is your personal property and you have the right to spread virus’s, but because the company is taking action to make Windows more secure and stop the spread of virus’s.
Interesting, but from a security point of view: as long as the pirated versions of M$ cant be updated, there will still be too many unsecure windowses around. That so wont make any difference
“Because you are probably the same person who complains when a virus takes down your system or Malware runs wild on your SP1. ”
Is he? Do you know him? And even if he were, then what?
“They who does the media blame for the stupidity of the users in most cases, thats right Microsoft.”
So because the media allegedly blames MS, they have a right to determine how I run my computer?
Well that’s the difference between “I tell my system what to do” and “My system tells me what to do”. I never understood why anybody would chose the latter.
Service Pack 2 looks like a nice update from what I have read and I even wish more software producer would get rid of old things even if it breaks compability. But still what updates I install on *my* computer is up to myself only. If I want to let somebody else decide that’s absolutely fine, but being forced to do so doesn’t look right.
Please tell me what apps you are using and they are bring broken by SP2? I need names not just blanket statements, prove your points!
I am sick of this argument “oh it breaks applications”, “I should be able to do what I want with my computer” – well if your computer is virus free, malware free, works perfectly then OK, if you dont take care of your machine like you should then pushing it down to users is the only thing to do to keep you protected from your own stupidity. (if you dont want the upgrade just go offline lol).
My personal platform of choice is the mac, however I administer, and use, windows machines at work. They are all SP2 patched. No programs misbehave and all works well.
One thing the trolls don’t tell you is that you don’t have to upgrade. The only time SP2 is “forced” on you is if you want to access any of the update features from Windows Update after April 12th.
The argument that you bought the software is still perfectly valid – stay with RTM, SP1, or whatever you currently have/bought the rights for and don’t update. However, Microsoft provides the windows update site, and the software updates. If you want to update the software, you’re not the one thats in charge as your EULA only extends to your software in its state at the time of purchase.
Basically, you have the choice not to accept any of the updates from Microsoft that you wish. However at the same time, Microsoft is in no way obligated to provide you update options a la carte.
You get it installed even if you’ve disabled automatic updates and never run Windows Update? I don’t think so. The whole idea is that all new patches require SP2, don’t want those, then never update.
I actually know someone who up until recently ran even without SP1, virusscanner and firewall, why? His computer wasn’t connected all external files came on floppy from one computer with up-to-date virus scanner and the works. And the only way data left the coputer was on paper. No need to update as all programs worked flawlessly for him.
Only when he bought a modem, did he update windows and install a virusscanner. And even with those he now has more problems than he ever hadbefore because of spyware. So if a computer is doing something really critical, don’t connect it to the net 🙂
What’s the problem here? You want to keep updating the system except for the patches that update the system. Stay where you are if you feel more comfortable with it as it is now. Nobody is putting a gun on you or something…
Umm, MS has a knowlede base entry on it:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=842242
and that doesn’t even mention the number of custom apps that this breaks. some very critical healthcare apps wont even launch under sp2, let alone run there digital radiology software…
_I_ should own my computer, not MS. If I want to run it with a particular version of XP that I bought (with SP1, NOT SP2), then I should be able to do so.
You don’t own MS windows XP, you licensed it. Asking MS to let you use XP SP1 is like asking them to let you use XP without IE, MediaPlayer, Solitarie or and the calculator.
They decide what features are installed and what updates you get. You just pay them for the license to use the software, “as is”.
You can still block the update, just block the MS site in the firewall.
Hi everyone! I hate to say RTFA, but please RTFA.
quote:
…”critical update” via Windows Update (WU) and the Automatic Updates (AU) delivery mechanism in Windows…
If you have Automatic updates disabled, it will not ocurr, and you can apply it in a sane manner. This will be a problem over dialup, but if you find a system with a phat pipe, you can always check http://downloads.microsoft.com and grab it there. I am more than certain they have info on the site about SP2 and what it is/does/can do/might disrupt.
As Phil mentioned, though we’ve had problems with various Photogrammetric and stereo visualization software with Service Pack 2. The end result for us is a clean load with SP2, then install the necessary software. Installing SP2 while the software is installed results in consistent BSoD on the system.
Yes, these programs are not that common, however, it’s an example of the issue. Thankfully, the number of systems with potential issues is minor for us, I can see this being even more of an issue for other environments.
Microsoft has been known to shove unrequired software and updates down their customers support. It’s nice to finally have a company that cares so much for their install base, thanks to Microsoft for making monopolies nothing more than a book term. Kudos, Steve Ballmer we all appreciate what you do for us, I could not handle so much love so switched to mac, but guess some people can’t just live without it.
Given the huge number of really nasty viruses, worms, phishes, trojans, etc etc I think SP2 is much akin to mandatory quarantine for nasty illlnesses that threaten the public safety. there is a precedence for this, and it’s probably the better option in the long run.
Although, it would be nice if this sort of thing were not necessary.
I don’t think Linux would solve this problem at all. The average XP user would really not be too thrilled at having to read the list of apps that SP2 breaks, much less learn a new OS and all it’s apps.
Just my own non-ideological thoughts.
I think that you are forgetting a MAJOR point here. _I_ should own my computer, not MS. If I want to run it with a particular version of XP that I bought (with SP1, NOT SP2), then I should be able to do so. I own the hardware, I own the software (no I am not claiming to own all of the rights to it), why should I have to change the software that is running on my computer? I bought a particular piece of software (XP with SP1) and now MS is saying that I cannot use it anymore, they are making me change it. Why should they have a say as to what _I_ run on my PERSONAL computer? How is this NOT a violation of my personal freedoms?
Haha. Violation of your _personal freedom_ ? Don’t make me laugh. They don’t say what you have to run on your computer. But if you want further patches then you _will have to_ install SP2. Simple as that. You can still run your SP1 machine, but don’t expect to install any newer patches. Just disable automatic updating and you’re set.
even for microsoft… this patch breaks a lot of applications, and i know my call log will be enormous on tuesday and wednesday from users with broken applications. *sigh* microsoft 999,999,999 me 0
This was a choice between security vs compatbillity. They’ve chosen security. And I personally think they made the right choice. Longhorn will further brake the compatbillity in favor of security.
Why on earth does MS want to make this mandatory? Call me cynical, but MS must have some other alterior motive behind this. When I buy a product, I like to do with it that which I choose. I’m glad I recently switched to GNU/Linux.
I am happy for you’re switch. Maybe now we will see less of your Microsoft comments. Why make it mandatory? Because when you have a serious flaw in your OS you have to fix it. Otherwise people whine about the software beeing insecure but they don’t install the patch. See the irony here.
Interesting, but from a security point of view: as long as the pirated versions of M$ cant be updated, there will still be too many unsecure windowses around. That so wont make any difference
Well, is a company resposible for users who are running an illegal version of their product? They are not their customers so you have no responsibillity over them. You can twist the question and say “why don’t I get support from Red Hat when I am running the free RHL version?”.
some very critical healthcare apps wont even launch under sp2, let alone run there digital radiology software…
A critical healthcare app has to be connected to the internet? Let alone digital radiology software? Enlighten me.
As Phil mentioned, though we’ve had problems with various Photogrammetric and stereo visualization software with Service Pack 2. The end result for us is a clean load with SP2, then install the necessary software. Installing SP2 while the software is installed results in consistent BSoD on the system.
I think there’s even a KB article on this. You have to install SP2 first or things might break.
For starters this argument of stating that ‘SP2’ breaks
applications, which ones and ‘if’ it actually does
then the only way it can be resolved is by installing
it and sending the report to MS when it asks you to
send the report.
I find it amazing that any company would ‘break’
applications in a SP supplied by the vendor.
Another falacy of the whole deal, if you do not
want it on your machine do NOT download it.
Your problem is solved, do not use it,
download it or even use the Vendor’s operating
system. Then you have no reason to complain about
something you know nothing about.
Complaining or griping about a situation does nothing,
taking action or finding a solution is the answer. I
would imagine that the biggest complainers have
installed SP2 and have had no problems, just it is
their nature to complain and gripe about something
to make them happy. No different than people talking
about someone behind their back, negative stuff
spews out like a sinner saying he has not sinned.
Sandra
Whether or not it’s in a KB or not, it is still a difficult task, especially if there are a large number of systems to deal with. And it is not uncommon for a corporate security person to mandate SP2, and force System Administrators to jump through the hoops to reload any systems with issues. 8 Months is a lot of time to get this resolved, but depending on how many systems you have affected, that may not be enough when you consider all the requirements in reloading a system (moving users data, etc)
I agree that MS is responsible for fixing their problems, hence SP2. However, in their quest to rid Windows of security holes, they can’t rid the stupidity of users. The biggest security threat are the users who fail to take adequate measures (not updating, not creating a non-administrator account, clicking on bogus emails, etc.). I do not that much about Longhorn, but if they start from scratch when they code the OS (à la OSX) then this will be a giant step towards security.
If I want apache2, I have to pull a bunch of libraries (that break PAM from debian-stable for one thing)… It’s forcing software down my throat!!!!!!!
blablablablabla blablabla blablabla whine whine whine blablabla blablabla
in 3000 client plus environments it simply is not an option to reinstall everyone in 8 months. and further more should not be neccessary. This patch is rediculous period.
SP2 kills my wireless connection, so I guess I won’t be doing any updates. Oh well, XP rarely gets used these days anyway (Thank you Ubuntu!)
lol.. what can i say..
ever heard about dependencies?
you need the .NET framework in order to run a .NET application.. thats obvious.. same for java and etc, and nobody complains about that.
you dont need SP2 to run windows xp.
PS: no i dont have winxp + sp2..
they never said they are forcing you to download SP2 all they did was move SP2 to the critical update section rather then having it an optional download. In windows update you can still skip it using custom install. Geez people simmer down.
I sure wish people checked their spelling before posting. I vote “ridiculous” as the most misspelled word on-line.
You all have to understand that any apps which break after you install SP2 do so because MS closed off different hooks/paths, whatever you want to call them, between how the OS interacts with aps running on it. Before SP2 when you made a program you didn’t have to fallow MS’s ways to the letter, and had different ways of getting your app to work with the OS.
