A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » Windows Service Pack 2
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SP2 - WHY?????



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old August 8th 04, 04:22 PM
Alias
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Greg R" wrote

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 16:25:08 +0200, "Alias"
wrote:


MVP wrote


On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 01:45:47 +0200, "Alias"
wrote:

FWIW, I've been on the beta team for that project. I've got it on
three systems here and I've not had a single problem with any of

them
since the RC1 release.

--
Jeffrey Struyk
Microsoft MVP

That's encouraging. But you're a tech. I bet your Windows

98SE/2K/Me/NT
ran
like silk, too.

For the most part, that's a true statement G. It's probably a safe
assumption that I spend a bit more time and energy maintaining my
systems than the average user.

It will be interesting to see what happens to those people
who aren't techs. Like another poster said, this coming Tuesday if,

indeed,
the SP2 is available on Windows Update for the general public, will be

an
interesting day on XP General.

I'm sure there will be questions, issues about the firewall (which is
turned on by default) and that kind of thing. As far as new
functionality, it's gotten simpler. Take the Security Center and the
Wireless Networking. Centralizing the security functions was a very
good move. The new wireless networking routines greatly simplify the
process and should help novice users configure their own networks.

--
Jeffrey Struyk
Microsoft MVP


But won't having auto update/install enabled cause problems if they also
have their AV's auto-scan enabled? Won't some programs not work properly
after the download and installation?

Alias

For some reason Nortons 2004 for has some problems on some systems.
Possible due to the stupid activation. However, Using any previous
Norton's version 2003 or earlier should work.

Here's how I would install xp sp2 if I was downloading xp sp2 and had

Norton's.
First change windows automatic update to "download updates for me, but
let me choose when to install them."

When it done downloading. I would unplug or disconnect my internet
connections.

In services.msc

I would stop all of Norton's services. (Not disable)
Install xp s2

Reboot
The only thing security center may not recognize it Norton is
installed.

Greg R


I don't have Norton. I have Trend Micro that came bundled with SystemSuite
5.0. What would you suggest for that?

Alias


Ads
  #17  
Old August 8th 04, 05:06 PM
Incognitus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Alias" wrote in message
...

MVP wrote in message ...
On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 01:45:47 +0200, "Alias"
wrote:

FWIW, I've been on the beta team for that project. I've got it on
three systems here and I've not had a single problem with any of them
since the RC1 release.

--
Jeffrey Struyk
Microsoft MVP

That's encouraging. But you're a tech. I bet your Windows 98SE/2K/Me/NT

ran
like silk, too.


For the most part, that's a true statement G. It's probably a safe
assumption that I spend a bit more time and energy maintaining my
systems than the average user.

It will be interesting to see what happens to those people
who aren't techs. Like another poster said, this coming Tuesday if,

indeed,
the SP2 is available on Windows Update for the general public, will be

an
interesting day on XP General.


I'm sure there will be questions, issues about the firewall (which is
turned on by default) and that kind of thing. As far as new
functionality, it's gotten simpler. Take the Security Center and the
Wireless Networking. Centralizing the security functions was a very
good move. The new wireless networking routines greatly simplify the
process and should help novice users configure their own networks.

--
Jeffrey Struyk
Microsoft MVP


But won't having auto update/install enabled cause problems if they also
have their AV's auto-scan enabled? Won't some programs not work properly
after the download and installation?

Alias



Not that it matters much but, I've installed every update including SP1,
except display drivers, while connected/online to Windows Updated and my AV
running without a single problem.

  #18  
Old August 8th 04, 05:29 PM
Johnny Lingo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Terrycymru" wrote

On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:09:47 GMT, R. McCarty wrote:

The other thing about SP2 is that a number of applications are going
to need updates/patches for SP2 compatibility. Most if not all won't
post those until the official release on Tuesday.


Is there a list somewhere of applications which have already been
identified as needing updates/patches for SP2 compatibility?

