Totally amazing feature of SP2

[Art]

It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
system had. Amazing.

[jct883]

Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.

"Art" wrote:

> It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
> system had. Amazing.
>
>
>

[Sandman]

MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that came with
installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all those problems.. A
smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
"jct883" > wrote in message
...
> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>
> "Art" wrote:
>
> > It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
> > system had. Amazing.
> >
> >
> >

[Kent W. England [MVP]]

jct883 wrote on 12-Sep-2004 5:31 AM:

> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>
> "Art" wrote:
>
>
>>It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
>>system had. Amazing.
>>

Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
and future problems with Windows.

--
Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security

[Testy]

SP2 is NOT a requirement for a secure computer.

Testy

"Kent W. England [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> jct883 wrote on 12-Sep-2004 5:31 AM:
>
>> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>>
>> "Art" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
>>>system had. Amazing.
>>>
>
> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
> and future problems with Windows.
>
> --
> Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security

You got that right! I don't want anything to do with SP2
at all. I have mys system running just like I want it,
not the way Microsoft wants it. I also have a
firewall/router between my LAN and my DSL.

>-----Original Message-----
>SP2 is NOT a requirement for a secure computer.
>
>Testy
>
>"Kent W. England [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
>> jct883 wrote on 12-Sep-2004 5:31 AM:
>>
>>> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>>>
>>> "Art" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed
all the problems my
>>>>system had. Amazing.
>>>>
>>
>> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has
decided to forego
>> the security features of SP2 and all future
XP "reloaded" releases and
>> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid
malicious software
>> and future problems with Windows.
>>
>> --
>> Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security
>
>
>.
>

[Art]

"Kent W. England [MVP]" > wrote in message
>
> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
> and future problems with Windows.
>

Nope, what Art has done is decide that after spending 4 weeks or so of
tweaking every possible configuration setting and scouring the internet
trying to find patches and updates for every possible driver on my system
and finding that I was still no closer to fixing the mess caused by SP2 that
I'd rather take my chances without any of it's supposed extra security
features for now. I already have a hardware firewall and I've never had any
problems in the past. Maybe the extra security features of SP2 would be
nice but I think it's more important to have a computer that can actually be
used. I might give SP2 a try again in 6 months or so, by then Microsoft
should have got round to releasing some patches to fix the updates to fix
the patches that will be supposed to fix the problems with SP2.

[Ted Zieglar]

With that attitude, there's really nothing else to say except good luck to
you, my friend. You're going to need lots of it.

Ted Zieglar

"Art" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Kent W. England [MVP]" > wrote in message
>>
>> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
>> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
>> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
>> and future problems with Windows.
>>
>
> Nope, what Art has done is decide that after spending 4 weeks or so of
> tweaking every possible configuration setting and scouring the internet
> trying to find patches and updates for every possible driver on my system
> and finding that I was still no closer to fixing the mess caused by SP2
> that
> I'd rather take my chances without any of it's supposed extra security
> features for now. I already have a hardware firewall and I've never had
> any
> problems in the past. Maybe the extra security features of SP2 would be
> nice but I think it's more important to have a computer that can actually
> be
> used. I might give SP2 a try again in 6 months or so, by then Microsoft
> should have got round to releasing some patches to fix the updates to fix
> the patches that will be supposed to fix the problems with SP2.
>
>
>

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

Then why did you install SP2? From your own message header:

From: "Testy" >
References: > >
>
Subject: Re: Totally amazing feature of SP2
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:45:32 -0400
Lines: 26
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Testy" wrote:

| SP2 is NOT a requirement for a secure computer.
|
| Testy

[Mike H]

Yo Ted

Art is ok.. he is behind a hardware firewall.. he has never had any problems
in the past.. he is probably a hero among his friends.. he gives no credence
to the phrase 'there is always a first time'.. he has enough confidence on
his own abilities.. wow, what a guy!!

Two things trouble me though.. he does not appear to know anything about
prepping before a major installation.. and he also appears to think that he
will be able to get SP2 related fixes and patches without the need for SP2..
wow, what a guy!!

