Congratulations new MVP.

"many future hotfixes or critical patches will probably require
the presence of SP2"

That is not necessarily true, according to Microsoft. SP1 will be supported
for patches and hotfixes for quite some time. Just like Win 2000 SP3, etc.

Tom
"Eric McG" wrote in message
...
| Glenn,
|
| You may find the following link to be an interesting read. The author
(Fred
| Langa) has slightly different point of view regarding this update.
|
| Paper or Plastic? (SP2 Upgrade)
| http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2004/2004-09-30.htm#2
|
| My comment is, if you're running Windows XP this is almost a *must have*
update
| mainly because many future hotfixes or critical patches will probably
require
| the presence of SP2.
|
| --
| Hope this helps..Reply in newsgroup only.
| Eric McGillicudy
|
| "Glenn" wrote in message
| ...
| You are truly a man of few words.
|
| Everyone really missed what I was looking for. I was looking for a
patch
| that would make my machine/system (ie: xp pro) work *better*. I guess
there
| is none of that included.
|
| I will probably load it one of these days (after a 3 - 4 marguerites)
but I
| do feel that my machine is pretty secure *now*.
|
| Glenn
|
| "PA Bear" wrote in message
| ...
| 1. To make your machine as secure as possible.
|
| 2. See #1.
|
| That short enough for ya?
| --
| ~PA Bear
|
|
|
|
|

I have stayed up to date with M$ patches (up to now).

Working better isn't that broad of a statement. Any programmer knows
phrases in a compiled program can be written to execute quicker written one
way as opposed to another.

That's all I was looking for. Just an updated OS program. I'm just a
simple boy, if 73 is still considered a boy. g BTW my first one was a
whole 24k so I've been around these things for a while.

Glenn

"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP)" wrote in message
...
Making your machine work better is a rather broad statement. Better than
what? Do you mean make it run faster, make it crash less? Unless,
there's
something specific that would apply to a wide variety of systems, that
sort
of thing is on the hardware and application side as opposed to the OS side
of things and if you decided to install SP2 you should be prepared for the
fact you may have to update various drivers and/or applications as an
update
such as this changes the operating environment.

If you've been staying up to date with security patches for XP, have a
good
firewall and antivirus application that you keep up to date, from a
security
standpoint, there's no compelling reason to update to SP2 and security
would
embody the bulk of what is improved in SP2.

That said, you may have trouble getting future updates and patches for XP
through Windows Update if you don't update to SP2 as there may be
compatibility issues going forward with regard to future updates. If you
have your own firewall, you can turn off the Windows firewall if you
install
SP2 and you would still have the benefit of the other security patches SP2
provides.

Was it running Unix?


"Glenn" wrote in message
...
I have stayed up to date with M$ patches (up to now).

Working better isn't that broad of a statement. Any programmer knows
phrases in a compiled program can be written to execute quicker written
one
way as opposed to another.

That's all I was looking for. Just an updated OS program. I'm just a
simple boy, if 73 is still considered a boy. g BTW my first one was a
whole 24k so I've been around these things for a while.

Glenn

"Michael Solomon (MS-MVP)" wrote in message
...
Making your machine work better is a rather broad statement. Better than
what? Do you mean make it run faster, make it crash less? Unless,
there's
something specific that would apply to a wide variety of systems, that
sort
of thing is on the hardware and application side as opposed to the OS
side
of things and if you decided to install SP2 you should be prepared for
the
fact you may have to update various drivers and/or applications as an
update
such as this changes the operating environment.

If you've been staying up to date with security patches for XP, have a
good
firewall and antivirus application that you keep up to date, from a
security
standpoint, there's no compelling reason to update to SP2 and security
would
embody the bulk of what is improved in SP2.

That said, you may have trouble getting future updates and patches for XP
through Windows Update if you don't update to SP2 as there may be
compatibility issues going forward with regard to future updates. If you
have your own firewall, you can turn off the Windows firewall if you
install
SP2 and you would still have the benefit of the other security patches
SP2
provides.

You know, I don't remember. It was a very basic dos OS. One of the fastest
OS I had was a dos called Theos, "The operating system" as I remember.

I have never had that much problem with M$ but as I indicated, anything can
be improved.

Glenn

"Andre Da Costa" wrote in message
...
Was it running Unix?


"Glenn" wrote in message
...
I have stayed up to date with M$ patches (up to now).

Working better isn't that broad of a statement. Any programmer knows
phrases in a compiled program can be written to execute quicker written
one
way as opposed to another.

That's all I was looking for. Just an updated OS program. I'm just a
simple boy, if 73 is still considered a boy. g BTW my first one was a
whole 24k so I've been around these things for a while.

Glenn

In ,
Glenn typed:

That's all I was looking for. Just an updated OS program. I'm
just a
simple boy, if 73 is still considered a boy. g BTW my first
one
was a whole 24k so I've been around these things for a while.


You're a few years older than I, but I probably go back farther
with computers than you. The first computer I worked on (1962)
was 4K (and that was decimal K--1000 characters per K, not binary
with 1024).

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup