SP2 drove me to open source

[velozoom30]

Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the SP2
and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of programming
(I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with you
and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am browsing
and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was
downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!


I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a single
piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering some
applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine I
have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving away
from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
Windows infrastructure.

I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the proverbial
writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe it
won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational IT
person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.

Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

[Testy]

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:55:03 -0800, velozoom30 wrote:

> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the SP2
> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of programming
> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with you
> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am browsing
> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was
> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!
>
>
> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the proverbial
> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe it
> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational IT
> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>
> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.


AMEN! Brother. I made the switch a couple of months ago. I will NEVER look
back.

Testy

[Usingthis]

"Testy" > wrote in message
. ..
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:55:03 -0800, velozoom30 wrote:
>
>> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
>> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
>> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
>> SP2
>> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
>> programming
>> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with
>> you
>> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
>> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am
>> browsing
>> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c
>> standards
>> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0
>> was
>> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available?
>> Hallelujiah!
>>
>>
>> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
>> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
>> proverbial
>> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe
>> it
>> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational
>> IT
>> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>>
>> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.
>
>
> AMEN! Brother. I made the switch a couple of months ago. I will NEVER look
> back.
>
> Testy
>
>

Then why are either of you in this Microsoft newsgroup?

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

You have to wonder..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"Usingthis" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Testy" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:55:03 -0800, velozoom30 wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to
>>> open
>>> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but
>>> some
>>> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
>>> SP2
>>> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
>>> programming
>>> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with
>>> you
>>> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
>>> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am
>>> browsing
>>> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c
>>> standards
>>> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0
>>> was
>>> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available?
>>> Hallelujiah!
>>>
>>>
>>> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
>>> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
>>> proverbial
>>> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe
>>> it
>>> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational
>>> IT
>>> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>>>
>>> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.
>>
>>
>> AMEN! Brother. I made the switch a couple of months ago. I will NEVER
>> look
>> back.
>>
>> Testy
>>
>>
>
> Then why are either of you in this Microsoft newsgroup?
>
>

[spodosaurus]

Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
> You have to wonder..
>

He may have to support XP on his home network or for clients. I know
that is a familiar scenario.

--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo

I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my
neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in
hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone
marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow
transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

[Testy]

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 23:49:26 +0800, spodosaurus wrote:

> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>> You have to wonder..
>>
>
> He may have to support XP on his home network or for clients. I know
> that is a familiar scenario.

EXACTLY! Work involves Windows, my PERSONAL choice is LINUX.

Testy

[Testy]

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:45:57 -0500, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:

> You have to wonder..

That's the problem with MS NO IMAGINATION and can't see beyong their nose.

Testy

[velozoom30]

"spodosaurus" wrote:


> He may have to support XP on his home network or for clients. I know
> that is a familiar scenario.

Of course I do. This is obvious in the following quote from my original
post-

"It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering some
applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine I
have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving away
from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
Windows infrastructure. "

My workplace is all Windows save for some of our graphics systems (Macs) and
the boxes that have to do the most processing for weather forecasting and
modeling (Red Hat). This was all before my time but I am hoping to bring in
a lot more Penguin boxes in the near future.

ANd what better place for an anti-MS rant than on an MS sponsored board? If
I go to a Linux board I would be preaching to the choir, would I not? What
sense is there in ranting to peeps that already agree with you?
lol.....silly MS peeps.

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

spod

His words.. "and specifically the security center because that horrid piece
of programming (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and
frustrated with you and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and
will soon be migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin."

He only had to ask..

"If I am browsing and come across some content that will only work in your
non-W3c standards compliant browser, I refuse to view it."

His loss..

"I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a
single
piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering some
applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine I
have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving away
from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
Windows infrastructure."

Lets hope that the learning curve that he is about to negotiate won't put
his TV Station off the air.. the bosses may not appreciate that.. I am not
suggesting that an X86 ported UNIX OS doesn't have a place in computing..

"I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the proverbial
writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe it
won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational IT
person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice."

Not nice.. this is almost wishing that we all have problems with Windows,
and that Windows is a bad thing.. he has much to learn, and it's going to
hit him in one big heap if and when his company changes to Linux..

"Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me."

This is not a hot line directly to Bill Gates..

This guy is a system administrator (allegedly)..


--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"spodosaurus" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>> You have to wonder..
>>
>
> He may have to support XP on his home network or for clients. I know that
> is a familiar scenario.
>
> --
> spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo
>
> I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my
> neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in
> hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone
> marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow
> transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor:
> http://www.abmdr.org.au/
> http://www.marrow.org/

[Charles Blair]

I have worked at 5 different companies in my years of IT ranging from just a
dozen workstations to almost 1000.

I have gone through 6 NT4.0 service packs, 4 2000 service packs, and 2 XP
service packs.

And never once have I run into the problems you described in this thread.

I will admit that there have been very infrequent times where an application
is not compatible with a newer service pack

But if you do your research and testing correctly, then just don't apply the
service pack until the application vendor gets caught up.

If the vendor is too slow, or refuses to upgrade their product, then you
find a different vendor that will.

I don't think your problem is with MS products and if you proceed to Linux
you will probably run into the same situations.

The philosophy behind running any network (MS or Novell or Linux ... etc.)
is that the infrastructure drives the applications, not the other way
around.

In laymen's terms: When the tires are bald on the car, you buy new tires
.... not a new car.

The sooner a Systems Administrator learns this, the sooner he/she will have
a stable network

Good luck with Linux ... you will need it.

Charles

"Testy" > wrote in message
. ..
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:45:57 -0500, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>
> > You have to wonder..
>
> That's the problem with MS NO IMAGINATION and can't see beyong their nose.
>
> Testy
>
>

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Testy

I worked for a company that used UNIX, Linux and Windows.. each OS had its
place.. no argument there..

BUT WHY do LINUX converts feel the need to rant here.. if you want t change
to Linux, do it, but do it quietly.. we don't care what you use as long as
you are happy..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"Testy" > wrote in message
. ..
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:45:57 -0500, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
>
>> You have to wonder..
>
> That's the problem with MS NO IMAGINATION and can't see beyong their nose.
>
> Testy
>
>

[Crash Override]

"velozoom30" wrote:

> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the SP2
> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of programming
> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with you
> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am browsing
> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was
> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!
>
>
> I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
> dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a single
> piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
> graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
> with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering some
> applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine I
> have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving away
> from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
> Windows infrastructure.
>
> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the proverbial
> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe it
> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational IT
> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>
> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.


Have a nice trip, see ya later buh bye. If the penguin works for you and
you are happy with it, more power to ya. As someone else pointed out, if
proper testing is done it works out better than going whole hog the day the
SP comes out. Oh well, to each their own.

[uggabugga]

I can't imagine why so many people have a problem with SP2. I purchased the
full OEM version with SP2 a month ago and have no problems with my brand new
machine. Besides the top of the line Dell XPS for $3,000, it's the fastest
machine I've ever seen for one third of the cost of a Dell.

