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 from MSDN?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46  
Old August 9th 04, 12:05 AM
Testy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

It was decided by these clients not to be cost effective for them to
re-write their code for these custom applications.

Testy

"Eyal Teler" wrote in message
...
Testy wrote:
As I have stated elsewhere I have Beats tested SP2 for several months

for
several of my clients. The major on which supplies custom software to

major
companies throughout N.A. has decided to NOT support SP 2 and has

advised
all its clients to stay with SP1 or to switch to Linux which will be

fully
supported.


I'd be interesting to know why this decision was made. Have any of the
problems which must have resulted in this decision been reported to
Microsoft, how were they reported, and what was the response if any?

Eyal



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/2004


Ads
  #47  
Old August 9th 04, 12:59 AM
Eyal Teler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Testy wrote:
As I have stated elsewhere I have Beats tested SP2 for several months for
several of my clients. The major on which supplies custom software to major
companies throughout N.A. has decided to NOT support SP 2 and has advised
all its clients to stay with SP1 or to switch to Linux which will be fully
supported.


I'd be interesting to know why this decision was made. Have any of the
problems which must have resulted in this decision been reported to
Microsoft, how were they reported, and what was the response if any?

Eyal
  #48  
Old August 9th 04, 02:19 PM
Testy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

No. It would be far to technical for you to understand.

Testy

"Eyal Teler" wrote in message
...
Testy wrote:
It was decided by these clients not to be cost effective for them to
re-write their code for these custom applications.


Why? Did they have a bunch of deliberate buffer underruns that would
be prevented by SP2?

Eyal



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/2004


  #49  
Old August 9th 04, 03:13 PM
Eyal Teler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Testy wrote:
It was decided by these clients not to be cost effective for them to
re-write their code for these custom applications.


Why? Did they have a bunch of deliberate buffer underruns that would
be prevented by SP2?

Eyal
  #50  
Old August 9th 04, 06:33 PM
Testy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Well, if you think you would be able to understand and know better the over
75 consultants working for several developers that employ hundreds of
programmers and supply custom applications to major corporation and
governments please send me your resume there is a position open that pays
150,000US I am sure you would qualify.


Testy

"Eyal Teler" wrote in message
...
Testy wrote:
No. It would be far to technical for you to understand.


Really, that technical, huh.

I'd have said "try me" but I'm sure you have no shred of idea yourself.

Eyal



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/2004


  #51  
Old August 9th 04, 07:25 PM
Eyal Teler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Testy wrote:
No. It would be far to technical for you to understand.


Really, that technical, huh.

I'd have said "try me" but I'm sure you have no shred of idea yourself.

Eyal
  #52  
Old August 9th 04, 08:51 PM
Eyal Teler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Testy wrote:
Well, if you think you would be able to understand and know better the over
75 consultants working for several developers that employ hundreds of
programmers and supply custom applications to major corporation and
governments please send me your resume there is a position open that pays
150,000US I am sure you would qualify.


I'm not saying I know better. I assume they had reasons (and it's also
clear to me now that, as I suspected, you don't know them). What I
wonder is whether they discussed it with Microsoft in any way. I
understand that these people were on the beta, so did Microsoft just
tell them "we don't care about your problem reports"?

BTW, the position isn't relevant (considering that I'm not in the US
and that you haven't given details), but thanks for the offer.

Eyal
  #53  
Old August 9th 04, 09:38 PM
Testy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Of course they were in contact with MS! For security reasons I am not
allowed to provide the information you request. If I did so I would be
subject to prosecution under breech of contract and several international
security laws.
P.S. if you really are that good send your resume I never said the position
was NOT in the U.S.

Testy


"Eyal Teler" wrote in message
...
Testy wrote:
Well, if you think you would be able to understand and know better the
over
75 consultants working for several developers that employ hundreds of
programmers and supply custom applications to major corporation and
governments please send me your resume there is a position open that pays
150,000US I am sure you would qualify.