TIA,
Terry


I would be curious to see that list, too. I am not going to install SP2
until I know my apps. will work. I am especially worried about WS_FTP 95

as
I do a lot of web work.

Alias




If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP program?



  #19  
Old August 8th 04, 06:51 PM
Greg R
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????

Alias
I just tested Norton 2003. I use avg know anyway.

Incognitus,
Yes, you can leave your virus program when downloading.
I usally disable my virus program after I unplug or disconnect my
internet connnection after downloading service packs.

Greg R



Not that it matters much but, I've installed every update including SP1,
except display drivers, while connected/online to Windows Updated and my AV
running without a single problem.


  #20  
Old August 8th 04, 11:18 PM
Incognitus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????

I've always just clicked the install button at the update site and installed
while there with AV running. Now, if I used Norton I'd still be trying to
uninstall it.

"Greg R" wrote in message
...
Alias
I just tested Norton 2003. I use avg know anyway.

Incognitus,
Yes, you can leave your virus program when downloading.
I usally disable my virus program after I unplug or disconnect my
internet connnection after downloading service packs.

Greg R



Not that it matters much but, I've installed every update including SP1,
except display drivers, while connected/online to Windows Updated and my

AV
running without a single problem.



  #21  
Old August 8th 04, 11:52 PM
Alias
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Johnny Lingo" wrote in message
news:sxsRc.269290$XM6.17286@attbi_s53...

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Terrycymru" wrote

On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 21:09:47 GMT, R. McCarty wrote:

The other thing about SP2 is that a number of applications are going
to need updates/patches for SP2 compatibility. Most if not all won't
post those until the official release on Tuesday.

Is there a list somewhere of applications which have already been
identified as needing updates/patches for SP2 compatibility?

TIA,
Terry


I would be curious to see that list, too. I am not going to install SP2
until I know my apps. will work. I am especially worried about WS_FTP 95

as
I do a lot of web work.

Alias




If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP program?


Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years. Why learn a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias


  #22  
Old August 9th 04, 01:39 PM
RA
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP program?


Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years. Why learn a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias



That's what my sister says about Windows95


  #23  
Old August 9th 04, 01:43 PM
Alias
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"RA" nomail@thisplace wrote

If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP program?


Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years. Why learn

a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias



That's what my sister says about Windows95


Apples/oranges. I can upload what I want with WS_FTP95. I cannot do what I
want to do with Win95. Now, do you know the answer or are you only capable
of making snide comments?

Alias


  #24  
Old August 9th 04, 03:46 PM
Johnny Lingo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Alias" wrote in message
...

"RA" nomail@thisplace wrote

If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP program?

Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years. Why

learn
a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias



That's what my sister says about Windows95


Apples/oranges. I can upload what I want with WS_FTP95. I cannot do what I
want to do with Win95. Now, do you know the answer or are you only capable
of making snide comments?

Alias




The point I believe that RA was making is that Windows 95 is an old and
antiquated OS that MS doesn't even support anymore. The world of technology
has come a long way since then and people need to keep up. WS_FTP95 falls in
the same realm. Keep up with technology, or you may get left behind.

I once knew of a group that worked for a company that I worked for that had
an application that worked with a very old versions of Oracle and DOS. Many
years passed and they refused to upgrade their applications as technology
advanced. It finally came to a point that it was almost impossible to
migrate to a current version, and a large chunk of their data was lost.

Bottom line: It should probably be time to move on.
http://www.ipswitch.com/Products/WS_FTP/






  #25  
Old August 9th 04, 04:05 PM
Alias
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Johnny Lingo" wrote

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"RA" nomail@thisplace wrote

If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP

program?

Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years. Why

learn
a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias



That's what my sister says about Windows95


Apples/oranges. I can upload what I want with WS_FTP95. I cannot do what

I
want to do with Win95. Now, do you know the answer or are you only

capable
of making snide comments?

Alias




The point I believe that RA was making is that Windows 95 is an old and
antiquated OS that MS doesn't even support anymore.