"Charles Blair" wrote:

> I have worked at 5 different companies in my years of IT ranging from just a
> dozen workstations to almost 1000.
>
> I have gone through 6 NT4.0 service packs, 4 2000 service packs, and 2 XP
> service packs.
>
> And never once have I run into the problems you described in this thread.
>
> I will admit that there have been very infrequent times where an application
> is not compatible with a newer service pack
>
> But if you do your research and testing correctly, then just don't apply the
> service pack until the application vendor gets caught up.
>
> If the vendor is too slow, or refuses to upgrade their product, then you
> find a different vendor that will.
>
> I don't think your problem is with MS products and if you proceed to Linux
> you will probably run into the same situations.
>
> The philosophy behind running any network (MS or Novell or Linux ... etc.)
> is that the infrastructure drives the applications, not the other way
> around.
>
> In laymen's terms: When the tires are bald on the car, you buy new tires
> .... not a new car.
>
> The sooner a Systems Administrator learns this, the sooner he/she will have
> a stable network
>
> Good luck with Linux ... you will need it.
>
> Charles
>
> "Testy" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:45:57 -0500, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) wrote:
> >
> > > You have to wonder..
> >
> > That's the problem with MS NO IMAGINATION and can't see beyong their nose.
> >
> > Testy
> >
> >
>
>
>

[velozoom30]

"Mike Hall (MS-MVP)" wrote:


> "If I am browsing and come across some content that will only work in your
> non-W3c standards compliant browser, I refuse to view it."
>
> His loss..

Not really. If I choose not to view it then I don't see it as a loss. This
is of course in my personal use, not at my workplace.


> Lets hope that the learning curve that he is about to negotiate won't put
> his TV Station off the air.. the bosses may not appreciate that.. I am not
> suggesting that an X86 ported UNIX OS doesn't have a place in computing..

While I am sure you aren't truly worried if we went off the air the learning
curve, steep as it surely will be for myself and others, will be negotiated
properly. This is a project only in the seminal stages. It's been tossed
around by my predecessors in the past but the administration never got behind
it. After the recent SP2 debacle, they are talking to me about it. I don't
expect to have anything more than a test environment running within 9mo to a
year and actual migrations may take a lot longer. Ever try to train Windows
peeps to use something different? That is what scares me the most. This is
the problem and it was a problem with me- we get so used to something that
change becomes painful. Change, however, is inevitable and I think it's time
for a change, even a paradigm shift if you will.


> Not nice.. this is almost wishing that we all have problems with Windows,
> and that Windows is a bad thing.. he has much to learn, and it's going to
> hit him in one big heap if and when his company changes to Linux..


Love your pedantic tone, it makes me giggle. I don't think you can assume
anything about how much I do or don't know about Linux and operating system
migration cost-analysis from the few, limited comments I have made here.
Even if you could, my post was not so much about the technical problems I had
it was about the tecnical problems finally winning me over to the open source
side. Do I expect that even if my station went completely to Linux in one
fell swoop that I would be able to sit back in my chair and relax all day?
Of course not. But I do read the literature and I see some big companies
making moves to open source, I see MS responding with advertising campaigns
because they are scared and are starting to feel a small hit in the
pocketboook, and I see that MS is not responsive to my needs. I also see the
attitude of MS as it is presented through its products.

There is no clearer example of that attitude than Internet Explorer. Billy
and his gang have thumbed their noses at the rest of the WWW by refusing to
bring IE into compliance with the W3C standards. When I build a website I
build it to W3C standards then I have to backtrack and make it usuable for
IE. It's the arrogance I hate. It's understandable given the market share
that MS/IE have, but it is no less offensive just because mose people use MS
products. Human history has shown that people, in general, aren't all that
bright so the fact that most people do something is in no way an indication
that that is in any way the right, best, or appropriate thing to do.

It's the same with SP2, especially with the Security Center if you want to
talk about end-user complications. Who the hell thought it was a good idea
to have Windows firewall turned on by default? For a home user who has no
common sense, perhaps it's ok to assume that this is a good idea but WinXP
has huge saturation in the business world and there it is NOT a good idea.
That bloody firewall has to be turned off with Admin priveleges and FUBARed
so many of my applications I probably couldn't list them all off the top of
my head. Did MS not take that this thing might affect business applications
into account? Yes, it's a small example and easily fixed, if not quickly
when you are talking 300 workstations and group policy through AD won't even
shut the bloody thing down, but it's a great example of MS not knowing who
their end user is. Isn't it better to let people choose? Isn't it better to
give them the power to turn it on or not? Give them the information but leave
the final choice to the user.

In the end, it's about choice. I see MS limiting my choices and so I will
move myself, and my company if I can, to a different way of doing things. We
will, and have, consulted with experts, gotten second opinions and are
searching for more, and hoepfully the suits will find it an advantageous way
to go.


> This is not a hot line directly to Bill Gates..

NO WAY!!! REALLY?!?!?!?

And here I thought my sarcasm was so blatant that a child would read it in
my post......

The only direct line to Billie Bob Gates anymore is the bottom line of the
quarterly financial statement. Maybe, possibly, perhaps at one time Billie
was about the software and the bringing about the revolution he most
certainly had a big hand in but for many years it's become about MS and
making MS bigger better and badder than anyone and at the expense of anyone
and anything that gets in the way of that goal. There is a reason why US and
European courts are finding MS guilty of monopolistic practices. Anyone who
stifles opposing viewpoints is evil.

I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend with my life
your right to say it. Famous words that have been all but forgotten by some
people.


> Mike Hall
> MVP - Windows Shell/user


MVP- and you aren't biased? Your whole career is probably based on Bill
Gates' stuff so of course you defend him.

This is so much fun, lol

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

If SP-2 "bolluxed up so many systems at my station" what did they have in
common?
Since you have many computers, did you test SP-2 on a small sampling before
installing?
Was all the software and hardware compatible with SP-2 as verified by the
manufacturer?

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
In memory of our dear friend, MVP Alex Nichol
http://www.dts-l.org


"velozoom30" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
> SP2
> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
> programming
> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with
> you
> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am
> browsing
> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0
> was
> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available?
> Hallelujiah!
>
>
> I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
> dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a
> single
> piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
> graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
> with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering
> some
> applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine
> I
> have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving
> away
> from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
> Windows infrastructure.
>
> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
> proverbial
> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe
> it
> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational
> IT
> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>
> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

[velozoom30]

> You mentioned 9 months to setup a test environment, well, if you were
> serious it would take about a month and then schedule a change over during
> the next month, at least that's our experience with under 500 users.
>

Because this is the speed the administration here moves at. i have no
control over that. And there are serious budgetary issues as well. I will
consifer myself luck if I have a definitive answer within a year.

[Don Taylor]

>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:55:03 -0800, velozoom30 wrote:
>>>> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to
>>>> open source applications.

>> "Testy" > wrote in message
>>> AMEN! Brother. I made the switch a couple of months ago. I will NEVER
>>> look back.

>"Usingthis" > wrote in message
>> Then why are either of you in this Microsoft newsgroup?

"Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)" > writes:
>You have to wonder..

Marketing and particularly sales folks can easily tell you the
answer to your question, if you **** off a customer sufficiently
they will carry a grudge against you, and tell other customers,
for a long long time.

Me, I still use Windows, I just wish they would fix the problems.

[Don Taylor]

Leythos > writes:
>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:03:03 -0800, velozoom30 wrote:
>> ANd what better place for an anti-MS rant than on an MS sponsored board?
>> If I go to a Linux board I would be preaching to the choir, would I
>> not? What sense is there in ranting to peeps that already agree with
>> you? lol.....silly MS peeps.

>No one really minds a rant about anything MS as long as you back it up
>with details so that people can understand the problem - to just state the
>SP2 screwed up everything so you went to Linux just looks like a trolling,
>even if it isn't.

That certainly seems fair.

Ok, hundreds of people reported in this newsgroup the problem with
Windows Explorer locking up or crashing starting immediately after
SP2 was installed. (Likely a far larger number saw this and have
no idea that this newsgroup even exists, or want to post here)
Almost none of those folks ever reported finding a solution to
this problem. The modest number who did report a solution seem
like some of them might not have had the same problem that all the
rest had. Nobody has a clue how to fix this problem.

>The fact that you had problems is well worth discussing, as other will
>learn from your solutions, but it's all in the details. If you had posted
>the products that you were having problems with we might have been able to
>assist before you went to production.

MVP have no idea how to fix this. Microsoft support folks have no
idea how to fix this. They finally stopped answering email after
I had done everything they had asked for months, often doing the
same thing repeatedly, because apparently they had lost track that
they had already asked me to do something more than once.

SP2 broke something in Windows Explorer and nobody knows what it
was, or they aren't telling. Search the group for the hundreds
of summary postings I made in response to people posting this
particular problem, you can then see the very similar descriptions
of all these folks, and that pretty much none of the claimed
causes fixed this for almost anyone.

Maybe as you suggest you can assist or people will learn from this.

Thank you

[Gordon]

Don Taylor wrote:
|| SP2 broke something in Windows Explorer and nobody knows what it
|| was,

But that's ONLY for those who posted the problem - it's like going to the
doctor, you only see the few who are ill, not the millions who are NOT
ill.....
SP2 has been successfully installed on MILLIONS of computers!

--
Interim Systems and Management Accounting
Gordon Burgess-Parker
Director
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

LOL.. love the way that you gave one impression in your first post, then
added all of the stuff about your company using Macs and Linux already in
your second post..

I have been into Linux newsgroups and have not seen Windows users taking
shots at the people in there.. so why do Linux users/lovers feel the need to
do it in here?

Just use whatever your preference is and let it go at that..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"velozoom30" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike Hall (MS-MVP)" wrote:
>
>
>> "If I am browsing and come across some content that will only work in
>> your
>> non-W3c standards compliant browser, I refuse to view it."
>>
>> His loss..
>
> Not really. If I choose not to view it then I don't see it as a loss.
> This
> is of course in my personal use, not at my workplace.
>
>
>> Lets hope that the learning curve that he is about to negotiate won't put
>> his TV Station off the air.. the bosses may not appreciate that.. I am
>> not
>> suggesting that an X86 ported UNIX OS doesn't have a place in computing..
>
> While I am sure you aren't truly worried if we went off the air the
> learning
> curve, steep as it surely will be for myself and others, will be
> negotiated
> properly. This is a project only in the seminal stages. It's been tossed
> around by my predecessors in the past but the administration never got
> behind
> it. After the recent SP2 debacle, they are talking to me about it. I
> don't
> expect to have anything more than a test environment running within 9mo to
> a
> year and actual migrations may take a lot longer. Ever try to train
> Windows
> peeps to use something different? That is what scares me the most. This
> is
> the problem and it was a problem with me- we get so used to something that
> change becomes painful. Change, however, is inevitable and I think it's
> time
> for a change, even a paradigm shift if you will.
>
>
>> Not nice.. this is almost wishing that we all have problems with Windows,
>> and that Windows is a bad thing.. he has much to learn, and it's going to
>> hit him in one big heap if and when his company changes to Linux..
>
>
> Love your pedantic tone, it makes me giggle. I don't think you can assume
> anything about how much I do or don't know about Linux and operating
> system
> migration cost-analysis from the few, limited comments I have made here.
> Even if you could, my post was not so much about the technical problems I
> had
> it was about the tecnical problems finally winning me over to the open
> source
> side. Do I expect that even if my station went completely to Linux in one
> fell swoop that I would be able to sit back in my chair and relax all day?
> Of course not. But I do read the literature and I see some big companies
> making moves to open source, I see MS responding with advertising
> campaigns
> because they are scared and are starting to feel a small hit in the
> pocketboook, and I see that MS is not responsive to my needs. I also see
> the
> attitude of MS as it is presented through its products.
>
> There is no clearer example of that attitude than Internet Explorer.
> Billy
> and his gang have thumbed their noses at the rest of the WWW by refusing
> to
> bring IE into compliance with the W3C standards. When I build a website I
> build it to W3C standards then I have to backtrack and make it usuable for
> IE. It's the arrogance I hate. It's understandable given the market
> share
> that MS/IE have, but it is no less offensive just because mose people use
> MS
> products. Human history has shown that people, in general, aren't all
> that
> bright so the fact that most people do something is in no way an
> indication
> that that is in any way the right, best, or appropriate thing to do.
>
> It's the same with SP2, especially with the Security Center if you want to
> talk about end-user complications. Who the hell thought it was a good
> idea
> to have Windows firewall turned on by default? For a home user who has no
> common sense, perhaps it's ok to assume that this is a good idea but WinXP
> has huge saturation in the business world and there it is NOT a good idea.
> That bloody firewall has to be turned off with Admin priveleges and
> FUBARed
> so many of my applications I probably couldn't list them all off the top
> of
> my head. Did MS not take that this thing might affect business
> applications
> into account? Yes, it's a small example and easily fixed, if not quickly
> when you are talking 300 workstations and group policy through AD won't
> even
> shut the bloody thing down, but it's a great example of MS not knowing who
> their end user is. Isn't it better to let people choose? Isn't it better
> to
> give them the power to turn it on or not? Give them the information but
> leave
> the final choice to the user.
>
> In the end, it's about choice. I see MS limiting my choices and so I will
> move myself, and my company if I can, to a different way of doing things.
> We
> will, and have, consulted with experts, gotten second opinions and are
> searching for more, and hoepfully the suits will find it an advantageous
> way
> to go.
>
>
>> This is not a hot line directly to Bill Gates..
>
> NO WAY!!! REALLY?!?!?!?
>
> And here I thought my sarcasm was so blatant that a child would read it in
> my post......
>
> The only direct line to Billie Bob Gates anymore is the bottom line of the
> quarterly financial statement. Maybe, possibly, perhaps at one time
> Billie
> was about the software and the bringing about the revolution he most
> certainly had a big hand in but for many years it's become about MS and
> making MS bigger better and badder than anyone and at the expense of
> anyone
> and anything that gets in the way of that goal. There is a reason why US
> and
> European courts are finding MS guilty of monopolistic practices. Anyone
> who
> stifles opposing viewpoints is evil.
>
> I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend with my life
> your right to say it. Famous words that have been all but forgotten by
> some
> people.
>
>
>> Mike Hall
>> MVP - Windows Shell/user
>
>
> MVP- and you aren't biased? Your whole career is probably based on Bill
> Gates' stuff so of course you defend him.
>
> This is so much fun, lol
>

[Jone Doe]

"Don Taylor" > wrote in message
...
>>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 05:55:03 -0800, velozoom30 wrote:
>>>>> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to
>>>>> open source applications.
>
>>> "Testy" > wrote in message
>>>> AMEN! Brother. I made the switch a couple of months ago. I will NEVER
>>>> look back.
>
>>"Usingthis" > wrote in message
>>> Then why are either of you in this Microsoft newsgroup?
>
> "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)" > writes:
>>You have to wonder..
>
> Marketing and particularly sales folks can easily tell you the
> answer to your question, if you **** off a customer sufficiently
> they will carry a grudge against you, and tell other customers,
> for a long long time.
>
> Me, I still use Windows, I just wish they would fix the problems.

I suppose we will eventually see him on a Linux group complaining and going
back to Windows.

[Tom]

"velozoom30" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
> SP2
> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
> programming
> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with
> you
> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am
> browsing
> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0
> was
> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available?
> Hallelujiah!
>
>
> I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
> dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a
> single
> piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
> graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
> with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering
> some
> applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine
> I
> have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving
> away
> from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
> Windows infrastructure.
>
> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
> proverbial
> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe
> it
> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational
> IT
> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>
> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

Well, you have all the right to make a change, but if you're an
administrator in the business type you claim, you wouldn't have come here
and made it a point to a public MS newsgroup; you would have simply made the
change and went on with your corporate life. Other than any real technical
reasons why you changed, it sounds more like hate than anything, regarding
your rant.

