Home > Windows > Windows XP SP2 RC2 Available to TestersWindows XP SP2 RC2 Available to Testers Submitted by Gsurface 2004-06-14 Windows 20 CommentsWindows XP SP2 RC2 is now available for download from BetaPlace. The build number is 2149 and there is currently a network install only, no express. More at Flexbeta.About The Author Eugenia LoliEx-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 20 Comments 2004-06-14 11:48 pm How many stupid beta releases does a SERVICE PACK – a set of patches need? Well, if you’re changing so much about the fundamental way the system operates, quite a few. This service pack, like most others before it is more than a set of patches; in it are NX stacks, tighter default security, a better firewall, a new infrastructure for managing antivirus software and internet downloads, and a large number of recompiled system binaries. All of these things can and have broken software, so why not test it extensively?P.S. Other than the hostile tone, IMO the comment was fine. 2004-06-15 1:06 am I hope they simply test it until they get it right. I don’t care how long it takes, I just want it ready for operation when it is done. 2004-06-15 1:07 am “How many stupid beta releases does a SERVICE PACK – a set of patches need? ”From my understanding a large majority of the OS has been recompiled, and changed security defaults will certainly break many a network application. They are giving companies a chance to have patches before the release. An excellent idea. 2004-06-15 1:56 am “From my understanding a large majority of the OS has been recompiled, ”you are completely wrong. nothing fundamental has changed. its all pretty much they way it should have beenSpeaking from the position of someone who knows what they’re talking about when it comes to Windows, I’d just like to point out that you’re very mistaken. Nothing is “pretty much the way it should have been”, and yes, large amounts of the core OS have been recoded – not merely recompiled. The addition of the security center, the integration of Windows Firewall with the Security Center, built-in Antivirus monitoring for supported AVs, etc, all take time and effort, and a lot of testing to get right.Windows XP SP1 went through at least 20 leaked builds during the beta test, with a whole host of builds compiled internally during that time. 2004-06-15 2:59 am You’re wasting your time with that guy. He’s one of those people who’s always right, even in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary. 2004-06-15 3:17 am I download sp2rc2 – I think. I was surprised to find it was an .img file. I’m embarassed to admit, I don’t know how to install the thing.I googled around, found some instructions, but they were for installing “xpsp2.exe.” That has to be installed with some “slipstreaming” process.Anybody know where I can get clear instructions on how to install? 2004-06-15 4:00 am huh?. how about mr.kingston. werent you the one who apologised several times to multiple people for being a freebsd troll all the time.a service pack is a set of patches. the time that it has taken for ms to release it has been enormous and they are doing this to hype this up for counter acting the huge time gap for longhorn. anybody who knows Ms is aware of this.claiming that a service pack has major portions of the core os is just plain silly. if thats case its not a service pack anymore.“Nothing is “pretty much the way it should have been”, ”i understand he means all these stuff should be have been the default long time ago instead of being added as a service pack now and he is right 2004-06-15 4:11 am Hi,I think that’s a cd image file – try burning it with Nero, Alchol 120% or cdrecord.Bye,Victor 2004-06-15 7:42 am This time, obviously it isn’t. Plus, they broke a lot of stuff so businesses (MS’s real customers) have to have time to fix it. 2004-06-15 8:48 am This time, obviously it isn’t. Plus, they broke a lot of stuff so businesses (MS’s real customers) have to have time to fix it.If software brokes, it uses insecure api’s or manages memory badly. SP2 technical documentation explains in deep detail what has changed and what has not.I’m personally waiting for SP2. It really brings new nice features and brings basic security to a level it should have been since XP’s releaseFor those who don’t know anything about SP2 and keep trolling, here’s some highlights:– Firewall, pretty equal to zonealarm, can block connections in-out and so on– RPC services now listen only local rpc calls by default (very important)– NX support– Better memory management– Boot-time policy with firewall. This means if firewall fails to start, all ports stay closed. This fixes also the problem that still exists in XP, in boot-time firewall starts last, so machine is vurnelable for worms for 20-sec to 2min in bootup.Read more from:http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/winx…[also