SP2

  • Thread starter Thread starter kozlikha
  • Start date Start date
K

kozlikha

What are the consequences of not upgrading to SP2?

The computer works fine now, i have Norton Firewall, Antivirus, Go
Back and Ad-aware installed.

I have tried to install SP2 earlier and Windows would not load up. I
have managed to uninstall Go Back program and performed a system
restore.

Thank God it's all back to normal and works now. I am not proficient
in computers and would not know what and how to upgrade to enable
smooth installation of SP2.

So the question remains, whether it is NECESSARY to do so.

Cheers.
 
kozlikha said:
What are the consequences of not upgrading to SP2?
Click to expand...

No future robust XP support from MS. Do SP2 as ultimately there is no
choice. SP2 works just fine for the vast majority of folks.
The computer works fine now, i have Norton Firewall, Antivirus, Go
Back and Ad-aware installed.

I have tried to install SP2 earlier and Windows would not load up. I
have managed to uninstall Go Back program and performed a system
restore.

Thank God it's all back to normal and works now. I am not proficient
in computers and would not know what and how to upgrade to enable
smooth installation of SP2.

So the question remains, whether it is NECESSARY to do so.
Click to expand...

Figure out why there was an SP2 problem. Fix it and do SP2.
 
What are the consequences of not upgrading to SP2?
No future robust XP support from MS. Do SP2 as ultimately there is no
choice. SP2 works just fine for the vast majority of folks.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ.. my experiences have been quite the opposite.. individuals
and businesses.. I've seen nothing but trouble with SP2..

Regards,
Chris
 
On 3 Oct 2004 19:01:40 -0400,
What are the consequences of not upgrading to SP2?

The computer works fine now, i have Norton Firewall, Antivirus, Go
Back and Ad-aware installed.

I have tried to install SP2 earlier and Windows would not load up. I
have managed to uninstall Go Back program and performed a system
restore.

Thank God it's all back to normal and works now. I am not proficient
in computers and would not know what and how to upgrade to enable
smooth installation of SP2.

So the question remains, whether it is NECESSARY to do so.
Click to expand...

No, not necessary. It has a few security features but if
you're REALLY into security you're not using IE or OE
anymore regardless of patches, they are the two biggest
holes in XP.

Here's an itemized list of what you're missing:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx

Most of the features are more for novice users that don't
already have experience, practices and procedures for
dealing with these issues already in place. For the most
part it's painless if your apps still work, but it's not a
"must-have" update by any stretch... but do visit
windowsupdate and have all the individual updates applied.
 
No, not necessary. It has a few security features but if
you're REALLY into security you're not using IE or OE
anymore regardless of patches, they are the two biggest
holes in XP.
Click to expand...

I still use IE due to paranoia that some sites wont work right but
frankly Im also using FireFox which is getting more and more popular
and so far its worked fine. With IE I have to admit I use a
Spyware/pop up blocker which can be a pain in the ass. SP2 also blocks
downloads of various things and will offer you the option of
downloading.

Ive never liked OE so I dont use it.

However --- it seems like the net is getting worse and worse. I was
formatting a installing some stuff for a neighbor after both of his
PCs were infected by viruses and spyware - screwed up. I searched for
the site to install the free prog search and destroy which is highly
regarded. There was this counterfeit site which I clicked on thinking
it was related to it and it isntalled 300 bits of spyware crud which
totally trashed the fresh installation I did. And then I saw a popup
which offered to sell me a spyware fixer for $30. It wasnt related to
search and destroy at all. The PC was running so slow it took forever
to get to the real site and then install it and run it. I could barely
run to the point after a long while it searched the PC and listed 300
entries ! It was locking up and so screwed I ended up refomatting
again. It kind of felt like extortion. I wish people would start suing
sites like that. Of course they are probably located in Outer Slobovia
making that impossible.

SP2 - not sure really. Ive had some weird things happen after I
installed it and others have blamed problems on it too. But its
running fine now so Im not sure if it was a convenient scapegoat or
not but Ive seen a fair amount of posts where people blame it for a
variety of post install problems.
 
Disable the Messenger service (it is disabled by default with SP2) don't use Internet Explorer or outlook/outlook express and you will have a secure system.
What are the consequences of not upgrading to SP2?

The computer works fine now, i have Norton Firewall, Antivirus, Go
Back and Ad-aware installed.

I have tried to install SP2 earlier and Windows would not load up. I
have managed to uninstall Go Back program and performed a system
restore.

Thank God it's all back to normal and works now. I am not proficient
in computers and would not know what and how to upgrade to enable
smooth installation of SP2.

So the question remains, whether it is NECESSARY to do so.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

--

When replying by Email include NewSGrouP (case sensitive) in Subject

Mike Walsh
West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
 
kozlikha said:
What are the consequences of not upgrading to SP2?
Click to expand...


I have no confidence in SP2. It causes problems with Windows own Internet
Connection Service causing the client computer's link to drop out
intermittently, so I turned the firewall off and went back to Zone Alarm
(version 4.5, their version 5 does the same as SP2). Then it told me that
my Norton Anti-virus 2003 was too old and I should fork out for a later
version, so I turned off the Anti Virus monitor as well. Then Nero Burning
Rom came up with a message that it had known problems with the operating
system, and that finished up with a 50+ megabyte download from Nero. I
think Mr gates should put SP2 where the sun don't shine.

Keith Willcocks
(remove .nospam from address to reply)
 
I agree,the MS newsgroups were flooded with complaints almost immediately
following it's release.An update shouldn't cause so many problems,it seems
ruhed,poorly developed,and even more poorly tested.
 
BIG thanks for your replies. I just hope that if I don't install SP2,
there will be no future conflicts between software updates.

Cheers.
 
Skeleton Man said:
I beg to differ.. my experiences have been quite the opposite.. individuals
and businesses.. I've seen nothing but trouble with SP2..
Click to expand...

Hire a professional to help you out.
 
kony said:
On 3 Oct 2004 19:01:40 -0400,


No, not necessary. It has a few security features but if
you're REALLY into security you're not using IE or OE
anymore regardless of patches, they are the two biggest
holes in XP.

Here's an itemized list of what you're missing:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx

Most of the features are more for novice users that don't
already have experience, practices and procedures for
dealing with these issues already in place. For the most
part it's painless if your apps still work, but it's not a
"must-have" update by any stretch...
Click to expand...

In the long run SP2 is a MUST HAVE for the average computer user.
 
Mike Walsh said:
Disable the Messenger service (it is disabled by default with SP2) don't
Click to expand...
use Internet Explorer or outlook/outlook express and you will have a secure
system.

And that advice is reasonable for what percentage of the user base? Would a
real computer pro take that advive?
 
Keith Willcocks said:
I have no confidence in SP2. It causes problems with Windows own Internet
Connection Service causing the client computer's link to drop out
intermittently, so I turned the firewall off and went back to Zone Alarm
(version 4.5, their version 5 does the same as SP2). Then it told me that
my Norton Anti-virus 2003 was too old and I should fork out for a later
version, so I turned off the Anti Virus monitor as well. Then Nero Burning
Rom came up with a message that it had known problems with the operating
system, and that finished up with a 50+ megabyte download from Nero. I
think Mr gates should put SP2 where the sun don't shine.
Click to expand...

All known weaknesses in your existant environment. SP2 works just fine.
Norton/
Symantec causes problems with everything and most are abandoning it.....
 
Gojira said:
I agree,the MS newsgroups were flooded with complaints almost immediately
following it's release.
Click to expand...

Not flooded. The amount was MUCH less than anticipated. NGs distill the
problems. Most don't come to NGs because SP2 works fine.
An update shouldn't cause so many problems,it seems
ruhed,poorly developed,and even more poorly tested.
Click to expand...

There is not the slightest evidence to support that.
 
kozlikha said:
BIG thanks for your replies. I just hope that if I don't install SP2,
there will be no future conflicts between software updates.
Click to expand...

OF COURSE there will be.
 
In the long run SP2 is a MUST HAVE for the average computer user.
Click to expand...

LOL, you're starting to sound like DaveW.

"Must have" is nonsense. If we want to nitpick, the average
user shouldn't even think about applying ANY service
packs... how many "average users" do you know that could
even get their systems running again if windows (just)
didn't load? Sure that can format and reinstall everything,
not knowing what went wrong. Or, they could slipstream SP2,
but how many "average users" even know what a slipstream is?

The average user doesn't monitor ports, disable services,
and has a half dozen spywares on their system at any given
time. The best thing an average user could do is simply
ditch as much as MS's SW as possible, not adding to it's
complexity in any way, including SP2.
 
use Internet Explorer or outlook/outlook express and you will have a secure
system.

And that advice is reasonable for what percentage of the user base? Would a
real computer pro take that advive?
Click to expand...


Most of them.
 
kony said:
The average user doesn't monitor ports, disable services,
and has a half dozen spywares on their system at any given
time.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's why they should install SP2 and use the MS firewall along with
AVG and Adaware and turn on Automatic Updates.
The best thing an average user could do is simply
ditch as much as MS's SW as possible,
Click to expand...

And that allows us all to dismiss you as 90% of the world runs MS on PCs.
 
Yep, that's why they should install SP2 and use the MS firewall along with
AVG and Adaware and turn on Automatic Updates.
Click to expand...


No, that does not solve the problem.
And that allows us all to dismiss you as 90% of the world runs MS on PCs.
Click to expand...

So we are in agreement that 90% of the world is not
concerned about what's best regarding security?
If so, then what argument remains for SP2?
90% of the world does not run winXP.
 
Back
Top