Many of these ways are very bad for security and stability, so in comes SP2 which closes up those paths, and forces you as the programer to re-code your app to work the right and more secure way. Apps that don’t use these shortcuts or whatever you want to call them, work just as good after SP2.
So when some app doesn’t work after SP2 is installed, it’s not MS’s direct fault, if the app was made to run correctly then it wouldn’t have any problems. This is why most of the apps which do break are special home made apps that companies use etc, with a few others that are more big named I guess.
I personally updated XP to SP2 on 4 systems at home without any problems, and all my audio/video editing/encoding and authoring software works perfectlly.
It’s a fact that MS said SP2 will break things way before it went final, you had beta’s and RC’s and the same people who made apps which now don’t work with SP2 did have more then enough time to test out these apps and see/fix any problems. I wonder how many things will break once longhorn users don’t have full admin access anymore when they login to a lower privliged account that you creat now with a longhorn install.
I have SP2 but really is there a list of stuff that SP2 adds for the users benefit besides the darn firewall? What performance or security enhancements does it provide besides a pop up blocker for IE? I am using SP2 and while it has made my computer a lot safer in terms of blocking spyware and malware etc from the internet, I would still like to know about a list of improvements..
“_I_ should own my computer, not MS. If I want to run it with a particular version of XP that I bought (with SP1, NOT SP2), then I should be able to do so. I own the hardware, I own the software (no I am not claiming to own all of the rights to it), why should I have to change the software that is running on my computer?”
What others have hinted at is that what you want is limited by the potential of your actions to harm others. I run Linux, but the adoption of XP SP2 will impact me in a positive way. I will see the impact in the form of less spam, and less generalized Internet slowdowns caused by Code Red and their ilk.
I agree with many others; it is time to install SP2 and adjust. Windows was SO bad that continued use of the earlier XP, given the alternatives present, cannot be justified.
“Please tell me what apps you are using and they are bring broken by SP2? I need names not just blanket statements, prove your points!”
okee dokee. It breaks Office 97, their own product. Upgrade? Why, when:
1. It works fine. No newer features are required.
2. Upgrading 1000 computers just because they released an inadequately programmed SP isn’t a good reason to spend that kind of money.
One major reason for SP2 to not be mandatory: Certain Via chipsets do not work AT ALL with it. If SP2 is installed on these machines, you can no longer boot even in safe mode. I work as a Service Technician and have seen this on a few machines. This is a SERIOUS PROBLEM that has not been addressed by Via or Microsoft.
Turn off everything windowsupdate and get MBSA from here…
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/tools/mbsahome.mspx
/gentooist irl
// How is this NOT a violation of my personal freedoms?//
Lighten up, spaz. If you don’t like Windows, then sell your copy and use Linux.
For 99% of the computer users out there, SP2 is a non-issue. Take off your tin-foil hat. Been to Roswell lately?
One major reason for SP2 to not be mandatory: Certain Via chipsets do not work AT ALL with it. If SP2 is installed on these machines, you can no longer boot even in safe mode. I work as a Service Technician and have seen this on a few machines. This is a SERIOUS PROBLEM that has not been addressed by Via or Microsoft.
Try updateing your BIOS 9 times out of 10 thats the problem. Not to mention this would be a VIA hardware of Software/driver problem not Microsofts.
Try updateing your BIOS 9 times out of 10 thats the problem. Not to mention this would be a VIA hardware of Software/driver problem not Microsofts.
Bios update was tried in this case to no avail. You are correct though, Via is mostly at fault here. It is nonetheless an issue that needs to be worked out though. SP2 should not LET itself install on a system that will have issues like this.
A program that will install itself without user agreement …. I call it a virus ….
block microsoft update server in your firewall or make a host file where the update server address is pointed to 127.0.0.1
so far, I have yet to see a successful upgrade. If things dont start breaking immediately, they do eventually. Reformatting the system and installing it before any other apps seems to work about 95% of the time, the only completely successful way i have found to get sp2 on an xp computer is to slipstream it into the install cd.
Regardless, I find rebooting after an update unacceptable, wiping a hd for an update is beyond all realm of reason. I would also like to note that this is just my experience in dealing with the pcs of friends and family. I’m not an admin, the people who have 2k boxes to administer are the ones who both have a right to complain, and need to be listened to.
Luckily, im off my WoW kick so I dont need to deal with this kind of bs anymore.
Regardless, I find rebooting after an update unacceptable, wiping a hd for an update is beyond all realm of reason.
Rebooting after a huge update is not something I find unreasonable. SP2 most likely has many many changes to the kernel, and to actually have those changes affect the system a reboot is necessary. IE is the same thing, because it’s tied to the kernel. Anything that is 100% userland shouldn’t require a reboot either. Or, maybe Windows should include loadable module support
, that way you wouldn’t have to reboot for something silly, like installing CD burning software.
SP2 should not LET itself install on a system that will have issues like this.
That would be quite a feat considering how many devices Windows supports i am sure there are other devices that may cause this problem.
so far, I have yet to see a successful upgrade. If things dont start breaking immediately, they do eventually. Reformatting the system and installing it before any other apps seems to work about 95% of the time, the only completely successful way i have found to get sp2 on an xp computer is to slipstream it into the install cd.
Its such a simple install i can’t fathom what your experincing. I have yet to see a SP2 cauae a single problem on any machines i have personaly updated(at least six).
Luckily, im off my WoW kick so I dont need to deal with this kind of bs anymore.
There is always Everquest 2 much better game them WoW.
as to which widely used apps break with sp2. I have yet to have any apps stop working or behave weirdly.
Hmm. Good thing I left Windows world and moved to Mac World.
Now I know why people say Windows is “so fun.”
Although a lot of you have a lot of good points (I’m a ex-WindowsXP person), one thing that I see is a large corporation overstepping its bounds.
Microsoft shouldn’t require its customers to upgrade. I have a Dell-box w/ SP1 and it works flawlessly (obviously running virus/spyware scanner and Tune-UP Utilities every Friday).
Why should I upgrade if this move is for security? I’m fine.
I should be in control of my computer, not some business.
Then again, this is Microsft we’re talking about. They could care less about their customers.
~PowerMac
Quote : Patrick — I agree that MS is responsible for fixing their problems, hence SP2. However, in their quest to rid Windows of security holes, they can’t rid the stupidity of users. The biggest security threat are the users who fail to take adequate measures (not updating, not creating a non-administrator account, clicking on bogus emails, etc.). I do not that much about Longhorn, but if they start from scratch when they code the OS (à la OSX) then this will be a giant step towards security.
Although OSNews is clearly a stamping ground for flamers, trolls and zealots, I thought I’d break the cycle by agreeing with anothers view– Never a truer word has been said than the above.
The power users and sysadmins who have issues should direct their rage at the clueless users who are too ill-education to secure their machine. To be honest, ISPs blocking virus riddled machines and botnet vendors would be a step in the right direction.
Hopefully this update will force SP2 down the throat of these users, and the power users, as always, will have a choice.
If you can’t stop SP2 being installed on your machines then you’re a hell-of-a-shit-sysadmin.
As for the people complaining about not being able to install post SP2 updates without installing SP2, either stop whining about security holes in Windows, or patch up. The choice is there.
HA HA
-Nelson
Clearly my above posts had mistakes. Easily done
ill-education = ill-educated
botnet vendors = botnet members
Well just turn off auto update. Its not like they force you to run it.
boeing.com ? Shouldn’t you be working ?
Apps that were broken on my computer were
Windows Media Player (wouldn’t start at all)
Outlook Express (couldn’t do a “Select-All”)
Nero (complained but still ran)
Funny thing is 3rd party equivalents Media Player Classic and Thunderbird ran just fine.
I ended up uninstalling SP2 and got WMP and OE running fine again. As a welcomed aftereffect of the install/uninstall a mIRC periodic disconnect problem was fixed.
Is Microsoft is forcing this via Automatic Updates? If so turning off that service and not doing any Windows Updates will keep your computer free from SP2
I am sick of this argument “oh it breaks applications”, “I should be able to do what I want with my computer” – well if your computer is virus free, malware free, works perfectly then OK, if you dont take care of your machine like you should then pushing it down to users is the only thing to do to keep you protected from your own stupidity. (if you dont want the upgrade just go offline lol).
Oh it breaks plenty of poorly written applications that do things like hack system files and attach themselves to the TCP/IP stack of the OS.
Of course software of this nature is questionable at best so …
Oh it breaks plenty of poorly written applications that do things like hack system files and attach themselves to the TCP/IP stack of the OS.
Of course software of this nature is questionable at best so …
Agreed. Not only that, but in my experience sysadmins of large networks complain because (and again, this is just my experience) 8/10 bespoke applications I see use shocking coding practices, stupid methods of accessing the API and generally just ignore any respected and safe methods of doing, well, anything!
If large corporations consulted their technical guys more (or hired competent technical staff) in relation to these bespoke applications, they might be a bit more discerning about what they buy and roll-out.
Unfortunately IT managers and the non-techies are only interested in whether the product will do it’s job _now_ and that’s not always the entire issue.
If Microsoft break their _own_ software with patches, then I can understand a little anger on the subject.
>so far, I have yet to see a successful upgrade.
Must be on Windows computers that you help people with.
I have found in the article dated October 2004 that over 106,000,000 people dowloaded SP2 from Microsoft already. Don’t you think that everyone would notice over 100 million unsuccessful upgrades by now?
Heck, some patch screws few thousand (OK, few hundred thousand:) Windows 98 computers- we hear about it clear and loud.
>”If things dont start breaking immediately, they do eventually.”
Yes, your girlfriend will dump you, your car will break on highway, and all your investments in hot stocks will become a dust.
This is what happens eventually with all people who install SP2. They should Fear SP2, be Uncertain about it, Doubt it as an evil Microsoft plot… blah-blah-blah
>“Reformatting the system and installing it before any other apps seems to work about 95% of the time,”
I would recommend you leave SP2 install to people who know what are they doing.
>“the only completely successful way i have found to get sp2 on an xp computer is to slipstream it into the install cd.”
I have found two: on properly managed computer (like I have and people I help with Windows pcs have) put CD with SP2 (free from Microsoft) into CD-reader, close it, let autoplay start, OK defaults.