small offtopic-feedback for comments. they .. hm.. suck. possibility to reply & quote for existing messages would be great, and perhaps also “tree” style view for comments, sorted by replies etc. in it’s current state this looks like a guestbook i wrote 5 years ago… not meant to be troll, meant to be improvement suggestion. i’m also available as volunteer if you need help with php code] 2004-06-15 10:28 am If software brokes, it uses insecure api’s or manages memory badly. SP2 technical documentation explains in deep detail what has changed and what has not.True, hence the reason I tell people, if they find that their application doesn’t work with Windows, their gripe is with the software application vendor and not Microsoft.Microsoft provides the operating system, provides information on their APIs, how best to use those API’s and information on any changes to those APIs and how ones application will be affected.If I were Microsoft, I would be tempted to make a point that those vendors who don’t keep their product up to date and inline and compatible with Microsofts version of Windows, they should be kicked off the Microsoft partnership register. 2004-06-15 3:32 pm hisince i use a modem and dialin 56k, and my computer isn’t always on (b/c it’s my only phone line) i don’t think security is an issue for me,i’m curious as to non-security related improvements.for example, how is Better memory management improved?what non-security related bug fixes are there?also is mount rainier/easy write supported natively?thanks 2004-06-15 5:22 pm since i use a modem and dialin 56k, and my computer isn’t always on (b/c it’s my only phone line) i don’t think security is an issue for me, You’d be surprised at the number of times my firewall detects a hack attempt and I’m using dial-up. Just because its dial-up doesn’t mean that it isn’t vulnerable. 2004-06-15 5:49 pm “a service pack is a set of patches. the time that it has taken for ms to release it has been enormous and they are doing this to hype this up for counter acting the huge time gap for longhorn. anybody who knows Ms is aware of this.claiming that a service pack has major portions of the core os is just plain silly. if thats case its not a service pack anymore.”The last time MS did something like this they released it as more then a service pack actually. Does Windows 98 SE ring a bell with anyone? That is the reason why we hear about “XP Reloaded”, then people complained so they are making it a “Service Pack”. There is no pleasing some people unfortunately. 2004-06-15 5:51 pm limited priviledges capability for windows xp home. it currently doesnt. i have win xp pro and it does have both admin and limited priviledges accounts. 2004-06-15 6:43 pm well a hacker would have 56k bandwidth, and i am only on for about an hour, and if connection is slow for any reason i disconnect and go play tennis or golf.does sp2 slow xp, no change, or make xp faster?curious 2004-06-15 8:43 pm Increases the speed of XP. 2004-06-15 10:51 pm I appologized for annoying one of the few bright people around here. Everything I had said was true, and more often than not was said to correct idiots like you as opposed to trolling.Of course your mr right. LOLThat sentence in itself is a troll. I’ve seen you troll Fedora Core threads as well and so far all you’ve been saying is a bunch of FUD over and over again. To such a point that even the admin got sick of you. 2004-06-15 11:11 pm “Microsoft provides the operating system, provides information on their APIs, how best to use those API’s and information on any changes to those APIs and how ones application will be affected.If I were Microsoft, I would be tempted to make a point that those vendors who don’t keep their product up to date and inline and compatible with Microsofts version of Windows, they should be kicked off the Microsoft partnership register.”This is a bunch of crap. Without those third apps, Windows is useless. I seriously doubt software vendors are going to be lazy about getting their applications to run on Windows. It’s only their livelihood at stake. The fault lies with Microsoft if the apps are crashing. They are the ones who need to make that extra effort to be sure software vendors have the information they need, since MS can make any changes to the OS anytime it wants, and the vendors are basically at their mercy if they want to stay in business. They have to hope MS not only gets it to work right, but also keeps them updated. 2004-06-15 11:17 pm If you’re a software vendor this has to be a major PITA. You’ve already went through the trouble of writing the software, getting it stabilized on XP awhile back and now here comes ANOTHER security patch to potentially make you re-write your code again. And God only knows how many more patches there will be until Longhorn gets here, so this is likely to be a recurring situation for them.