[NoNoBadDog!]

"velozoom30" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
> SP2
> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
> programming
> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with
> you
> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am
> browsing
> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0
> was
> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available?
> Hallelujiah!
>
>
> I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
> dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a
> single
> piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
> graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
> with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering
> some
> applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine
> I
> have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving
> away
> from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
> Windows infrastructure.
>
> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
> proverbial
> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe
> it
> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational
> IT
> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>
> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

I feel sorry for the TV station. If you cannot handle something simple as a
Service Pack, you don't deserve the title. Goodbye, good luck, and good
riddance. You won't be missed. One less clueless end user.
SP2 does not cause any problems for over 95% of those who install it. For
those that do have problems, it is *ALWAYS* due to a flakey installation of
windows, or a system that has *NOT* been properly maintained. In addition,
some choose not to follow the installation instructions, and this can result
in system instability.

Enjoy your foray into open source. If you think you had problems with a
Windows environment, just wait until you deploy your new open source
environment...you have no idea what headaches you are getting yourself into.
We won't even touch upon the subject of having to re-educate your users on
the changes that the move to open source will bring, and the fact that they
will not be able to do the things they could in the Windows environment in
the same fashion.

I give you 6 months and you'll find yourself coming back to a MS
environment, simply for ease of troubleshooting and integration.

Bobby.

[velozoom30]

"Mike Hall (MS-MVP)" wrote:

> LOL.. love the way that you gave one impression in your first post, then
> added all of the stuff about your company using Macs and Linux already in
> your second post..

Hmm...I think the only number I actally used was that there are about 300
workstations here. 4 of them are Macs and 3 of them are Linux. Everything
else, and 99.999999% of my job, is on Windows boxes.

[Don Taylor]

"Gordon" > writes:
>Don Taylor wrote:
>|| SP2 broke something in Windows Explorer and nobody knows what it
>|| was,

>But that's ONLY for those who posted the problem - it's like going to the
>doctor, you only see the few who are ill, not the millions who are NOT
>ill.....
>SP2 has been successfully installed on MILLIONS of computers!

Absolutely, and that tells me I'm not sick how?

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Velo

There was no mention of numbers in your original post, and absolutely no
mention of Linux and MacOS used at your workplace.. that's ZERO %..

--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm





"velozoom30" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Mike Hall (MS-MVP)" wrote:
>
>> LOL.. love the way that you gave one impression in your first post, then
>> added all of the stuff about your company using Macs and Linux already in
>> your second post..
>
> Hmm...I think the only number I actally used was that there are about 300
> workstations here. 4 of them are Macs and 3 of them are Linux.
> Everything
> else, and 99.999999% of my job, is on Windows boxes.

[Don Taylor]

Leythos > writes:

>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 15:18:56 -0600, Don Taylor wrote:
>>
>> I hope something in this helps someone. But it appears that the
>> large majority of people never get a fix for the "Windows Explorer"
>> problem. If someone tells you to try something and it doesn't help
>> then please make a posting so we can start accumulating what
>> suggestions don't do any good. And if someone tells you something
>> that does work then please report it.

>Based on the description of your problem and that you got a simple
>macro-virus from your friend, I would suggest that you at least were
>partially compromised, yea, you've herd it before, but all modern
>antivirus scanners do Macro-Viruses with ease. That also seems to indicate
>you were not running any AV software, were you?

It is true, that was a simple macro virus. If it really matters, the
macro actually never got to run on my machine, someone else realized
it was infected before I opened the sheet on my computer, but the file
had been on my box so I counted that as an infection. And I made sure
that never ever happened to me again.

That virus was ancient history, long before XP or even the current
computer or any of the current problems, I was just trying to satisfy
those who immediately begin chanting "it is all viruses and spyware"
when any problem is described. We had a wall around the outside.
We never did track down where he got it from. The guess was that
he got it from someone outside and carried it in on a floppy somehow.

>As for Explorer issues - you talked about 2000, then Sp2, is this problem
>computer a dual boot? Is it a upgraded 2000 machine that is now XP?

My apologies that I wasn't clear, that was the YEAR 2000, not the OS 2000.
And, nope, brand new bare bare hardware with XP installed on fresh drives.
We made the jump from 98SE, put the old machines on the shelf, and were
going to go to ME but before that was installed we went to XP.

>As for your problem, I suspect that it's Microsoft Scripting that's the
>problem:
>http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=C717D943-7E4B-4622-86EB-95A22B832CAA&displaylang=en

>the link may not work if it wraps, but that's the download for XP's
>scripting engine, reinstall it and see if that helps.

Ok, I'm up for anything, nobody else has a clue how to fix this, I've
been told the silliest things are definitely absolutely positiviely
the cause of all this, just today we still see someone chanting "the
only people who have problems with SP2 are the ones who don't know what
they are doing and did it to themselves." But I'll go along with
your idea. Let's settle this one.

If I might ask, strictly for plausibility reasons, WHY would several
hundred people all who had no problems with windows explorer before
SP2 and immediately see these problems when they upgraded to SP2 have
scripting be the problem? Maybe if you can explain your reasoning
and evidence I can recognize more clues and we can track this down
and fix this for hundreds of people.

For example, what scripting is it that would be causing the failure?
The problem is almost always evident in at least two things that are
based on Windows Explorer, and often everything using Windows Explorer.

How can I get some definite diagnostic evidence that your analysis
is the cause? (Something better than "well, we blew away a bunch of
crap and we installed a bunch of crap and now we don't see it now so
that must have been it"?) I'm not saying you are wrong, I just want
to prove what the cause was. I'm really trying to avoid the random
changes until bug hides for a while methodology. That is what got
every one of us into this mess of Windows in the first place.

Believe it or not, I'm really actually honestly trying to expose the
root cause of this problem with conclusive evidence, something that
has not been able to be done by anybody in the last six months.

If it matters any, I've actually started writing and running small
scripts, months after SP2 was installed and the problem began. They
seem to be working, at least as well as the documentation for scripting
allows.

Thank you

[Don Taylor]

Leythos > writes:
>On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 23:24:18 -0600, Don Taylor wrote:
>>
>>>As for your problem, I suspect that it's Microsoft Scripting that's the
>>>problem:
>>>http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=C717D943-7E4B-4622-86EB-95A22B832CAA&displaylang=en
>>
>>>the link may not work if it wraps, but that's the download for XP's
>>>scripting engine, reinstall it and see if that helps.
>>
>> Ok, I'm up for anything, nobody else has a clue how to fix this, I've
>> been told the silliest things are definitely absolutely positiviely the
>> cause of all this, just today we still see someone chanting "the only
>> people who have problems with SP2 are the ones who don't know what they
>> are doing and did it to themselves." But I'll go along with your idea.
>> Let's settle this one.

>Service Packs have always been a gamble, and in most cases if you tested
>it on a non-production computer before installing it, you would see what
>the problems were. For those without a second computer, you backup all
>your data (as instructed) and then apply the SP and test until you
>determine if it works. I didn't install SP2 on any clients computers for
>months, as I was testing it against several similar systems to determine
>if there would be a problem.

I AM the guinea pig here, we are STILL waiting before we risk tring it
on the other computers, thinking a miracle might happen and this might
find a fix. But the machines here are not all identical, so fixing it
on mine probably says little or nothing about the others.

>> If I might ask, strictly for plausibility reasons, WHY would several
>> hundred people all who had no problems with windows explorer before SP2
>> and immediately see these problems when they upgraded to SP2 have
>> scripting be the problem? Maybe if you can explain your reasoning and
>> evidence I can recognize more clues and we can track this down and fix
>> this for hundreds of people.

>It all goes back to one simple thing - Windows XP runs on a mass of
>different system, most of them are not something that can be tested
>against as there are soooooo many variations of even the Dell system, just
>imagine the rest of the computers in the world. Windows XP SP2 was not
>forced on anyone, there were clear instructions from MS on how to install
>it and to make your (anyone's) machine ready for it, and even the
>parts/systems vendors have specific notes/updates for people installing
>SP2.

>If you have several hundred people with very similar problems, it would
>stand to reason that you should have been able to determine what was
>common between all of those systems and then determine a corrective path,
>but I've not seen the analysis of those hundreds of systems.

I keep saying this and I just must not be clear, this is several hundred
different people spread across the world, look at some of this to see
their descriptions of mostly the same problem:



There are a few other things mixed in there but that is mostly people
all describing pretty much what appears to be the same root problem
followed by my list of the things this had all claimed to be caused
by and which almost all appeared to not be the cause or fix it.

>> For example, what scripting is it that would be causing the failure? The
>> problem is almost always evident in at least two things that are based
>> on Windows Explorer, and often everything using Windows Explorer.

>In my case, we installed SP2 on a clients set of computers, all of them
>were Dell computers that were purchased with XP (no-SP1) at the same time,
>about 1 year ago. All computers have the SAME parts/hardware/applications.
>One of the systems, after installing SP2, would not allow searches, didn't
>show the proper IE Help/About information (it was missing lots), and there
>seemed to be no answer from anyone, even MS, about what caused it. I
>searched for a week and started putting reports/fixes together from people
>that had pieces of the problem and their fixes (and I've been doing this
>since the 70's) and determined (through t/e) that scripting was the
>problem - I installed the scripting package and everything started working
>again.

We aren't that lucky to have identical machines. And IE doesn't seem
to be involved in this. But I can understand your method.

>> How can I get some definite diagnostic evidence that your analysis is
>> the cause? (Something better than "well, we blew away a bunch of crap
>> and we installed a bunch of crap and now we don't see it now so that
>> must have been it"?) I'm not saying you are wrong, I just want to prove
>> what the cause was. I'm really trying to avoid the random changes until
>> bug hides for a while methodology. That is what got every one of us
>> into this mess of Windows in the first place.

>I can't explain it or even tell you how/why it worked for me. I've had two
>serious SP2 problems on a just over 1000 machines that we manage for a
>diverse group of clients. Of those, one needed a BIOS update, and the
>other needed the scripting reinstalled. Since you say that you are having
>problems with Explorer and searching (which was also a symptom that we
>experienced, not just IE) I suggested the fix that worked for me. I
>suspected that you had already done the basics, and this can't hurt.

Control panel,
Folder shortcuts,
Recycle bin,
Searching,
Windows Explorer
Not IE

Most folks report the same problem with at least a couple of these,
and some report it with every one of these

>> Believe it or not, I'm really actually honestly trying to expose the
>> root cause of this problem with conclusive evidence, something that has
>> not been able to be done by anybody in the last six months.
>>
>> If it matters any, I've actually started writing and running small
>> scripts, months after SP2 was installed and the problem began. They
>> seem to be working, at least as well as the documentation for scripting
>> allows.

>If you've lived with it for 6 months, then it's time to either try the
>scripting or just do a wipe/reinstall to give you a fully working machine.

[lesjf]

well thats great boohoo. I'm 100% behind bill and his team and am very
pleased with sp2. if you have had problems it probly cause your not taking
care of your systems and if you think you are your probly doing a half assed
job at it. thats all i got to say about that :) forest

"velozoom30" wrote:

> Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
> source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
> laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the SP2
> and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of programming
> (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with you
> and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
> migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am browsing
> and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
> compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was
> downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!
>
>
> I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
> dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a single
> piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
> graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
> with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering some
> applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine I
> have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving away
> from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
> Windows infrastructure.
>
> I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
> monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the proverbial
> writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe it
> won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational IT
> person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>
> Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

[Jason Bowen]

Frankly you both are juvenille but I sure would like to figure out why a
fresh install of XP Pro with SP2 applied right after the install has
left me with a machine that can't seem to find device drivers for new
hardware that is plugged in to it. Trying to add a sidewinder usb
joystick and an iPod(firewire and usb) results in the hardware wizard
failing for both, saying it can't find the drivers. Any tips for that
or just more of the same? Sadly I've done the same exact install before
and everything worked just fine.

lesjf wrote:
> well thats great boohoo. I'm 100% behind bill and his team and am very
> pleased with sp2. if you have had problems it probly cause your not taking
> care of your systems and if you think you are your probly doing a half assed
> job at it. thats all i got to say about that :) forest
>
> "velozoom30" wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
>>source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
>>laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the SP2
>>and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of programming
>>(I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and frustrated with you
>>and your company that I built up a Linux box at home and will soon be
>>migrating all of my personal equipment over to the Penguin. If I am browsing
>>and come across some content that will only work in your non-W3c standards
>>compliant browser, I refuse to view it. DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was
>>downloaded over a million times the first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!
>>
>>
>>I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
>>dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a single
>>piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV production, and
>>graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to work with) as I have
>>with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my station, rendering some
>>applications totally unusable, that I have removed it from every machine I
>>have. I've talked to the administration and we are looking into moving away
>>from all MS products and following the growing trend of dismantling our
>>Windows infrastructure.
>>
>>I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
>>monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the proverbial
>>writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way out. Maybe it
>>won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any thinking and rational IT
>>person, but I think it is coming and on that day I will rejoice.
>>
>>Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
If you did the same before and everything worked fine then you apparently
have a bad install this time.
Since you just installed, the best solution may be to start over instead of
taking the time to find and fix the problem

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
In memory of our dear friend, MVP Alex Nichol
http://www.dts-l.org


"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> Frankly you both are juvenille but I sure would like to figure out why a
> fresh install of XP Pro with SP2 applied right after the install has left
> me with a machine that can't seem to find device drivers for new hardware
> that is plugged in to it. Trying to add a sidewinder usb joystick and an
> iPod(firewire and usb) results in the hardware wizard failing for both,
> saying it can't find the drivers. Any tips for that or just more of the
> same? Sadly I've done the same exact install before and everything worked
> just fine.

[Jason Bowen]

That's assinine that re-installing would be the answer. Surely this can
be figured out without me having to get every cd out again and going
through this process once more. I don't want to be punished for going
against my instict.

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Jason;
> If you did the same before and everything worked fine then you apparently
> have a bad install this time.
> Since you just installed, the best solution may be to start over instead of
> taking the time to find and fix the problem
>

[Greg Burns]

Did you install the chipset drivers for your motherboard this second go
round?

Greg


"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> Frankly you both are juvenille but I sure would like to figure out why a
> fresh install of XP Pro with SP2 applied right after the install has left
> me with a machine that can't seem to find device drivers for new hardware
> that is plugged in to it. Trying to add a sidewinder usb joystick and an
> iPod(firewire and usb) results in the hardware wizard failing for both,
> saying it can't find the drivers. Any tips for that or just more of the
> same? Sadly I've done the same exact install before and everything worked
> just fine.
>
> lesjf wrote:
>> well thats great boohoo. I'm 100% behind bill and his team and am very
>> pleased with sp2. if you have had problems it probly cause your not
>> taking care of your systems and if you think you are your probly doing a
>> half assed job at it. thats all i got to say about that :) forest
>>
>> "velozoom30" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
>>>source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
>>>laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
>>>SP2 and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
>>>programming (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and
>>>frustrated with you and your company that I built up a Linux box at home
>>>and will soon be migrating all of my personal equipment over to the
>>>Penguin. If I am browsing and come across some content that will only
>>>work in your non-W3c standards compliant browser, I refuse to view it.
>>>DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was downloaded over a million times the
>>>first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!
>>>I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
>>>dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a
>>>single piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV
>>>production, and graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to
>>>work with) as I have with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my
>>>station, rendering some applications totally unusable, that I have
>>>removed it from every machine I have. I've talked to the administration
>>>and we are looking into moving away from all MS products and following
>>>the growing trend of dismantling our Windows infrastructure.
>>>
>>>I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
>>>monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
>>>proverbial writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way
>>>out. Maybe it won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any
>>>thinking and rational IT person, but I think it is coming and on that day
>>>I will rejoice.
>>>Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
Well, that is your opinion and you are free to maintain your computer as you
see fit.
How much time have you spent on this current issue vs. how much time to
reinstall on a system that is still a new install?
The suggestion is given since your installation is so new.
In such cases, it is often much quicker to start over rather than spend the
time troubleshooting and possibly reinstall anyways.