On improperly managed computer that some people brought me after their family friend screwd it royally: install antivirus with free one year subscribtion you can get from Microsoft, kill all viruses, run anti-spyware (LavaSoft and one from Microsoft), kill all spyware, reboot, repeat just in case, then put CD with SP2 (free from Microsoft) into CD-reader, close it, let autoplay start, OK defaults.
I did install of SP2 both ways, successfully.
May be, if a computer is totally 0wned by hackers and completely trashed by spyware, adware, crappy software, viruses, worms, was totally neglected by clueless user and gravely misconfigured by his/her clueless “he’s computer geek” type of friend- then it may be necessary to reformat the system.
>”Regardless, I find rebooting after an update unacceptable”
SP2 is, like, in terms you can understand, a new Linux kernel. Do you understand now why you have to reboot after an update like that?
>“wiping a hd for an update is beyond all realm of reason.”
Agree compeltely.
I would not consider hiring a person for Windows support job, who would say during the interview the stuff you said. That person is either incompetent or blind in his zealotry. Both cases make that person not an acceptable candidate for any Windows related tech support job.
>“I would also like to note that this is just my experience in dealing with the pcs of friends and family.”
A-ha!
>“I’m not an admin,”
You are not even a power Windows user. Tell your friends and relatives to find a competent person to deal with their PCs, and stop embarassing yourself with your statements about your troubles with MS Windows here.
No, really.
I would agree that SP2 doesnt break as many off the shelf apps, but how many shops have custom devoloped apps. The company I work for has 4 that were developed in house because there really wasnt anything out there that exactelly fit our needs. SP2 breaks 2 of the 4. we have identified what the issues are but upgrades are not cheap, easy or well received at all times.
I will be turning off Automatic updates accross the whole org. With over 4500 users thats alot of problems if SP2 was released.
All you do is kill the automatic updates service and you’re away! M$ can’t force a d/l via a service that’s not enabled!
You can secure your PC without having to d/l any SP’s – just close unnecessarily open ports, kill netmeeting-type services/apps and you’re as secure as the (P)OS is going to get…
Will MS force illegal copies to update to SP2? So far they have prevented them to do so.
Sweet.
More job security.
this sounds like a dream come true, i’m a tech and get paid to fix these things and SP2 brings customers in every day with problems so to me i’ll have heaps more work and heaps more $$$, now to start thinking what to spend my extra $$ on, maybe a new car ? a boat ? or a bigger linux box for me [sVen]
Welcome to the Real Word™, switcher. Some security updates will not appear on the Mac if you do not have some other previous security updates already installed. That, besides the fact that Apple breaks compatibility with about a zillion apps every year and a half.
Speaking of 10.4…
PS: and before you jump to my throat, I am a Mac OS X user exclusively, and quite happy with that.
after that … will be Judgement Day
Terminator II
ge ge ge
I’m from Russia … and we use GNU/Linux software
All they really did was move SP2 under critical updates. If you want other updates, you gotta use SP2, because those updates are usually meant to work with SP2.
Not only that, Automatic Updates downloads the updates and notifies you, and suggests you install. You do NOT have to install however. You can ignore, or just uncheck SP2.
This is NOT “forcing an upgrade”, it’s just giving it a higher priority and trying to push it more to users.
If it does break apps, that’s a bad thing of course.
Here’s an idea: uninstall the apps first, then upgrade to SP2 and reinstall your apps, so that they are nicely and properly installed on the system. Much less chance of breakage.
You can’t really blame Microsoft for wanting to patch their system. You can blame them for making a bad system in the first place when they have money enough to build something that could guard the bank, but that’s another discussion.
They’ve admitted that there are problems with their software, they’re making a considerable effort to resolve them. Maybe you want to consider following their advice since they’re obviously the expert on their system. If not them, who else?
When Apple sends me the software update to fix bugs in the system, I’m installing them. That’s not to say that I disregard the fact that one day somebody may make a terrible mistake and screw up my entire machine [I definitely hope not], but you expect them to run it on test machines for a while before releasing it into the public domain.
When Microsoft releases a patch for their system, and I make no secret of it that I’m not a fan of the whole Windows universe, you’re still better off than not installing the patch.
Uninstall critical stuff [whatever it is that you deem critical] before installing the patch, then install the patch and update the drivers, and put your critical app[s] back on. That should prevent a whole lot of problems.
[If somebody mentioned that before, I’m sorry for spamming].
…oops too late.
Before this gets out of hand, let it be known that SP2 is only downloaded it is not installed.
In order to install the service pack, the user has to be an admin and aceept the EULA as well as click through several disclaimers before manually installing the service pack.
THERE IS NO AUTOMATIC INSTALL OF SP2
“SP2 helps XP’s security in a major way. It breaks A FEW apps, yes, but weighing in the advantages and disantvantages of the whole thing, it’s a GOOD step to upgrade.
Besides, THAT’S why admins had 8 months before this upgrade got rolled in: so they can fix any app problems they had. If they haven’t done so all this time, they should be fired, it’s not MS’ problem. MS gave them 8 months time to fix their broken apps. Now, it’s time for SP2.”