Mike H


"Ted Zieglar" > wrote in message
...
> With that attitude, there's really nothing else to say except good luck to
> you, my friend. You're going to need lots of it.
>
> Ted Zieglar
>
> "Art" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Kent W. England [MVP]" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
>>> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
>>> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
>>> and future problems with Windows.
>>>
>>
>> Nope, what Art has done is decide that after spending 4 weeks or so of
>> tweaking every possible configuration setting and scouring the internet
>> trying to find patches and updates for every possible driver on my system
>> and finding that I was still no closer to fixing the mess caused by SP2
>> that
>> I'd rather take my chances without any of it's supposed extra security
>> features for now. I already have a hardware firewall and I've never had
>> any
>> problems in the past. Maybe the extra security features of SP2 would be
>> nice but I think it's more important to have a computer that can actually
>> be
>> used. I might give SP2 a try again in 6 months or so, by then Microsoft
>> should have got round to releasing some patches to fix the updates to fix
>> the patches that will be supposed to fix the problems with SP2.
>>
>>
>>
>

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

There is a major flaw in your plan.
Many of the issues are not Microsoft issues as stated by you.
"for every possible driver on my system"
Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer and not
Microsoft.
Software patches are also the responsibility of the manufacturers and
not Microsoft.
If you ever intend to install SP-2, you need to research your hardware
and software for compatibility issues.
Start with the issues you already know and from there check the
manufacturers.

Simply waiting and doing nothing will accomplish nothing since the
SP-2 of today is identical to the SP-2 of next year.
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Art" > wrote in message
...
> Nope, what Art has done is decide that after spending 4 weeks or so
> of
> tweaking every possible configuration setting and scouring the
> internet
> trying to find patches and updates for every possible driver on my
> system
> and finding that I was still no closer to fixing the mess caused by
> SP2 that
> I'd rather take my chances without any of it's supposed extra
> security
> features for now. I already have a hardware firewall and I've never
> had any
> problems in the past. Maybe the extra security features of SP2
> would be
> nice but I think it's more important to have a computer that can
> actually be
> used. I might give SP2 a try again in 6 months or so, by then
> Microsoft
> should have got round to releasing some patches to fix the updates
> to fix
> the patches that will be supposed to fix the problems with SP2.

[Dave K]

I'm with Art and JCT883. I am a network engineer, and let
MS do the autoupdate to SP2 an my home machine. The first
problem I had is now OE6 is asking for the password for
the 'Main Identity' and I have never had or needed a 'Main
Identity' password. After doing some SP2 research and
seeing all of the other reported problems (and I can tell
the real problems from the don't-know-what-I'm-doing
problems), I figure Art's solution is the best. Kudos
Art, there is a reason that no self-respecting corporation
isn't letting SP2 go without putting it through its
paces. I wish I had, but I really don't care all that
much about this home machine.

Dave

>-----Original Message-----
>MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating
problems that came with
>installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
those problems.. A
>smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>"jct883" > wrote in
message
...
>> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>>
>> "Art" wrote:
>>
>> > It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed
all the problems my
>> > system had. Amazing.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>.
>

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

The "self-respecting corporation" have been testing SP-2 for several
months and there are not real surprises for them.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Dave K" > wrote in message
...
> I'm with Art and JCT883. I am a network engineer, and let
> MS do the autoupdate to SP2 an my home machine. The first
> problem I had is now OE6 is asking for the password for
> the 'Main Identity' and I have never had or needed a 'Main
> Identity' password. After doing some SP2 research and
> seeing all of the other reported problems (and I can tell
> the real problems from the don't-know-what-I'm-doing
> problems), I figure Art's solution is the best. Kudos
> Art, there is a reason that no self-respecting corporation
> isn't letting SP2 go without putting it through its
> paces. I wish I had, but I really don't care all that
> much about this home machine.
>
> Dave
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating
> problems that came with
>>installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
> those problems.. A
>>smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>>"jct883" > wrote in
> message
...
>>> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>>>
>>> "Art" wrote:
>>>
>>> > It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed
> all the problems my
>>> > system had. Amazing.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>
>>
>>.
>>

[Ted Zieglar]

"...there is a reason that no self-respecting corporation isn't letting SP2
go without putting it through its paces."

That's correct, but it has nothing to do with your post.

Ted Zieglar

"Dave K" > wrote in message
...
> I'm with Art and JCT883. I am a network engineer, and let
> MS do the autoupdate to SP2 an my home machine. The first
> problem I had is now OE6 is asking for the password for
> the 'Main Identity' and I have never had or needed a 'Main
> Identity' password. After doing some SP2 research and
> seeing all of the other reported problems (and I can tell
> the real problems from the don't-know-what-I'm-doing
> problems), I figure Art's solution is the best. Kudos
> Art, there is a reason that no self-respecting corporation
> isn't letting SP2 go without putting it through its
> paces. I wish I had, but I really don't care all that
> much about this home machine.
>
> Dave
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating
> problems that came with
>>installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
> those problems.. A
>>smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>>"jct883" > wrote in
> message
...
>>> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>>>
>>> "Art" wrote:
>>>
>>> > It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed
> all the problems my
>>> > system had. Amazing.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>
>>
>>.
>>

[dc in AZ]

Wow, what arrogance. You do NOT know what issues Art has had with his system
and to arbitrarily believe MS has NO bugs in this release is truly arrogance
to the extreme. I have installed SP2 and have found very few problems -
however, I am not of the opinion that it is a panacea nor is it perfect (my
download speed dropped to a third of what it was prior to install, for
instance, which is the reason I am in this forum in the first place) and I
WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect them from MS
Software. That's just pragmatic given their track record. To try to bully
Art into saying that he was wrong to "forego the security features of SP2 and
all future XP 'reloaded' releases and trust to luck and his innate computer
skills to avoid malicious software and future problems with Windows" makes an
assumption that MS has the only way to secure your system. Whew, big leap.
Few in the industry would ever consider MS a leader in Security Architecture
and Design. That may change over time, as they are investing heavily there,
but it's a might too early to say SP2 is the XP Release that shows them
joining the elite.

I, also, may find myself uninstalling it and waiting for SP2 w/ fixes
depending on whether I can get my download speeds back to normal! Right now,
I find nothing that points to a fix for my issue.

"Kent W. England [MVP]" wrote:

> jct883 wrote on 12-Sep-2004 5:31 AM:
>
> > Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
> >
> > "Art" wrote:
> >
> >
> >>It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
> >>system had. Amazing.
> >>
>
> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
> and future problems with Windows.
>
> --
> Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security
>

[Ted Zieglar]

"I WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect them from
MS Software."

With an attitude like that, you'll have issues alright but they won't have
anything to do with Microsoft.

Ted Zieglar

"dc in AZ" > wrote in message
...
> Wow, what arrogance. You do NOT know what issues Art has had with his
> system
> and to arbitrarily believe MS has NO bugs in this release is truly
> arrogance
> to the extreme. I have installed SP2 and have found very few problems -
> however, I am not of the opinion that it is a panacea nor is it perfect
> (my
> download speed dropped to a third of what it was prior to install, for
> instance, which is the reason I am in this forum in the first place) and I
> WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect them from
> MS
> Software. That's just pragmatic given their track record. To try to
> bully
> Art into saying that he was wrong to "forego the security features of SP2
> and
> all future XP 'reloaded' releases and trust to luck and his innate
> computer
> skills to avoid malicious software and future problems with Windows" makes
> an
> assumption that MS has the only way to secure your system. Whew, big
> leap.
> Few in the industry would ever consider MS a leader in Security
> Architecture
> and Design. That may change over time, as they are investing heavily
> there,
> but it's a might too early to say SP2 is the XP Release that shows them
> joining the elite.
>
> I, also, may find myself uninstalling it and waiting for SP2 w/ fixes
> depending on whether I can get my download speeds back to normal! Right
> now,
> I find nothing that points to a fix for my issue.
>
> "Kent W. England [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> jct883 wrote on 12-Sep-2004 5:31 AM:
>>
>> > Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>> >
>> > "Art" wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
>> >>system had. Amazing.
>> >>
>>
>> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
>> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
>> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
>> and future problems with Windows.
>>
>> --
>> Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security
>>

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

Sandman wrote:
> MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that
> came with installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
> those problems.. A smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!

Methinks you need to purchase a dictionary. Let me give you a little lesson
in word definition

*Smart* /adj/ clever, witty, astute or shrewd

Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing a
Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd' then you're either
stupid - or a liar. Removing a SP is equally not smart.

If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
have zero problems. OK, I had a problem with Nero, but that wasn't caused by
SP2, it was caused by my lack of updating. For a smooth installation of SP2
it is necessary to do the following: -

1) Defrag the hard drive
2) Scan for viruses
3) Scan for spy/malware
4) Make sure all your software is updated
5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation

If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you have
problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -

What to Know (and Do) Before You Download and Install Windows XP Service
Pack 2
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx

If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame when
something goes wrong. You wouldn't undertake any DIY without first reading
the instructions, and making sure you've taken the necessary precautions
(e.g. you wouldn't solder pipes without wearing goggles, or gloves, to
protect your eyes and hands would you? Because you know that, if you didn't,
you'd most likely end up blind - and/or severely burnt). In the same way,
you need to take precautions before installing a SP. You didn't, so you have
problems.PEBCAK.
--
My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
lose his marbles?

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

Ted Zieglar wrote:
> "I WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect
> them from MS Software."
>
> With an attitude like that, you'll have issues alright but they won't
> have anything to do with Microsoft.
>
> Ted Zieglar

PMSL!! Well said Rocky! Couldn't have put it better myself!



--
My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
lose his marbles?

[Michael W. Ryder]

Miss Perspicacia Tick wrote:

> Sandman wrote:
>
>>MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that
>>came with installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
>>those problems.. A smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>
>
> Methinks you need to purchase a dictionary. Let me give you a little lesson
> in word definition
>
> *Smart* /adj/ clever, witty, astute or shrewd
>
> Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing a
> Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd' then you're either
> stupid - or a liar. Removing a SP is equally not smart.
>
> If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
> have zero problems. OK, I had a problem with Nero, but that wasn't caused by
> SP2, it was caused by my lack of updating. For a smooth installation of SP2
> it is necessary to do the following: -
>
> 1) Defrag the hard drive
> 2) Scan for viruses
> 3) Scan for spy/malware
> 4) Make sure all your software is updated
> 5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
> 6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation
>
> If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you have
> problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -
>
> What to Know (and Do) Before You Download and Install Windows XP Service
> Pack 2
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
>
> If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
> taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame when
> something goes wrong. You wouldn't undertake any DIY without first reading
> the instructions, and making sure you've taken the necessary precautions
> (e.g. you wouldn't solder pipes without wearing goggles, or gloves, to
> protect your eyes and hands would you? Because you know that, if you didn't,
> you'd most likely end up blind - and/or severely burnt). In the same way,
> you need to take precautions before installing a SP. You didn't, so you have
> problems.PEBCAK.


I love how all of you MS lovers keep forgetting NT SP2. That disaster
caught everyone and MS had to pull it. Just because MS has not admitted
there are any problems with XP SP2 does not mean they are not there.
Also most "naive" users have auto update enabled like MS wants them to
have. So they get SP2 and suddenly their computer does not work. They
did not know that they had to spend days looking for obscure patches and
driver updates (if they even knew where to start) before the update was
loaded. Why couldn't MS which has a much better idea of the problems
warned the people before the update that they needed to upgrade this or
that like they do when you first install??

[Testy]

And that is why most of them ate NOT installing SP2 at this time!

Testy

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" > wrote in message
...
> The "self-respecting corporation" have been testing SP-2 for several
> months and there are not real surprises for them.
>
> --
> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
>
>
> "Dave K" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I'm with Art and JCT883. I am a network engineer, and let
>> MS do the autoupdate to SP2 an my home machine. The first
>> problem I had is now OE6 is asking for the password for
>> the 'Main Identity' and I have never had or needed a 'Main
>> Identity' password. After doing some SP2 research and
>> seeing all of the other reported problems (and I can tell
>> the real problems from the don't-know-what-I'm-doing
>> problems), I figure Art's solution is the best. Kudos
>> Art, there is a reason that no self-respecting corporation
>> isn't letting SP2 go without putting it through its
>> paces. I wish I had, but I really don't care all that
>> much about this home machine.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating
>> problems that came with
>>>installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
>> those problems.. A
>>>smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>>>"jct883" > wrote in
>> message
...
>>>> Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
>>>>
>>>> "Art" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed
>> all the problems my
>>>> > system had. Amazing.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>.
>>>
>
>

[Art]

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" > wrote in message
...
> Sandman wrote:
> > MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that
> > came with installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
> > those problems.. A smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>
> Methinks you need to purchase a dictionary. Let me give you a little
lesson
> in word definition
>
> *Smart* /adj/ clever, witty, astute or shrewd
>


If I had been smart I wouldn't have installed SP2 in the first place.


> Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing
a
> Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd' then you're either
> stupid - or a liar. Removing a SP is equally not smart.
>
> If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
> have zero problems. OK, I had a problem with Nero, but that wasn't caused
by
> SP2, it was caused by my lack of updating. For a smooth installation of
SP2
> it is necessary to do the following: -
>
> 1) Defrag the hard drive
> 2) Scan for viruses
> 3) Scan for spy/malware
> 4) Make sure all your software is updated
> 5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
> 6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation
>
> If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you
have
> problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -
>
> What to Know (and Do) Before You Download and Install Windows XP Service
> Pack 2
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx


Just to clarify, do you think the only way someone could have problems with
SP2 is if they hadn't prepared there system properly before installing it?


> If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
> taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame
when
> something goes wrong. You wouldn't undertake any DIY without first reading
> the instructions, and making sure you've taken the necessary precautions
> (e.g. you wouldn't solder pipes without wearing goggles, or gloves, to
> protect your eyes and hands would you? Because you know that, if you
didn't,
> you'd most likely end up blind - and/or severely burnt). In the same way,
> you need to take precautions before installing a SP. You didn't, so you
have
> problems.PEBCAK.
> --
> My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
> lose his marbles?
>
>
>

[Art]

"Ted Zieglar" > wrote in message
...
> With that attitude, there's really nothing else to say except good luck to
> you, my friend. You're going to need lots of it.
>
> Ted Zieglar
>

Ok, thanks.

[bullwinkel J. Moose]

An excellent program to update by. Whether it's MS or any other major
installation.

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" > wrote in message
...
> Sandman wrote:
>> MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that
>> came with installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
>> those problems.. A smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>
> Methinks you need to purchase a dictionary. Let me give you a little
> lesson in word definition
>
> *Smart* /adj/ clever, witty, astute or shrewd
>
> Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing
> a Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd' then you're either
> stupid - or a liar. Removing a SP is equally not smart.
>
> If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
> have zero problems. OK, I had a problem with Nero, but that wasn't caused
> by SP2, it was caused by my lack of updating. For a smooth installation of
> SP2 it is necessary to do the following: -
>
> 1) Defrag the hard drive
> 2) Scan for viruses
> 3) Scan for spy/malware
> 4) Make sure all your software is updated
> 5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
> 6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation
>
> If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you
> have problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -
>
> What to Know (and Do) Before You Download and Install Windows XP Service
> Pack 2
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
>
> If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
> taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame
> when something goes wrong. You wouldn't undertake any DIY without first
> reading the instructions, and making sure you've taken the necessary
> precautions (e.g. you wouldn't solder pipes without wearing goggles, or
> gloves, to protect your eyes and hands would you? Because you know that,
> if you didn't, you'd most likely end up blind - and/or severely burnt). In
> the same way, you need to take precautions before installing a SP. You
> didn't, so you have problems.PEBCAK.
> --
> My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
> lose his marbles?
>
>

[cquirke (MVP Win9x)]

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 07:19:27 +0100, "Miss Perspicacia Tick"

>Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing a
>Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd'

You're being rather presumtuous, assuming that if the OP had adverse
mileage with SP2, it must have been user failure on his side.

FYI, there are several system particularities that can cause SP2 to go
very pear-shaped indeed. Even MS would acknowledge that.

>If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
>have zero problems.

That's not the only reason it worked for you. It's like throwing
darts at a dart board; mostly the darts stick just fine, but sometimes
they hit the wire and bounce off. Maybe your PC is like the big broad
20-point strip and OP's was like the little triple-20 band? YMMV.

>For a smooth installation of SP2
>it is necessary to do the following: -

-3) Make sure this doesn't apply to you...

http://cquirke.mvps.org/sp2intel.htm

....as well as other known caveats

-2) Make sure your hardware is sound
-1) Make sure you are free of active malware
0) Make sure your PC is running properly, free HD space OK

>1) Defrag the hard drive
>2) Scan for viruses
See (-1), do before (1)
>3) Scan for spy/malware
See (-1), do before (1)
>4) Make sure all your software is updated
>5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
>6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation

>Microsoft even spells it out for you: -

They didn't exactly spell out the Prescott factor, and even if you
read (5) as "let's get the latest BIOS", you may still NOT have been
OK for an SP2 install.