If you want a more precise solution to otherwise resolve your issue, you
need to post the details you have so far left out such as hardware
configuration.
With the details, someone may be able to give a specific answer.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
In memory of our dear friend, MVP Alex Nichol
http://www.dts-l.org


"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> That's assinine that re-installing would be the answer. Surely this can
> be figured out without me having to get every cd out again and going
> through this process once more. I don't want to be punished for going
> against my instict.
>
> Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
>> Jason;
>> If you did the same before and everything worked fine then you apparently
>> have a bad install this time.
>> Since you just installed, the best solution may be to start over instead
>> of taking the time to find and fix the problem
>>

[Jason Bowen]

All the drivers are from Microsoft, off the XP CD or from Windows update.

Greg Burns wrote:
> Did you install the chipset drivers for your motherboard this second go
> round?
>
> Greg
>
>
> "Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Frankly you both are juvenille but I sure would like to figure out why a
>>fresh install of XP Pro with SP2 applied right after the install has left
>>me with a machine that can't seem to find device drivers for new hardware
>>that is plugged in to it. Trying to add a sidewinder usb joystick and an
>>iPod(firewire and usb) results in the hardware wizard failing for both,
>>saying it can't find the drivers. Any tips for that or just more of the
>>same? Sadly I've done the same exact install before and everything worked
>>just fine.
>>
>>lesjf wrote:
>>
>>>well thats great boohoo. I'm 100% behind bill and his team and am very
>>>pleased with sp2. if you have had problems it probly cause your not
>>>taking care of your systems and if you think you are your probly doing a
>>>half assed job at it. thats all i got to say about that :) forest
>>>
>>>"velozoom30" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thanks to Microsoft's WindowsXP SP2, I have finally made the move to open
>>>>source applications. I've wanted to make the move for some time but some
>>>>laziness on my part has delayed me. Thanks, Billy, for pushing out the
>>>>SP2 and specifically the security center because that horrid piece of
>>>>programming (I call SP2 the new WinME) finally made me so angry and
>>>>frustrated with you and your company that I built up a Linux box at home
>>>>and will soon be migrating all of my personal equipment over to the
>>>>Penguin. If I am browsing and come across some content that will only
>>>>work in your non-W3c standards compliant browser, I refuse to view it.
>>>>DId you notice that FireFox 1.0 was downloaded over a million times the
>>>>first DAY it was available? Hallelujiah!
>>>>I am the systems administrator at a television station and so am used to
>>>>dealing with new technology. I have never had as many problems with a
>>>>single piece of software (and let me tell you, video-editing, TV
>>>>production, and graphics software can be extremely touchy and hard to
>>>>work with) as I have with SP2. It has bolluxed up so many systems at my
>>>>station, rendering some applications totally unusable, that I have
>>>>removed it from every machine I have. I've talked to the administration
>>>>and we are looking into moving away from all MS products and following
>>>>the growing trend of dismantling our Windows infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>>I truly hope that the recent trend in computing to move away from the
>>>>monopolistic domination of MS is but the first scratchings of the
>>>>proverbial writing on the wall that will soon say that MS is on its way
>>>>out. Maybe it won't come soon, certainly not soon enough for any
>>>>thinking and rational IT person, but I think it is coming and on that day
>>>>I will rejoice.
>>>>Thanks, again, Billy. SP2 did it's job well enough for me.
>
>
>

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
You are usually better off getting the drivers directly from the hardware
manufacturers.

Microsoft gets the drivers from the manufacturers.
Tests are performed at the manufacturers expense and only then does
Microsoft release them.
This and other reasons often lead to newer drivers being available from the
hardware manufacturer.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
In memory of our dear friend, MVP Alex Nichol
http://www.dts-l.org


"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> All the drivers are from Microsoft, off the XP CD or from Windows update.
>
> Greg Burns wrote:
>> Did you install the chipset drivers for your motherboard this second go
>> round?
>>
>> Greg

[Jason Bowen]

It's my opinion that something should work right consistently?

Mobile Athlon XP-M 2400+(runs at 1.87Ghz)
512 MB RAM
60 GB hard drive
DVD-CDRW drive
2 USB 1.1 ports
1 Firewire 400 port
National Semi DP83815 (MacPhyter) 10/100 Ethernet
ALi Corporation M5451 PCI AC-Link Controller Audio Device
ALi Corporation M5457 AC-Link Modem
PS/2 mouse port
RS-232(serial) port
Parallel port
VGA out
S-VHS out
1 CardBus slot

All the drivers come from the Original XP install or Windows update, all
my hardware was supported by XP out of the box. Basically I've done all
the monkey boy check lists, I need more expertise than following the
scripts. I've done the uninstall/reinstall the software schtick. I want
to know why XP, when it run the new hardware wizard says, it can't find
the drivers for anything I've plugged in. I'd just like to get real
answers instead of stabs in the dark. The problem is there doesn't seem
to be a real answer, just stabs in the dark.

It is a default install of XP Pro with XP SP2 applied and nothing other
than drivers distributed by Microsoft. If something went wrong during
any of the installation or subsequent install of SP2 there was no
notification.

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Jason;
> Well, that is your opinion and you are free to maintain your computer as you
> see fit.
> How much time have you spent on this current issue vs. how much time to
> reinstall on a system that is still a new install?
> The suggestion is given since your installation is so new.
> In such cases, it is often much quicker to start over rather than spend the
> time troubleshooting and possibly reinstall anyways.
>
> If you want a more precise solution to otherwise resolve your issue, you
> need to post the details you have so far left out such as hardware
> configuration.
> With the details, someone may be able to give a specific answer.
>

[Jason Bowen]

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Jason;
> You are usually better off getting the drivers directly from the hardware
> manufacturers.
>
> Microsoft gets the drivers from the manufacturers.
> Tests are performed at the manufacturers expense and only then does
> Microsoft release them.
> This and other reasons often lead to newer drivers being available from the
> hardware manufacturer.
>

So you are telling me that Microsoft distributes drivers it doesn't test
with it's operating system and subsequent updates?

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
I never said that, you just did.
Microsoft only tests the drivers sent by the manufacturers at the
manufacturers expense.
There are often newer drivers available from the manufacturers.
Read my post again for what I said.
It is difficult to test anything for compatibility issues with "subsequent
updates" since often the update does not exist when the driver is submitted
to Microsoft for testing.
Try the latest driver from the manufacturer.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
In memory of our dear friend, MVP Alex Nichol
http://www.dts-l.org


"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> So you are telling me that Microsoft distributes drivers it doesn't test
> with it's operating system and subsequent updates?

