Ray
December 12th 03, 06:46 AM
Netscape and Opera web browsers allow you to prevent pop
ups/unders. That function is integrated right into those
browsers. Pop ups/unders should be treated like a virus
and those two web browsers allow you to do just that. Ask
yourself why Internet Explorer doesn't. Follow the money.
Also see the article at
http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,111108,00.asp .
************************************************** *******
Here's the article:
Bugs and Fixes: A Big Microsoft Mess--Patches Gone Bad
The company now says that XP performance issues don't
warrant a remedy.
Stuart J. Johnston
From the August 2003 issue of PC World magazine
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2003
Last winter, Devin Wood of Milford, Massachusetts,
installed Service Pack 1 for Windows XP. Right after that,
his PC got slower, and he's been unhappy with it ever
since. "I'm sick of watching my desktop icons draw like
someone is inside my computer with an Etch-A-Sketch," says
Wood.
We received many similar reports from readers after SP1
rolled out (go to "Proceed With Caution When Using
Microsoft Patch"). Several months later, Microsoft said
that it had released patches to fix the performance snags.
But now we get the bad news: Microsoft admits that it
didn't address readers' problems, and the company says it
has no plans to fix the situation at all.
Here's how the saga unfolded: When Microsoft first
released the supposed fix, it told us that the only way to
get help was to call Microsoft (see June's Bugs & Fixes
at "Leaky Windows--Keep the Hackers Out"). Hordes of
unhappy XP users picked up the phone. Some readers said
company technicians told them there was no fix for XP
performance woes. "The tech denied the problem [existed],"
recalls Devin Wood. But other readers spoke to techs who
were aware of the problem, and they received e-mail
messages with a link to a fix. It turns out that some of
these readers were directed to one patch, and others to a
different (unrelated) patch. Neither fix took care of the
problem. (If you installed either one of these two
patches, your PC won't be affected, according to
Microsoft.)
Double Trouble
The first patch, a "hot fix" labeled Q815411 (details
at "Heap Algorithm Update for Atypically Large Heap
Requests") was aimed at a small set of corporate
customers. Hot fixes are quickie patches that Microsoft
creates when users run into specific problems.
"The patch was mislabeled," says Greg Sullivan, lead
product manager with Microsoft's Windows group. "This
enterprise hot fix was created for PCs running under very
specific circumstances."
The second patch, labeled Q811493, was a revised security
fix affecting Windows XP, 2000, and NT. Microsoft had to
withdraw the original security fix because it introduced
performance lags for some SP1 users. Visit "Buffer Overrun
in Windows Kernel Message" and click Technical Details for
Microsoft's notes about the reissued patch.
After this crazy runaround, we continue to receive
readers' reports about sluggish PCs relating to SP1.
Nevertheless, Microsoft doesn't believe that the problem
deserves a patch.
"[We've] not received broad general feedback about
performance issues with SP1," Microsoft's Sullivan tells
us. "Therefore, [we're] not currently developing a widely
applicable patch."
Some readers have uninstalled SP1 to get performance back.
Visit "Microsoft Windows Service Pack 1 Readme" for
Microsoft's notes on how to remove SP1. Sullivan doesn't
advise users to do this, but it seems to be your only
(extreme) option. Sullivan also says that, in general, you
don't need SP1 to get future updates, although some
updates (known as quick-fix engineering updates) do
require SP1.
Microsoft's site doesn't offer an easy way to submit a
complaint. Send your SP1 reports to .
Stuart J. Johnston is a contributing editor for PC World.
Click on the link for more Bugs and Fixes columns.
>-----Original Message-----
>While Win98SE is a good OS, XP pro is so much better. I
>thought asbout keeping my 98se, but then I realized I
>don't really like it when I'm in the middle of doing
>anything and my comuter decides to crash. Since I've
gone
>to XP, I haven't even gotten a blue screen.
>
>And the thing about the pop ups and pop unders, that's
not
>really from IE, that's more from spyware and adware. A
>simple pop-up blocker or ending frequent stops to porn
>sights can fix that.
>
>You do have to love people that talk to their Linux
>buddies and actually listens to them...
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>I see that Microsoft has released Windows XP Service
Pack
>>1, which essentially destroys XPs operating speed. I
>>still use Windows 98SE because I wanted to wait for
>>Microsoft to work the bugs out of XP first but it seems
>>that now Microsoft will sabotage it's own operating
>system
>>and refuse to fix it. Why would a company do that? I
>>have watched similar things done to Internet Explorer.
>>Pop up and Pop Under advertisement windows have made
>using
>>the internet a negative and aggravating experience.
>Other
>>browsers allow an end user to prevent pop ups and pop
>>unders. This strongly suggests that there must be some
>>financial reason that Microsoft would allow this sort of
>>Guerilla Advertising in its internet browser. And it is
>>no secret that there is a leap frog formula whereby the
>>software is made so cpu-cycle intensive that it forces
>end
>>users to buy faster hardware but the cycle never ends.
>>What is also clear is the obvious trend to allow outside
>>agencies and companies to have more and more control
over
>>individual's computer systems. Sending information back
>>out to web sites, applying patches automatically in the
>>background, tracking user habits and activities. By
it's
>>very nature, these practices will eventually get out of
>>control. It is completely self limiting and eventually
>>the abuses and liberties being taken at the end
>>user/customers expense will kill the very thing it
wishes
>>to control, peoples online and computing experience.
>This
>>can only go on for so long and the buying public as a
>>whole will continue to become more educated and wise
>about
>>computers, especially when the digital generation gets
>>older. Wouldn't it be better for Microsoft to start
>>operating in a friendlier manner? Or is it just that
>>Microsoft has grown so large that it has grown out of
>>control?