As a sysadmin, I don’t any order from MS but from my BOSS. MS have not to force me to do anything, and surely not being as gentle as leaving me ‘8 months to switch or…’ ! WE are consumers of MS, THEY are on the lower position ! Spending time on ‘complying with new MS rules’ cost alot to us, where we have paid expensively for a service currently broken by MS ! And even if its a licence agreement of not, that’s not the problem… Then we paid for a licence contract, neither side should be allowed to change the licence afterward. We paid for a working product, software updates should at least leave installed softwares running without disruption !
OK, perhaps some software were badly written. But these were running on SP1, why no more on SP2 ? Where is the document from MS that list all changes on APIs and so to help coders spot where is the problem and speedy fix their software ? Coders are now running blinded to find where are the troubles ! For this, they should install XP SP2 as new OS on their dev machines, where they used W2000 or XP no SP before… Thus they should pay for extra XP SP2 licences from MS JUST to be able to find where are the troubls !
Fuck off you all narrow minded people ! And what about everyday user that almost know anything about computer ? Can they install, if only understand the concept of admin account ?
Kochise
“I don’t any order from MS” = “I don’t GET any order from MS”
Sorry, was a bit fed up and angry about this, as suddently our dev department gets fired with SP2 issue where we should worry about producing OUR software, NOT maintening MS software. No software is idealy written, and as prooved on MS non SP2 compatible software list, even MS softwares are affected. Are they following their own rules at least ? Obviously not, so don’t start asking for the others…
Kochise
I think the main issue here is that Auto Update is set to download and install updates by default, as far as I know, and the average user is probably not willing to delve into the control panel settings and find out how to change it. Therefore, like it or not, they will be stuck with having service pack 2 forced on them.
Another thing, I think auto update should by default only check for updates, and notify the user of the updates. The user should also be told how long the updates will take to install on various connection speeds. many of us out there still have dial-up, myself included.
What will happen to my warez version of XP ?
Okay, half of you really need to STFU. The other half of you need to educate the first half.
YOU ARE NOT FORCED TO INSTALL SERVICE PACK 2, NOR DO YOU REQUIRE A “SP2 LICENSE”. IT IS 100% YOUR CHOICE.
Shit, why are people so dumb? Don’t install SP2. No one is making you. However, don’t whine the next time some script kiddie 0wnz your machine, or you can’t download any security updates from MS. You people are such whiners. “Waaa, waaa, I don’t want SP2!”
Two weeks later: “Waaa waaa, XP is a piece of shit, I got hacked! WAAAAAA!”
“>so far, I have yet to see a successful upgrade.
Must be on Windows computers that you help people with.
I have found in the article dated October 2004 that over 106,000,000 people dowloaded SP2 from Microsoft already. Don’t you think that everyone would notice over 100 million unsuccessful upgrades by now?
Heck, some patch screws few thousand (OK, few hundred thousand:) Windows 98 computers- we hear about it clear and loud.”
I have yet to see a successful upgrade. I have no way of watching the hundreds of millions of people who have downloaded and installed it. I have seen it done on about 15 boxes with a 100% failure rate. This is what I based that statement on. And if you havnt heard of sp2 breaking machines, you must live under a rock.
“>”If things dont start breaking immediately, they do eventually.”
Yes, your girlfriend will dump you, your car will break on highway, and all your investments in hot stocks will become a dust.
This is what happens eventually with all people who install SP2. They should Fear SP2, be Uncertain about it, Doubt it as an evil Microsoft plot… blah-blah-blah”
Actually, I highly recommend SP2, and would strongly advise against anyone using the net without it. Again, based on my personal experience, around here you have about 2 hours or so before you have spyware on an upatched xp machine. If my personal observations dont count, I could easily gather up links saying everything from 15 minutes to 5.
I also recommend installing it on as clean a system as humanly possible, as I mention later. The only way you can see that as FUD is if you are a zealot.
>”Reformatting the system and installing it before any other apps seems to work about 95% of the time,”
I would recommend you leave SP2 install to people who know what are they doing.
Um, I run the installer, with a full virus/malware scan before hand (if it isnt on a clean install). What do you do?
>”the only completely successful way i have found to get sp2 on an xp computer is to slipstream it into the install cd.”
I have found two: on properly managed computer (like I have and people I help with Windows pcs have) put CD with SP2 (free from Microsoft) into CD-reader, close it, let autoplay start, OK defaults.
If you think that this applies to the VAST majority of windows owners out there, you are not only a zealot, you are also an idiot. Windows accumulates cruft over time as anyone with experience and the slightest amount of objectivity will tell you. Using it properly will cut down the cruft, but it still accumulates. The more cruft on the system, the more chance of a borked sp2 install.
On improperly managed computer that some people brought me after their family friend screwd it royally: install antivirus with free one year subscribtion you can get from Microsoft, kill all viruses, run anti-spyware (LavaSoft and one from Microsoft), kill all spyware, reboot, repeat just in case, then put CD with SP2 (free from Microsoft) into CD-reader, close it, let autoplay start, OK defaults.
http://www.google.com/search?complete=1&hl=en&q=microsoft+sp2+probl…
google tells me there are about 550 000 sites that disagree with you, including microsoft.
I did install of SP2 both ways, successfully.