There's good reason to NOT make a whole lot of other system changes,
e.g. new BIOS and drivers, at the same time as SP2; muddied
troubleshooting if things go wrong (is it the new BIOS, or is it SP2?)

Please, folks - inscribe this on your forehead:

"I will NOT install a SP on a sick PC, hoping it will fix it!"

That is the real, indefensible, inexcusable stupidity.


>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - -
Never turn your back on an installer program
>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - -

[cquirke (MVP Win9x)]

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:42:50 -0700, "Kent W. England [MVP]"

>Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
>the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
>trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
>and future problems with Windows.

Why not? That's what we've been expected to do since 2001 ;-)



>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Tip Of The Day:
To disable the 'Tip of the Day' feature...
>-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

[Giga]

Miss Tick, why is it that in every post you imply that SP2 has no issues and
that it is always the end user that is at fault? I will add that I have now
installed SP2 onto several machines with mixed results. Hereis the result
that may be of interest to you: installed onto an unprepared machine and it
worked, installed onto a prepared machine and had to reformat the hard drive.
Preparation does not guarantee success and lack thereof does not guarantee
failure.

> If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you have
> problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -
For many end users, it isnt a matter of whether they can be arsed or not, it
is that they do not know. SP2 was built to improve security for the masses,
and the masses are generally illiterate when it comes to system maintenance.
Microsoft should put up warning dialogs on the auto-update installer of SP2
as many people have no idea that it makes so many changes.

> If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
> taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame when
> something goes wrong.
No, you have Microsoft to blame for giving bad advice (turn on
Auto-updates), as they are the experts so why not listen to them? (assuming
you don't know a lot about Microsofts history) Your analogy to the soldering,
most people who solder learn to do so, with information on safety
precautions. All your analogies are like this. SP2 auto-update is for the
people who have no training or knowledge on the issue. Do not make this
comparison.

One more thing, please do not use the dictionary every time to insult the
OP. This is a place for help and support, not to abuse people who have
problems.

[Giga]

How is that a flaw? In the 6 months or whatever that the windows patches are
released, driver and software vendors will also have released patches to
their software. He can download them when he upgrades. The SP2 of today will
be the same of SP2 in the next year, but there will be hotfixes available to
solve the problem (we hope!), and during the waiting time, he can use the
computer (albeit less securely) without problems. Not having SP2 does not
guarantee that you will be a victim of security, and having it does not
guarantee that you will be safe. It just improves your chances (and from the
sounds of it, his chances have played out for him in his current
configuration).

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

> There is a major flaw in your plan.
> Many of the issues are not Microsoft issues as stated by you.
> "for every possible driver on my system"
> Drivers are the responsibility of the hardware manufacturer and not
> Microsoft.
> Software patches are also the responsibility of the manufacturers and
> not Microsoft.
> If you ever intend to install SP-2, you need to research your hardware
> and software for compatibility issues.
> Start with the issues you already know and from there check the
> manufacturers.
>
> Simply waiting and doing nothing will accomplish nothing since the
> SP-2 of today is identical to the SP-2 of next year.
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm
>
> --
> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
>
>
> "Art" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Nope, what Art has done is decide that after spending 4 weeks or so
> > of
> > tweaking every possible configuration setting and scouring the
> > internet
> > trying to find patches and updates for every possible driver on my
> > system
> > and finding that I was still no closer to fixing the mess caused by
> > SP2 that
> > I'd rather take my chances without any of it's supposed extra
> > security
> > features for now. I already have a hardware firewall and I've never
> > had any
> > problems in the past. Maybe the extra security features of SP2
> > would be
> > nice but I think it's more important to have a computer that can
> > actually be
> > used. I might give SP2 a try again in 6 months or so, by then
> > Microsoft
> > should have got round to releasing some patches to fix the updates
> > to fix
> > the patches that will be supposed to fix the problems with SP2.
>
>
>

[Giga]

Won't have anything to do with MS? How can you be sure of that? How can a
computer detect an attitude and crash accordingly? If he suspects MS problems
and waits for MS patches, that will not increase his non-MS issues.