What's that got to do with WS_FTP? It works fine on my XP Pro now and worked
fine on 95, 98, 98SE, W2k and Me.

The world of technology
has come a long way since then and people need to keep up. WS_FTP95 falls

in
the same realm. Keep up with technology, or you may get left behind.


Key word: "may". Do you know???

I once knew of a group that worked for a company that I worked for that

had
an application that worked with a very old versions of Oracle and DOS.

Many
years passed and they refused to upgrade their applications as technology
advanced. It finally came to a point that it was almost impossible to
migrate to a current version, and a large chunk of their data was lost.

Bottom line: It should probably be time to move on.


Another key word: "probably". Do you know???

http://www.ipswitch.com/Products/WS_FTP/


Um, the "pro" is not free. I don't see any free programs there, do you? The
one I have is. Do you know the answer to my question or can you merely post
an essay on computer technology that *doesn't* answer the question. A simple
yes or no will do.

I am not concerned about losing data as WS_FTP 95 only keeps my login and
password, no other data. The data is both on my D drive and on my host
server, and not kept by WS_FTP.

Alias


  #26  
Old August 9th 04, 04:18 PM
Greg R
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????

WS_FTP95 LE
Yes, It works on 98se & windows xp sp2 rc2. I used to used this alot.
That is until I heard about firefox.

Ws_Ftp_pro is not free.


Greg R




http://www.angelfire.com/in4/computertips/
  #27  
Old August 9th 04, 04:22 PM
Alias
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????

THANK YOU!

Alias

"Greg R" wrote

WS_FTP95 LE
Yes, It works on 98se & windows xp sp2 rc2. I used to used this alot.
That is until I heard about firefox.

Ws_Ftp_pro is not free.


Greg R




http://www.angelfire.com/in4/computertips/



  #28  
Old August 9th 04, 05:12 PM
Johnny Lingo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Johnny Lingo" wrote

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"RA" nomail@thisplace wrote

If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP

program?

Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years. Why

learn
a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias



That's what my sister says about Windows95

Apples/oranges. I can upload what I want with WS_FTP95. I cannot do

what
I
want to do with Win95. Now, do you know the answer or are you only

capable
of making snide comments?

Alias




The point I believe that RA was making is that Windows 95 is an old and
antiquated OS that MS doesn't even support anymore.


What's that got to do with WS_FTP? It works fine on my XP Pro now and

worked
fine on 95, 98, 98SE, W2k and Me.

The world of technology
has come a long way since then and people need to keep up. WS_FTP95

falls
in
the same realm. Keep up with technology, or you may get left behind.


Key word: "may". Do you know???



In my opinion, YES you will be left behind at some point if you continue to
hold on to antiquated technology.




I once knew of a group that worked for a company that I worked for that

had
an application that worked with a very old versions of Oracle and DOS.

Many
years passed and they refused to upgrade their applications as

technology
advanced. It finally came to a point that it was almost impossible to
migrate to a current version, and a large chunk of their data was lost.

Bottom line: It should probably be time to move on.


Another key word: "probably". Do you know???



Again, you insist on using only antiquated technology, and not move up from
time to time, you will be left behind!




http://www.ipswitch.com/Products/WS_FTP/


Um, the "pro" is not free. I don't see any free programs there, do you?

The
one I have is. Do you know the answer to my question or can you merely

post
an essay on computer technology that *doesn't* answer the question. A

simple
yes or no will do.



Things in this world cost. You should not expect everything to be free!



I am not concerned about losing data as WS_FTP 95 only keeps my login and
password, no other data. The data is both on my D drive and on my host
server, and not kept by WS_FTP.

Alias




  #29  
Old August 9th 04, 05:44 PM
Alias
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????


"Johnny Lingo" wrote in message
news:doNRc.118737$eM2.48262@attbi_s51...

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Johnny Lingo" wrote

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"RA" nomail@thisplace wrote

If you do a lot of web work, why don't you get a newer FTP

program?