[Kerry Brown]

"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> It's my opinion that something should work right consistently?
>
> Mobile Athlon XP-M 2400+(runs at 1.87Ghz)
> 512 MB RAM
> 60 GB hard drive
> DVD-CDRW drive
> 2 USB 1.1 ports
> 1 Firewire 400 port
> National Semi DP83815 (MacPhyter) 10/100 Ethernet
> ALi Corporation M5451 PCI AC-Link Controller Audio Device
> ALi Corporation M5457 AC-Link Modem
> PS/2 mouse port
> RS-232(serial) port
> Parallel port
> VGA out
> S-VHS out
> 1 CardBus slot
>
> All the drivers come from the Original XP install or Windows update, all
> my hardware was supported by XP out of the box. Basically I've done all
> the monkey boy check lists, I need more expertise than following the
> scripts. I've done the uninstall/reinstall the software schtick. I want
> to know why XP, when it run the new hardware wizard says, it can't find
> the drivers for anything I've plugged in. I'd just like to get real
> answers instead of stabs in the dark. The problem is there doesn't seem
> to be a real answer, just stabs in the dark.
>
> It is a default install of XP Pro with XP SP2 applied and nothing other
> than drivers distributed by Microsoft. If something went wrong during any
> of the installation or subsequent install of SP2 there was no
> notification.
>

Jason

Is this a laptop? If so it will need the drivers from the manufacturer or at
least the chipset manufacturer. It is very rare to see a laptop that works
properly with a generic XP install. If you don't have the disk that came
with it check the web for drivers. So far I have always been able to get the
right drivers on the web but it sometimes is quite a hunt for generic
laptops. I've had to strip them down so I could physically identify the
motherboard.

Laptop manufacturers routinely ship with slightly modified Windows
installations to support their non-standard hardware. Expecting Microsoft to
support non-standard hardware is unrealistic. Also calling most of the
people on this newsgroup "monkey boys" isn't a great way to ask for help.
Diagnosing complex problems by newsgroups will always be a stab in the dark.
If you want better support talk to the manufacturer of your computer.

If this is not a laptop please ignore my post :-)

Other than the monkey boy part :-)

Kerry

[Jason Bowen]

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Jason;
> I never said that, you just did.
> Microsoft only tests the drivers sent by the manufacturers at the
> manufacturers expense.
> There are often newer drivers available from the manufacturers.
> Read my post again for what I said.
> It is difficult to test anything for compatibility issues with "subsequent
> updates" since often the update does not exist when the driver is submitted
> to Microsoft for testing.
> Try the latest driver from the manufacturer.
>

There are wires crossed here. I only have drivers from Microsoft,
including the ones from Windows Update or the ones distributed with SP2.
I have no drivers from any other source. Shouldn't these all be tested?

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
Yes, they were tested at some point.
As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.
Are the drivers dated before or after the release of SP-2?
If you used these same drivers before, they should still work.
Anything can get corrupted and there is nothing anyone can do anywhere with
anything that can permanently eliminate chances of corruption.

In any event drivers is a good place to start since a reinstall is not an
option for you.
Start with chipset and any other motherboard drivers from the manufacturer.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
In memory of our dear friend, MVP Alex Nichol
http://www.dts-l.org


"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
>> Jason;
>> I never said that, you just did.
>> Microsoft only tests the drivers sent by the manufacturers at the
>> manufacturers expense.
>> There are often newer drivers available from the manufacturers.
>> Read my post again for what I said.
>> It is difficult to test anything for compatibility issues with
>> "subsequent updates" since often the update does not exist when the
>> driver is submitted to Microsoft for testing.
>> Try the latest driver from the manufacturer.
>>
>
> There are wires crossed here. I only have drivers from Microsoft,
> including the ones from Windows Update or the ones distributed with SP2. I
> have no drivers from any other source. Shouldn't these all be tested?

[Jason Bowen]

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Jason;
> Yes, they were tested at some point.
> As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.
> Are the drivers dated before or after the release of SP-2?
> If you used these same drivers before, they should still work.
> Anything can get corrupted and there is nothing anyone can do anywhere with
> anything that can permanently eliminate chances of corruption.
>
> In any event drivers is a good place to start since a reinstall is not an
> option for you.
> Start with chipset and any other motherboard drivers from the manufacturer.
>

I re-installed, did the same install path I always did and everything
worked. The issue is that I have always taken this XP Pro CD and
installed it and just used the drivers from the XP CD and Windows
update. It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any
"motherboard" drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The
files they provide are the same I got from Windows update, I compared
the files installed and the driver versions. I could find no reason for
the behavior of the last install and this is precisely why people get
frustrated with Microsoft. I am an operating system hobbyist, like to
play with whatever I can get my hands on, and I've never had the issue
be uninstall/reinstall ad nauseum with other operating systems. It's
simply unacceptable and smacks of poor software engineering.

[Kerry Brown]

"Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
...
> Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
>> Jason;
>> Yes, they were tested at some point.
>> As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.
>> Are the drivers dated before or after the release of SP-2?
>> If you used these same drivers before, they should still work.
>> Anything can get corrupted and there is nothing anyone can do anywhere
>> with anything that can permanently eliminate chances of corruption.
>>
>> In any event drivers is a good place to start since a reinstall is not an
>> option for you.
>> Start with chipset and any other motherboard drivers from the
>> manufacturer.
>>
>
> I re-installed, did the same install path I always did and everything
> worked. The issue is that I have always taken this XP Pro CD and
> installed it and just used the drivers from the XP CD and Windows update.
> It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any "motherboard"
> drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The files they provide
> are the same I got from Windows update, I compared the files installed and
> the driver versions. I could find no reason for the behavior of the last
> install and this is precisely why people get frustrated with Microsoft. I
> am an operating system hobbyist, like to play with whatever I can get my
> hands on, and I've never had the issue be uninstall/reinstall ad nauseum
> with other operating systems. It's simply unacceptable and smacks of poor
> software engineering.

Have you tried installing Linux on the laptop? Did it work immediately?
Nothing against Linux, just using it as an example. Operating systems are
complex. Laptops have non-standard hardware. It is very rare to install an
OS on a laptop and not have to do some tweaking. Compaq should have shipped
a recovery CD with the laptop. That is the only OS guaranteed to run on it.
Blame Compaq (the original OS supplier), not Microsoft or any other OS
supplier. I find that in cases like you describe it is usually a
dirty/scratched CD or marginal drive. The OS seems to install Ok but
something is not right. Reinstalling with a different CD or cleaning the CD
and reinstalling usually fixes it. It's a stab in the dark but based on my
experience it could be close to the mark.

Glad to hear you got it going.

Kerry

[Jason Bowen]

Kerry Brown wrote:
> "Jason Bowen" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
>>
>>>Jason;
>>>Yes, they were tested at some point.
>>>As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.
>>>Are the drivers dated before or after the release of SP-2?
>>>If you used these same drivers before, they should still work.
>>>Anything can get corrupted and there is nothing anyone can do anywhere
>>>with anything that can permanently eliminate chances of corruption.
>>>
>>>In any event drivers is a good place to start since a reinstall is not an
>>>option for you.
>>>Start with chipset and any other motherboard drivers from the
>>>manufacturer.
>>>
>>
>>I re-installed, did the same install path I always did and everything
>>worked. The issue is that I have always taken this XP Pro CD and
>>installed it and just used the drivers from the XP CD and Windows update.
>>It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any "motherboard"
>>drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The files they provide
>>are the same I got from Windows update, I compared the files installed and
>>the driver versions. I could find no reason for the behavior of the last
>>install and this is precisely why people get frustrated with Microsoft. I
>>am an operating system hobbyist, like to play with whatever I can get my
>>hands on, and I've never had the issue be uninstall/reinstall ad nauseum
>>with other operating systems. It's simply unacceptable and smacks of poor
>>software engineering.
>
>
> Have you tried installing Linux on the laptop? Did it work immediately?