Congratulations, your friends and family either dont use their computers as much as mine, dont do as many stupid things on their computers as mine, or are just lucky. Once again, read what microsoft and the thousands of forum posts have to say, and you will find you are the exception, not the rule.
May be, if a computer is totally 0wned by hackers and completely trashed by spyware, adware, crappy software, viruses, worms, was totally neglected by clueless user and gravely misconfigured by his/her clueless “he’s computer geek” type of friend- then it may be necessary to reformat the system.
Once again, a quick google search tells me there are estimates of over a million zombies on the net. And thats just the owned by hackers part. Would you care to take a guess at how many computers are infected by some sort of malware? my guess would be around 80-85%, as a very liberal estimate. whats yours?
>”Regardless, I find rebooting after an update unacceptable”
SP2 is, like, in terms you can understand, a new Linux kernel. Do you understand now why you have to reboot after an update like that?
Yes, and when combined with the second half of the sentance, you will see that the first half is talking about windows updates in general, the second is talking about sp2 in particular.
>”wiping a hd for an update is beyond all realm of reason.”
Agree compeltely.
I would not consider hiring a person for Windows support job, who would say during the interview the stuff you said. That person is either incompetent or blind in his zealotry. Both cases make that person not an acceptable candidate for any Windows related tech support job.
Thats good, because I have zero formal education when it comes to administration, so hiring me for a windows tech support job at anything other than a hole in the wall computer store would be kind of dumb. I also would not hire someone who is so ignorant that even if his personal experiences contradict the vast majority of reports by users, he will chalk it up to incompitance or zealotry.
>”I would also like to note that this is just my experience in dealing with the pcs of friends and family.”
A-ha!
Yes, I never claimed to be something I am not. I have also used expressions like “In my experience” or “In my opinion”, as I do not claim to know everything there is about the subject. I would like to know your qualifications for making the statements you have. Considering how unprofessional your response has been, my guess is some highschool dropout working at a local computer repair store. You sound more like a gentoo zealot then a windows administrator.
>”I’m not an admin,”
You are not even a power Windows user. Tell your friends and relatives to find a competent person to deal with their PCs, and stop embarassing yourself with your statements about your troubles with MS Windows here.
No, really.
These are not only my troubles, they are the troubles of a computer repair friend of mine, who has several small businesses as customers, is certified, and has been using microsoft operating systems since DOS 3.0. Quite honestly, I trust his opinion more than anyone on this site, especially uninformed children.
“Two weeks later: “Waaa waaa, XP is a piece of shit, I got hacked! WAAAAAA!”
This is going to happen WITH or WITHOUT SP2 installed.
>“I have seen it done on about 15 boxes with a 100% failure rate.”
Again, either your experience is common and relevant, and then 100% of users who downloaded SP2 failed to successfully install it- or your experience is uncommon and because of that- irrelevant.
Because I for sure have seen successful install of SP2 on XP, your 100% failure rate is irrelevant and uncommon.
>“based on my personal experience, around here you have about 2 hours or so before you have spyware on an upatched xp machine.”
Of course, driving a car without engine coolant will also break it in less than 15 minutes, but we could call someone brave enough to drive “unpatched” car a dumbass.
Running unpatched OS sounds more like an achievement when it comes from you.
Sorry to offend you again, but doing that is not, well, clever.
You always seem to have very bad personal experience, when it is Windows-related.
>“I also would not hire someone who is so ignorant that even if his personal experiences contradict the vast majority of reports by users, he will chalk it up to incompitance or zealotry.”
One user- is the vast majority? Well, well…
But I would help even that user, and my services are free.
>“a quick google search tells me there are estimates of over a million zombies on the net.”
A quick google search for estimate on number of Windows boxes running will tell you it is less that 0.5% from 200,000,000 Windows XP computers on the Net, and less than 0.2% of 500,000,000 Windows computers of all versions.
>“infected by some sort of malware? my guess would be around 80-85%, as a very liberal estimate. whats yours?”
Mine would tell me that, first, you must exclude cookies which are Internet standard invented by Netscape and treated as spyware by some overzealous antispyware companies.
After that, I would say, based on my personal experience, on all my 5 home computer there is no spyware whatsoever. I would not be so overzealous to claim it means there are 0% computers infected with spyware, will just show you how personal experience, good or bad, could be irrelevant.
Also, if you don’t visit pr0n Web sites, don’t install software that allows you to infringe on copyright of others- don’t do something like that- you are very much safe from spyware.
>“These are not only my troubles, they are the troubles of a computer repair friend of mine, who has several small businesses as customers, is certified,”
Well, because I am not charging for my services, I do configure computers right the first time. I have no interest in doing sloppy job: I would be paying for my sloppy job with my time fixing what I have done wrong.
At least, I can successfully install SP2 on computer, which is not what you can do and your certified friend can if I to believe you in that as well.
