Device manager says SP1; should it say SP1a?

[Josh Collins]

I see SP1a on the MS website for download. My device manager shows SP1. If I
had installed the SP1a would it show the SP1a in device manager?

[Chris Jackson \(MVP\)]

It will always say SP1 whether you have SP1 or SP1a. The difference is that
SP1a does NOT include the Microsoft Virtual Machine for Java.

--
Chris Jackson
Software Engineer
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP Associate Expert
--
"Josh Collins" > wrote in message
...
> I see SP1a on the MS website for download. My device manager shows SP1. If
I
> had installed the SP1a would it show the SP1a in device manager?
>
>

[Steve C. Ray]

Josh, SP1 and SP1a are identical except 1a does not include Microsoft
Virtual Machine (removed by a court order). If you have SP1 don't download
SP1a.

--
Steve C. Ray
Replace "mail" with "36db"
"Josh Collins" > wrote in message
...
> I see SP1a on the MS website for download. My device manager shows SP1. If
I
> had installed the SP1a would it show the SP1a in device manager?
>
>

[Tx2]

In ,
Steve C. Ray > typed:

> If you have SP1 don't
> download SP1a.

And if you don't have SP1, then don't download that either!
I used to be an advocate of updates ... until i (well Microsoft) trashed
what was a perfectly healthy machine with one of their patches.
I removed the update, and a variety of issues surfaced, forcing my hand to
format and re-install.
With the new installation, very few updates have been added, and my machine
now performs considerably better than it did previously.

[Josh Collins]

Hmmm....I have had no problems with XP SP1. My computer works fine after the
download. But my copy is a legal copy. BTW, have you ever heard of the
Restore option in XP? I have found that people who love to blame MS--rather
than themseleves--for some problem should really learn how to use the
Restore option in XP.

"Tx2" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Steve C. Ray > typed:
>
> > If you have SP1 don't
> > download SP1a.
>
> And if you don't have SP1, then don't download that either!
> I used to be an advocate of updates ... until i (well Microsoft) trashed
> what was a perfectly healthy machine with one of their patches.
> I removed the update, and a variety of issues surfaced, forcing my hand to
> format and re-install.
> With the new installation, very few updates have been added, and my
machine
> now performs considerably better than it did previously.
>
>

[Lorne Smith]

One shouldn't blame the matches for the fire, just becuase someone was
playing with them... :)

"Tx2" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Steve C. Ray > typed:
>
> > If you have SP1 don't
> > download SP1a.
>
> And if you don't have SP1, then don't download that either!
> I used to be an advocate of updates ... until i (well Microsoft) trashed
> what was a perfectly healthy machine with one of their patches.
> I removed the update, and a variety of issues surfaced, forcing my hand to
> format and re-install.
> With the new installation, very few updates have been added, and my
machine
> now performs considerably better than it did previously.
>
>

[Tx2]

In ,
Josh Collins > typed:

> Hmmm....I have had no problems with XP SP1. My computer works fine
> after the download. But my copy is a legal copy. BTW, have you ever
> heard of the Restore option in XP? I have found that people who love
> to blame MS--rather than themseleves--for some problem should really
> learn how to use the Restore option in XP.

I to have a legal copy of Windows XP Home edition.
In fact, i have 3, one for each PC in this household.

I know how to use System Restore, but it didn't resolve the situation.
The problems *only* occurred after MS Patche(s) were installed and
subsequently deleted.
The machine threw up all sorts of issues at that point, enough for me to
re-install the OS.

I thought my PC was working OK under SP1, it was only the introduction of a
patch that screwed things up.
It is now that i have a machine without SP1 that i realise just how slow and
sluggish SP1 made it.

And, FWIW, my PC has decent 'brand name' components, not cheap and nasty Far
East unknowns.
SP1 was without doubt not something my machine benefited from.

[Tx2]

In ,
Lorne Smith > typed:

> One shouldn't blame the matches for the fire, just becuase someone was
> playing with them... :)

So your advice agrees with my opinion then.
Don't install (play with) the Service Pack (the matches) as they will f*ck
up (burn) your machine (fingers)

[Lorne Smith]

"Tx2" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Lorne Smith > typed:
>
> > One shouldn't blame the matches for the fire, just becuase someone was
> > playing with them... :)
>
> So your advice agrees with my opinion then.
> Don't install (play with) the Service Pack (the matches) as they will f*ck
> up (burn) your machine (fingers)
>
>
Actually, I meant that is probably not the SP's fault that problems
occurred. More often than not, any problems are caused by badly written
device drivers or such things as firewall or AV programs which hook into the
system at a very low level. The best way to ensure a good install of SP1 is
to disable any such programs and only run with certificated drivers. At
least then you've got a much better chance of the matches not singeing your
fingers :)

I'm not saying SP1 is perfect (what MS product is), but I've installed it on
100's of computers with different configurations. Some box built machines,
some custom builds... The only time I had a problem was with a Dell
computer and that wasn't the SP's fault, it was Dell's for customizing XP
too much :)

For big box build machines, I'd recommend checking their website for any
known issues with SP1 and patches before trying to install it.