"Ted Zieglar" wrote:

> "I WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect them from
> MS Software."
>
> With an attitude like that, you'll have issues alright but they won't have
> anything to do with Microsoft.
>
> Ted Zieglar
>
> "dc in AZ" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Wow, what arrogance. You do NOT know what issues Art has had with his
> > system
> > and to arbitrarily believe MS has NO bugs in this release is truly
> > arrogance
> > to the extreme. I have installed SP2 and have found very few problems -
> > however, I am not of the opinion that it is a panacea nor is it perfect
> > (my
> > download speed dropped to a third of what it was prior to install, for
> > instance, which is the reason I am in this forum in the first place) and I
> > WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect them from
> > MS
> > Software. That's just pragmatic given their track record. To try to
> > bully
> > Art into saying that he was wrong to "forego the security features of SP2
> > and
> > all future XP 'reloaded' releases and trust to luck and his innate
> > computer
> > skills to avoid malicious software and future problems with Windows" makes
> > an
> > assumption that MS has the only way to secure your system. Whew, big
> > leap.
> > Few in the industry would ever consider MS a leader in Security
> > Architecture
> > and Design. That may change over time, as they are investing heavily
> > there,
> > but it's a might too early to say SP2 is the XP Release that shows them
> > joining the elite.
> >
> > I, also, may find myself uninstalling it and waiting for SP2 w/ fixes
> > depending on whether I can get my download speeds back to normal! Right
> > now,
> > I find nothing that points to a fix for my issue.
> >
> > "Kent W. England [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >> jct883 wrote on 12-Sep-2004 5:31 AM:
> >>
> >> > Please explain, I 'm a newbie and do not understand.
> >> >
> >> > "Art" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>It's called "uninstall", it's just completely fixed all the problems my
> >> >>system had. Amazing.
> >> >>
> >>
> >> Rather than research and fix his SP2 problems, Art has decided to forego
> >> the security features of SP2 and all future XP "reloaded" releases and
> >> trust to luck and his innate computer skills to avoid malicious software
> >> and future problems with Windows.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kent W. England, Microsoft MVP for Windows Security
> >>
>
>

[Giga]

> PMSL!! Well said Rocky! Couldn't have put it better myself!

Because you are too arrogant in believing SP2 is perfect. It is an
improvement, but again it is NOT perfect.

"Miss Perspicacia Tick" wrote:

> Ted Zieglar wrote:
> > "I WILL have issues as time goes on. In fact, I've come to expect
> > them from MS Software."
> >
> > With an attitude like that, you'll have issues alright but they won't
> > have anything to do with Microsoft.
> >
> > Ted Zieglar
>
> PMSL!! Well said Rocky! Couldn't have put it better myself!
>
>
>
> --
> My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
> lose his marbles?
>
>
>
>

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

Giga wrote:
>> PMSL!! Well said Rocky! Couldn't have put it better myself!
>
> Because you are too arrogant in believing SP2 is perfect. It is an
> improvement, but again it is NOT perfect.

Er, excuse me?! Where did I state that "SP2 is perfect"? I have never stated
that, nor will I state that, because I know that it isn't. There are certain
types of CPU it doesn't like (Prescotts being the model cited most often).



--
My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
lose his marbles?

[Carl G]

You are probably one out of one million people that would wear gogles and
gloves to solder pipes.

--
Carl G
"Miss Perspicacia Tick" > wrote in message
...
> Sandman wrote:
>> MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that
>> came with installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
>> those problems.. A smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>
> Methinks you need to purchase a dictionary. Let me give you a little
> lesson in word definition
>
> *Smart* /adj/ clever, witty, astute or shrewd
>
> Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing
> a Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd' then you're either
> stupid - or a liar. Removing a SP is equally not smart.
>
> If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
> have zero problems. OK, I had a problem with Nero, but that wasn't caused
> by SP2, it was caused by my lack of updating. For a smooth installation of
> SP2 it is necessary to do the following: -
>
> 1) Defrag the hard drive
> 2) Scan for viruses
> 3) Scan for spy/malware
> 4) Make sure all your software is updated
> 5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
> 6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation
>
> If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you
> have problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -
>
> What to Know (and Do) Before You Download and Install Windows XP Service
> Pack 2
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
>
> If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
> taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame
> when something goes wrong. You wouldn't undertake any DIY without first
> reading the instructions, and making sure you've taken the necessary
> precautions (e.g. you wouldn't solder pipes without wearing goggles, or
> gloves, to protect your eyes and hands would you? Because you know that,
> if you didn't, you'd most likely end up blind - and/or severely burnt). In
> the same way, you need to take precautions before installing a SP. You
> didn't, so you have problems.PEBCAK.
> --
> My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
> lose his marbles?
>
>

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

He never said anything to suggest he was going to research.
Simply waiting for the patches will not be enough.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Giga" > wrote in message
...
> How is that a flaw?