Yep, it actually did. The only thing that wasn't supported was the
winmodem and support for it can be bought for $15. There is a
difference between supporting hardware and the operating system not
working correctly. Like I've said, I've never had such a solution for
any other operating system. OpenBSD installed smoothly on this laptop.

> Nothing against Linux, just using it as an example. Operating systems are
> complex. Laptops have non-standard hardware.

The chipset is used by other laptops, the cpu is, the winmodem is, the
soundcard is... What do you define as standard? The manufacturers all
made windows drivers available for the hardware.

It is very rare to install an
> OS on a laptop and not have to do some tweaking. Compaq should have shipped
> a recovery CD with the laptop. That is the only OS guaranteed to run on it.
> Blame Compaq (the original OS supplier), not Microsoft or any other OS
> supplier. I find that in cases like you describe it is usually a
> dirty/scratched CD or marginal drive. The OS seems to install Ok but
> something is not right. Reinstalling with a different CD or cleaning the CD
> and reinstalling usually fixes it. It's a stab in the dark but based on my
> experience it could be close to the mark.
>

Sorry but what you describe happening should be caught, a scratched cd
won't read and the drives have error detection taking place. It's all
hand waving really. I know about uninstall/reinstall/wash/rinse/repeat,
I came here looking for something more in depth.

> Glad to hear you got it going.
>
> Kerry
>
>

[Plato]

Jason Bowen wrote:
>
> update. It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any
> "motherboard" drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The
> frustrated with Microsoft. I am an operating system hobbyist, like to

Then use a standard, non proprietary pc to play with.







--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

[Jason Bowen]

Plato wrote:
> Jason Bowen wrote:
>
>>update. It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any
>>"motherboard" drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The
>>frustrated with Microsoft. I am an operating system hobbyist, like to
>
>
> Then use a standard, non proprietary pc to play with.
>
>

All the hardware does conform to standards such as VESA and IDE. That
is why an operating system like OpenBSD installed.

>
>
>
>
>

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:23:58 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"

>Yes, they were tested at some point.
>As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.

This highlights something rather significant about SP2, and some
background reasons why this may be a taste of things to come.

Windows meshes several subsystems into one lump - i.e. while separate
dev teams dev the subsystems, they cannot be uninstalled and managed
separately by the end user. Thinking DirectX, WSH, IE, OE, WMP etc.

Current MS support policy draws lines between "still supported" vs.
"no longer supported" based on SP levels.

So there's a temptation to push the latest subsystems into each SP,
the sooner to set a new support baseline. For example, if you were
the DirectX team, you'd rather see SP2 push DirectX 9c rather than
leave (say) DirectX 8 in place, because a certain time down the line,
you could drop support for DirectX 8.xx through DirectX 9b once SP2
becomes the lowest SP level supported.

This breaks the principle of "do not add features to Service Packs".
Effectively, SP2 *is* a new OS subversion, just as much as Win98SE was
over Win98. But whereas Win98SE was marketed as a new subversion (you
had to buy it as an upgrade from Win98) SP2 is not.

That's good news, but the downside is that folks will apply SP2 on the
assumption it will fix a few security issues, and that's it. They'll
read up the caveats about how these security changes will affect
software that will fall foul of these, but they won't expect deep
driver-level incompatibilities e.g. Prescott vs. SP2, etc.

In fact, many of us who advocate installing SP2 (in the interests of
better malware safety) also advocate against installing a newer OS
over an older one to upgrade it - we know how wrong that can go.


It was several months before SP2 was released as an OS (e.g. the new
DSP and OEM CDs that are natively SP2). Without that, users have
other problems if they apply SP2...
- cannot use Recovery Console
- cannot do repair install
....because SP2 breaks compatibility with their license-legit (but now
comparitively useless) installation CD.

IMO, if an SP does this, then it is obliged to:
- include functionality to generate replacement installation CD
- document this issue in "before you install..."
- offer that during the installation process
- have this available after the installation process

MS should demonstrate good faith by releasing this functionality as a
free downloadable adjunct to SP2. As it is, their lecensing terms
disallow the creation of a "slipstreamed" installation disk, as is
possible via 3rd-party tools and advice. In essence, SP2 knocks you
down and MS's rules disallow you from getting up again. That SUCKS.



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

[DevilsPGD]

In message > "cquirke (MVP
Windows shell/user)" > wrote:

>MS should demonstrate good faith by releasing this functionality as a
>free downloadable adjunct to SP2. As it is, their lecensing terms
>disallow the creation of a "slipstreamed" installation disk, as is
>possible via 3rd-party tools and advice. In essence, SP2 knocks you
>down and MS's rules disallow you from getting up again. That SUCKS.

I didn't read the license too closely, but I didn't see anything there
that forbids end-user creation of a slipstreamed disk.

Did I miss something?


--
1832-Curling is introduced to the U.S., giving Americans
a sport combining the surface of hockey with the thrill
of watching paint dry.

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 00:32:47 -0700, DevilsPGD >
>In message > "cquirke (MVP
>Windows shell/user)" > wrote:

>>MS should demonstrate good faith by releasing this functionality as a
>>free downloadable adjunct to SP2. As it is, their lecensing terms
>>disallow the creation of a "slipstreamed" installation disk, as is
>>possible via 3rd-party tools and advice. In essence, SP2 knocks you
>>down and MS's rules disallow you from getting up again. That SUCKS.

>I didn't read the license too closely, but I didn't see anything there
>that forbids end-user creation of a slipstreamed disk.

>Did I miss something?

Probably. I had a client who needed something like this, as they had
a laptop with one of those lame "recovery" disks, and I wanted to do a
custom OS install plus ensure they could RC and do repair installs
whould the need arise. Although it was a new PC, the OS was pre-SP2,
so I figured doing a slipstream build would hit all the spots.

That's when I was told that technically, slipstream builds broke the
terms of the licensing.

Now one can shrug and ignore such issues, or confront them. Most of
us will do what we have to do, and that constrains us in how tall we
dare stand when something else needs to be confronted. My take is
that licensing terms that force you to be a warez bunny to get the job
done, even when you have paid for the software, suck++

In the end, we found a less sucky laptop brand with a "real" CD :-)



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

[DevilsPGD]

In message > "cquirke (MVP
Windows shell/user)" > wrote:

>On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 00:32:47 -0700, DevilsPGD >
>>In message > "cquirke (MVP
>>Windows shell/user)" > wrote:
>
>>>MS should demonstrate good faith by releasing this functionality as a
>>>free downloadable adjunct to SP2. As it is, their lecensing terms
>>>disallow the creation of a "slipstreamed" installation disk, as is
>>>possible via 3rd-party tools and advice. In essence, SP2 knocks you
>>>down and MS's rules disallow you from getting up again. That SUCKS.
>
>>I didn't read the license too closely, but I didn't see anything there
>>that forbids end-user creation of a slipstreamed disk.
>
>>Did I miss something?
>
>Probably. I had a client who needed something like this, as they had
>a laptop with one of those lame "recovery" disks, and I wanted to do a
>custom OS install plus ensure they could RC and do repair installs
>whould the need arise. Although it was a new PC, the OS was pre-SP2,
>so I figured doing a slipstream build would hit all the spots.
>
>That's when I was told that technically, slipstream builds broke the
>terms of the licensing.
>
>Now one can shrug and ignore such issues, or confront them. Most of
>us will do what we have to do, and that constrains us in how tall we
>dare stand when something else needs to be confronted. My take is
>that licensing terms that force you to be a warez bunny to get the job
>done, even when you have paid for the software, suck++
>
>In the end, we found a less sucky laptop brand with a "real" CD :-)

I'm not seeing anything in the WinXP (full or OEM) licenses which forbid
slipstreaming -- If your OEM places additional restrictions on you,
that's a problem between you and your OEM.


--
If stupidity persists, consult your psychiatrist.