Cause I like that one and I've been using it for over 7 years.

Why
learn
a
new program when this one works beautifully to meet my needs?

Alias



That's what my sister says about Windows95

Apples/oranges. I can upload what I want with WS_FTP95. I cannot do

what
I
want to do with Win95. Now, do you know the answer or are you only

capable
of making snide comments?

Alias




The point I believe that RA was making is that Windows 95 is an old

and
antiquated OS that MS doesn't even support anymore.


What's that got to do with WS_FTP? It works fine on my XP Pro now and

worked
fine on 95, 98, 98SE, W2k and Me.

The world of technology
has come a long way since then and people need to keep up. WS_FTP95

falls
in
the same realm. Keep up with technology, or you may get left behind.


Key word: "may". Do you know???



In my opinion, YES you will be left behind at some point if you continue

to
hold on to antiquated technology.


Apparently, it *isn't* antiquated, despite your guessing.




I once knew of a group that worked for a company that I worked for

that
had
an application that worked with a very old versions of Oracle and DOS.

Many
years passed and they refused to upgrade their applications as

technology
advanced. It finally came to a point that it was almost impossible to
migrate to a current version, and a large chunk of their data was

lost.

Bottom line: It should probably be time to move on.


Another key word: "probably". Do you know???



Again, you insist on using only antiquated technology, and not move up

from
time to time, you will be left behind!


Apparently, it *isn't* antiquated, despite your guessing.





http://www.ipswitch.com/Products/WS_FTP/


Um, the "pro" is not free. I don't see any free programs there, do you?

The
one I have is. Do you know the answer to my question or can you merely

post
an essay on computer technology that *doesn't* answer the question. A

simple
yes or no will do.



Things in this world cost. You should not expect everything to be free!


I don't. Are you saying that freeware is a bad thing? If so, when will you
be removing your AdAware, Spybot, Spywareblaster, etc.? Do you plan to send
MS a check for SP2 so that you can feel better about your "world"?

Why couldn't you just answer the question? And, if you didn't know the
answer, why did you respond to the post, other than using the opportunity to
lamely try to put me down and expouse your thoughts on new technology and
that a lot of things in this world are not free?

Alias




I am not concerned about losing data as WS_FTP 95 only keeps my login

and
password, no other data. The data is both on my D drive and on my host
server, and not kept by WS_FTP.

Alias






  #30  
Old August 9th 04, 06:17 PM
Ken
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 - WHY?????

The link you posted includes a download link for SP2 for installation on
multiple computers over a network. It is a huge file -- 272 MB. The link
says that users of a single computer should not install this version, but
wait for a smaller download taylored for single computers.

I have a single computer, but I also have a blazing fast broadband
connection that can download this 272 MB file in minutes. Is the problem
here merely the size of the download, or is the problem also the network
components presumably included in this version? In other words, other than
having to download a bigger file, what would be the downside for me of
installing this version of SP2 on a single computer instead of waiting until
August 16 or whatever?

TIA
Ken

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:

I installed SP2 yesterday over an existing Windows XP SP1
installation. After performing a Disk Cleanup and Defrag,
I must say this computer is performing better than ever.

List of fixes included in Service Pack 2 for Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=winxp

The final version of SP2 is not yet available to the general public for download.
It should appear as a Critical Update sometime around August 16th on the Windows
Update website.

Check this site next week for updates to it's availability:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../winxpsp2.mspx

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

Be Smart! Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/

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

"tony" wrote:

| What is wrong with all of the authors in this newsgroup. What is the hurry
| about installing SP2?
| Haven't they learnt yet that it isn't wise to install a new package as soon
| as it is available as there
| will no doubt be many bugs that will need updating within the first month.
| (A lot of you will be aware of the ZoneAlarm 5 fiasco!)
| I personally will not be updating with SP2 until I have seen what the
| feedback is like in this and
| other groups.
| Good luck to all
| Tony


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.