[Giga]

> Er, excuse me?! Where did I state that "SP2 is perfect"? I have never stated
> that, nor will I state that, because I know that it isn't. There are certain
> types of CPU it doesn't like (Prescotts being the model cited most often).

If you know that it isn't perfect, why do you always defend SP2 and say it
is the end users fault? In some cases, yes it is, but not in all cases. You
don't need to be so aggressive on this stance. Instead of blaming them, ask
what they did and offer suggestions. You seem to be frustrating a lot of OPs
that ask for help.

[Giga]

Actually, he said he did research for the latest 3rd party drivers and
updates. I assume (correctly I hope) that he will do the same next time he
tries SP2. You are correct in that he did not explicitly state that he will,
but it was implied.

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

> He never said anything to suggest he was going to research.
> Simply waiting for the patches will not be enough.
>
> --
> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
>
>
> "Giga" > wrote in message
> ...
> > How is that a flaw?
>
>
>

[yeloduke]

If you can't be 'arsed' to do that, then don't come whining here when you
have
problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -

Freudian Slip
Spell check missed that one. Ha Ha




"Miss Perspicacia Tick" > wrote in message
...
> Sandman wrote:
>> MY guess is, this person had some of the frustrating problems that
>> came with installing SP2 and Uninstalled it, thereby solving all
>> those problems.. A smart man.. And clever to put it the way he did!
>
> Methinks you need to purchase a dictionary. Let me give you a little
> lesson in word definition
>
> *Smart* /adj/ clever, witty, astute or shrewd
>
> Now if you can tell me that failing to prepare a system before installing
> a Service Pack makes one 'clever, astute, or shrewd' then you're either
> stupid - or a liar. Removing a SP is equally not smart.
>
> If you fail to prepare - prepare to fail. I didn't and - guess what?! - I
> have zero problems. OK, I had a problem with Nero, but that wasn't caused
> by SP2, it was caused by my lack of updating. For a smooth installation of
> SP2 it is necessary to do the following: -
>
> 1) Defrag the hard drive
> 2) Scan for viruses
> 3) Scan for spy/malware
> 4) Make sure all your software is updated
> 5) Make sure you have the latest drivers for all your hardware
> 6) Disable your AVP/firewall before installation
>
> If you can't be arsed to do that, then don't come whining here when you
> have problems. Microsoft even spells it out for you: -
>
> What to Know (and Do) Before You Download and Install Windows XP Service
> Pack 2
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
>
> If you rush headlong into something, without reading the instructions and
> taking the necessary precautions, then you only have yourself to blame
> when something goes wrong. You wouldn't undertake any DIY without first
> reading the instructions, and making sure you've taken the necessary
> precautions (e.g. you wouldn't solder pipes without wearing goggles, or
> gloves, to protect your eyes and hands would you? Because you know that,
> if you didn't, you'd most likely end up blind - and/or severely burnt). In
> the same way, you need to take precautions before installing a SP. You
> didn't, so you have problems.PEBCAK.
> --
> My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
> lose his marbles?
>
>

[Lou]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 22:05:03 -0700, "Giga" >
wrote:

>> Er, excuse me?! Where did I state that "SP2 is perfect"? I have never stated
>> that, nor will I state that, because I know that it isn't. There are certain
>> types of CPU it doesn't like (Prescotts being the model cited most often).
>
>If you know that it isn't perfect, why do you always defend SP2 and say it
>is the end users fault? In some cases, yes it is, but not in all cases. You
>don't need to be so aggressive on this stance. Instead of blaming them, ask
>what they did and offer suggestions. You seem to be frustrating a lot of OPs
>that ask for help.

She heasn't helped anybody to date. Why would you expect her to start with this
subject?

[Giga]

> She heasn't helped anybody to date. Why would you expect her to start with
this
> subject?

Good point.