>>.
>>
>.
>
ups/unders. That function is integrated right into those
browsers. Pop ups/unders should be treated like a virus
and those two web browsers allow you to do just that. Ask
yourself why Internet Explorer doesn't. Follow the money.
Also see the article at
http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article/0,aid,111108,00.asp .
************************************************** *******
Here's the article:
Bugs and Fixes: A Big Microsoft Mess--Patches Gone Bad
The company now says that XP performance issues don't
warrant a remedy.
Stuart J. Johnston
From the August 2003 issue of PC World magazine
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2003
Last winter, Devin Wood of Milford, Massachusetts,
installed Service Pack 1 for Windows XP. Right after that,
his PC got slower, and he's been unhappy with it ever
since. "I'm sick of watching my desktop icons draw like
someone is inside my computer with an Etch-A-Sketch," says
Wood.
We received many similar reports from readers after SP1
rolled out (go to "Proceed With Caution When Using
Microsoft Patch"). Several months later, Microsoft said
that it had released patches to fix the performance snags.
But now we get the bad news: Microsoft admits that it
didn't address readers' problems, and the company says it
has no plans to fix the situation at all.
Here's how the saga unfolded: When Microsoft first
released the supposed fix, it told us that the only way to
get help was to call Microsoft (see June's Bugs & Fixes
at "Leaky Windows--Keep the Hackers Out"). Hordes of
unhappy XP users picked up the phone. Some readers said
company technicians told them there was no fix for XP
performance woes. "The tech denied the problem [existed],"
recalls Devin Wood. But other readers spoke to techs who
were aware of the problem, and they received e-mail
messages with a link to a fix. It turns out that some of
these readers were directed to one patch, and others to a
different (unrelated) patch. Neither fix took care of the
problem. (If you installed either one of these two
patches, your PC won't be affected, according to
Microsoft.)
Double Trouble
The first patch, a "hot fix" labeled Q815411 (details
at "Heap Algorithm Update for Atypically Large Heap
Requests") was aimed at a small set of corporate
customers. Hot fixes are quickie patches that Microsoft
creates when users run into specific problems.
"The patch was mislabeled," says Greg Sullivan, lead
product manager with Microsoft's Windows group. "This
enterprise hot fix was created for PCs running under very
specific circumstances."
The second patch, labeled Q811493, was a revised security
fix affecting Windows XP, 2000, and NT. Microsoft had to
withdraw the original security fix because it introduced
performance lags for some SP1 users. Visit "Buffer Overrun
in Windows Kernel Message" and click Technical Details for
Microsoft's notes about the reissued patch.
After this crazy runaround, we continue to receive
readers' reports about sluggish PCs relating to SP1.
Nevertheless, Microsoft doesn't believe that the problem
deserves a patch.
"[We've] not received broad general feedback about
performance issues with SP1," Microsoft's Sullivan tells
us. "Therefore, [we're] not currently developing a widely
applicable patch."
Some readers have uninstalled SP1 to get performance back.
Visit "Microsoft Windows Service Pack 1 Readme" for
Microsoft's notes on how to remove SP1. Sullivan doesn't
advise users to do this, but it seems to be your only
(extreme) option. Sullivan also says that, in general, you
don't need SP1 to get future updates, although some
updates (known as quick-fix engineering updates) do
require SP1.
Microsoft's site doesn't offer an easy way to submit a
complaint. Send your SP1 reports to .
Stuart J. Johnston is a contributing editor for PC World.
Click on the link for more Bugs and Fixes columns.
>-----Original Message-----
>While Win98SE is a good OS, XP pro is so much better. I
>thought asbout keeping my 98se, but then I realized I
>don't really like it when I'm in the middle of doing
>anything and my comuter decides to crash. Since I've
gone
>to XP, I haven't even gotten a blue screen.
>
>And the thing about the pop ups and pop unders, that's
not
>really from IE, that's more from spyware and adware. A
>simple pop-up blocker or ending frequent stops to porn
>sights can fix that.
>
>You do have to love people that talk to their Linux
>buddies and actually listens to them...
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>I see that Microsoft has released Windows XP Service
Pack
>>1, which essentially destroys XPs operating speed. I
>>still use Windows 98SE because I wanted to wait for
>>Microsoft to work the bugs out of XP first but it seems
>>that now Microsoft will sabotage it's own operating
>system
>>and refuse to fix it. Why would a company do that? I
>>have watched similar things done to Internet Explorer.
>>Pop up and Pop Under advertisement windows have made
>using
>>the internet a negative and aggravating experience.
>Other
>>browsers allow an end user to prevent pop ups and pop
>>unders. This strongly suggests that there must be some
>>financial reason that Microsoft would allow this sort of
>>Guerilla Advertising in its internet browser. And it is
>>no secret that there is a leap frog formula whereby the
>>software is made so cpu-cycle intensive that it forces
>end
>>users to buy faster hardware but the cycle never ends.
>>What is also clear is the obvious trend to allow outside
>>agencies and companies to have more and more control
over
>>individual's computer systems. Sending information back
>>out to web sites, applying patches automatically in the
>>background, tracking user habits and activities. By
it's
>>very nature, these practices will eventually get out of
>>control. It is completely self limiting and eventually
>>the abuses and liberties being taken at the end
>>user/customers expense will kill the very thing it
wishes
>>to control, peoples online and computing experience.
>This
>>can only go on for so long and the buying public as a
>>whole will continue to become more educated and wise
>about
>>computers, especially when the digital generation gets
>>older. Wouldn't it be better for Microsoft to start
>>operating in a friendlier manner? Or is it just that
>>Microsoft has grown so large that it has grown out of
>>control?
>>.
>>
>.
>