I really don’t see what all the fuss is about, if you know what you are doing you can still block SP2 from installing, if you know what you are doing you can install SP2 without any problems, if you know what you are doing you can install a pre SP1 XP on client networks and have them never get a virus/trojan…(I do it everyday), if you don’t know what you are doing you seem to come hear to bitch about it,
but it is hard on system admins, i have clients with custom programs that where written on windows 9x and by companys that no longer exist, so if they install SP2 they have to upgrade to new software, merge/redo the entire databases that took years and a lot of staff to create in the first place(and not in a standard format), and then retrain staff, and then if it’s not 100% the sys admin guys get there asses kick, when in reallity it’s the problem coursed my poor planing and silly uneducated IT manages,
if you really want to lock down you box you need to do more then just install SP’s and Patches, you have to spend time configuring and setting it up in a way that the crap dosn’t get in,
or you can go the quick fix, and install SP2 and be safe for a week or two until malware/viruses/… writters find way around SP2 (malware already get around SP2)
[sVen]
OK, this thread is about MS forcing EVERY XP to upgrade to SP2. My problem is once consumers will have SP2, our products maybe won’t work at all. And it’s not a problem about coding style, remember even MS have troubles with this issue (but OK, maybe in their case its coding style – the deep code of Windows and MS products – that may be in fault).
Well, users switching to Linux won’t be able to our products either. But there the problem is the OS stills named Windows XP, so they start complaining our product is bullshit, even if it was working flawlessly just BEFORE their upgrade to SP2.
Same would have happened in a lessar fashion with the switch from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95. The brand stills ‘Windows’, so the product HAVE to be compatible, as our products remains upward compatible.
MS job is to garantee this upward compatibility too. I can bear some trouble from 3.11 to 95/XP, but I surely cannot afford lack of compatibility between XP and XP !!! It reminds me all incompatibility issues introduced with each InstallShield SP
Let’s resume :
Here at OsNews, there is no ‘average’ users, just above average users (coders, sysadmin, etc…) who probably knows how to block SP2.
The average user, to whom the mandatory is focused, won’t be able to block SP2 on its next Windows Update request.
Once SP2 comfortably installed, OUR products will gets broken, WE will have to focus on the issue without being able to request the payback of the maintenance involved in SP2 compatibility issue to MS. It will probably costs us 10000€+, but MS won’t return us this fee :/ Should we make our consumers paying the updates to SP2 ?
Well, MS = MafiaSoftware ! Be with US, or collapse !
Kochise
But maybe you should read the thread. MS is NOT forcing everyone to upgrade. They are only forcing users to upgrade to SP2 IF they want further patches. They are having SP2 downloaded by AU IF AU is enabled, but it is STILL up to the user to install it! You CAN choose “NO”.
To force an install, it has to give NO options to stop it, whereas it DOES actually give you an option to not install.
Pay fucking attention and stop bashing MS just to bash MS.
“They are only forcing users to upgrade to SP2 IF they want further patches.”
Who does want further patches ?
Kochise
Looking at the responses I have been getting from posting my less then satisfactory experiences with SP2, I have obviously offended some people here in a very deep and personal way. I would like to make a few things clear:
1) Problems with SP2 are common. I am not the only one to have these experiences. I do not use windows at home, and havnt since before SP2 came out the door, so my experiences have consisted of helping friends and family. My comments should be taken as someone with the perspective of the common user, since its only that kind of xp that I have any experience installing SP2 on. As I mentioned many times, failed upgrades tend to be determined by the amount of cruft on the system. For the average home user, that is alot. That is all I am trying to say.
2) Due to the childish nature of the comments directed at me, Im not going to bother arguing anymore. In the words of paul graham, “Argue with idiots, and you become an idiot.”. Anyone who refuses to believe that there have been significant problems with SP2 is an idiot, this is something that is widely documented.
3) I have said it many times, but I will say it again since some people here cant seem to read (I’m referring to the mental giant who said this: “You wouldn’t hire anyone. You’re clearly so bloody useless that the chances of you getting a position of responsibility are absolutely non-existant.”). I am a J2EE developer who writes an ERP/Workflow management system that is used by most of the fortune 500 apparel manufacturers. I am not a sysadmin, this is not expert opinion. There were some admins who posted at the beginning of this thread, but the people who are getting all uppity with me obviously arnt.
4) If my posts have seriously made you angry enough to tell me to “go to a corner and die”, you seriously need to get a life, and move out from your mothers basement. Ill admit, I have a bias against windows. I just dont like it. Chalk it up to personal preference if you want, there are a thousand little annoyances that I have to deal with every day. That being said, I also do not think that code put out by microsoft is “evil”, and it is not my personal goal in life to overthrow microsoft. I find such people worthy of pity. In my origional post, the only thing I said that came out of that bias was that I find the constant reboots on windows unacceptable, and that a reformat for an upgrade is beyond the realm of reason. Something to respond to would be “Windows seems to be designed for someone with the brain of a chimp, except it is designed so badly that things that should logically work, dont. So instead of learning the os, it is more a matter of rote memorization on what to do or not do” or “Windows is, technology wise, the worst out of all the major operating systems. The only reason to use it is if you are into “economy” products, or have no opinion outside of “what everyone else is doing””. Those would be inflammatory comments, but still far superior to that anonymous troll, as they rise above the “poopyface” level of discussion. If you want to troll (hey, its osnews, everyone does it), at least troll well.
People who want to have real freedom never use Windows. There are linux, *BSDs and several alternatives.