Lorne

[Tx2]

In ,
Lorne Smith > typed:

> Actually, I meant that is probably not the SP's fault that problems
> occurred. More often than not, any problems are caused by badly
> written device drivers or such things as firewall or AV programs
> which hook into the system at a very low level. The best way to
> ensure a good install of SP1 is to disable any such programs and only
> run with certificated drivers. At least then you've got a much
> better chance of the matches not singeing your fingers :)

Oh for the perfect world and and an endless pot of money that will allow me
to buy components to build such a 100% compatible machine!

FWIW .... SP1 was installed prior to any AV software being installed, as i
have it on MS disk and hadn't put any AV software on the machine at that
point. I also have 'brand name' components in my machine ... Nvidia, MSI,
Creative et al .... and not just some Far Eastern unknowns. To my knowledge,
all the components are certified, i've not had any indication to the
contrary.

I think i gave SP1 every chance i could ;-)

> I'm not saying SP1 is perfect (what MS product is)

XP gets close IMO ... i wouldn't use any other previous version of Windows
now.

> installed it on 100's of computers with different configurations.
> Some box built machines, some custom builds... The only time I had a
> problem was with a Dell computer and that wasn't the SP's fault, it
> was Dell's for customizing XP too much

I've also installed it several times, not quite on 100's of machines (i'm
too busy doing other less mundane tasks), and have either had a variety of
issues, or none at all.

Personally, unless there is an issue that absolutely requires SP1 be
installed, then i won't. I will now patch the machine bit by bit if i feel
it is needed, carefully checking exactly what is going to change on my PC
rather than trusting the Microsoft machine to customise my PC as they see
fit.

[Lorne Smith]

"Tx2" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Lorne Smith > typed:
>
> > Actually, I meant that is probably not the SP's fault that problems
> > occurred. More often than not, any problems are caused by badly
> > written device drivers or such things as firewall or AV programs
> > which hook into the system at a very low level. The best way to
> > ensure a good install of SP1 is to disable any such programs and only
> > run with certificated drivers. At least then you've got a much
> > better chance of the matches not singeing your fingers :)
>
> Oh for the perfect world and and an endless pot of money that will allow
me
> to buy components to build such a 100% compatible machine!
>
> FWIW .... SP1 was installed prior to any AV software being installed, as i
> have it on MS disk and hadn't put any AV software on the machine at that
> point. I also have 'brand name' components in my machine ... Nvidia, MSI,
> Creative et al .... and not just some Far Eastern unknowns. To my
knowledge,
> all the components are certified, i've not had any indication to the
> contrary.
>
> I think i gave SP1 every chance i could ;-)
>
> > I'm not saying SP1 is perfect (what MS product is)
>
> XP gets close IMO ... i wouldn't use any other previous version of Windows
> now.
>
> > installed it on 100's of computers with different configurations.
> > Some box built machines, some custom builds... The only time I had a
> > problem was with a Dell computer and that wasn't the SP's fault, it
> > was Dell's for customizing XP too much
>
> I've also installed it several times, not quite on 100's of machines (i'm
> too busy doing other less mundane tasks), and have either had a variety of
> issues, or none at all.
>
> Personally, unless there is an issue that absolutely requires SP1 be
> installed, then i won't. I will now patch the machine bit by bit if i feel
> it is needed, carefully checking exactly what is going to change on my PC
> rather than trusting the Microsoft machine to customise my PC as they see
> fit.
>
>

Of course that's entirely your choice, and if that methods works best for
you then great :) My own PC is full of unbranded hardware and it still
worked fine, so to say that a big name is more likely to work isn't
completely right :) To be honest, there are SO many variables involved,
right down to a slightly iffy stick of RAM than worked ok with pre-SP1 and
is unstable afterwards, that it's impossible to say if you'll have any
problems after installing it until you actually GET the problems....

Still, hope you get it updated to suit your needs, just remember that sooner
or later there will be software released that will require SP1, so
eventually you'll end up having to install it anyway.... Why not try
creating a slipstreamed copy of XP with SP1 and do a fresh or repair
install?

Lorne

[Josh Collins]

Just in case anyone was wondering . . . the OP was that the only difference
between SP1 and SP1a is that SP1a does not have Virtual Machine because it
had to be removed by court order.

[Lorne Smith]

"Josh Collins" > wrote in message
...
> Just in case anyone was wondering . . . the OP was that the only
difference
> between SP1 and SP1a is that SP1a does not have Virtual Machine because it
> had to be removed by court order.
>
>

Already mentioned by Steve, but this was getting a teeny bit OT :) ...

[Tx2]

In ,
Lorne Smith > typed:

> Still, hope you get it updated to suit your needs, just remember that
> sooner or later there will be software released that will require
> SP1, so eventually you'll end up having to install it anyway....

I won't have to do anything i don't want to ;-)
But, in fact, there already is a component i know of that requires SP1 to
work.
I can't recall the model, but it's one of the MSI mainboards.
SP1 needs to be installed in connection with USB 2.0, which rather surprised
me as i have an 'older' MSI board that works perfectly well with USB 2.0....