I'm not saying I know better. I assume they had reasons (and it's also
clear to me now that, as I suspected, you don't know them). What I wonder
is whether they discussed it with Microsoft in any way. I understand that
these people were on the beta, so did Microsoft just tell them "we don't
care about your problem reports"?

BTW, the position isn't relevant (considering that I'm not in the US and
that you haven't given details), but thanks for the offer.

Eyal



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/2004


  #54  
Old August 9th 04, 10:10 PM
Testy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

I am only a small cog in a huge worldwide conglomerate. All actions were
taken at the highest level since several nations security were involved.

Testy


"Eyal Teler" wrote in message
...
Testy wrote:
Of course they were in contact with MS! For security reasons I am not
allowed to provide the information you request. If I did so I would be
subject to prosecution under breech of contract and several international
security laws.


Okay, sorry. Pity I can't satisfy my curiosity.

If you're allowed, however, perhaps you could write a detailed description
of the case and e-mail it to one of the higher ups in Microsoft. As an MVP
and beta tester, I've seen feedback go to waste by inadequate responses,
but I've also seen good responses when feedback reached the right people.
I'm sure Microsoft does care about losing business, so they might try to
do something. Too late for SP2, but maybe in the future... So if you have
some time to spare, such a letter might achieve something.

P.S. if you really are that good send your resume I never said the
position was NOT in the U.S.


I may be misunderstanding the sentence -- is it in the US or not? The
sentence says it is, but I'm not, so...

In any case, not really relevant right now (not sure if at all, since I
still don't know what job you're offering). I'm in YAS mode (Yet Another
Startup). Payment up front is lousy (and usually in the end, too), but
high job satisfaction.

Eyal



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.736 / Virus Database: 490 - Release Date: 8/9/2004


  #55  
Old August 9th 04, 11:05 PM
Eyal Teler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Testy wrote:
Of course they were in contact with MS! For security reasons I am not
allowed to provide the information you request. If I did so I would be
subject to prosecution under breech of contract and several international
security laws.


Okay, sorry. Pity I can't satisfy my curiosity.

If you're allowed, however, perhaps you could write a detailed
description of the case and e-mail it to one of the higher ups in
Microsoft. As an MVP and beta tester, I've seen feedback go to waste
by inadequate responses, but I've also seen good responses when
feedback reached the right people. I'm sure Microsoft does care about
losing business, so they might try to do something. Too late for SP2,
but maybe in the future... So if you have some time to spare, such a
letter might achieve something.

P.S. if you really are that good send your resume I never said the position
was NOT in the U.S.


I may be misunderstanding the sentence -- is it in the US or not? The
sentence says it is, but I'm not, so...

In any case, not really relevant right now (not sure if at all, since
I still don't know what job you're offering). I'm in YAS mode (Yet
Another Startup). Payment up front is lousy (and usually in the end,
too), but high job satisfaction.

Eyal
  #56  
Old August 10th 04, 06:13 PM
Michael J. Carter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 from MSDN?

Yeah, it appears that they messed up on the version string.

The only way to tell that you have the final version is if it says
xpsp_sp2_rtm. Notice the date is incorrect as well, since the final build
date was 2004-08-04 not 2004-08-03. It seems they were under the gun to get
the final version out and this just slipped between the cracks. How
unforunate, since it is very confusing.

The correct version string should have been:

Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040804-2180: Service Pack 2


"Nospam" wrote in message
...
I see Windows XP SP2 listed on the MSDN downloads site. Is this the
official release?

I d/l it, installed it. I thought it was supposed to be build 2180, but
when I do a Winver I get the following:

Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158: Service Pack 2 which sounds like
build 2158.

However, if I look at the AUTORUN.DLL file on the CD I burned I see
5.1.2600.2180 as the version of that file.

So is this the correct official release?



  #57  
Old August 10th 04, 11:50 PM
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 from MSDN?

2158 refers to time not Build so it is correct..
That is why 2158 follows the date, you not only get the date but the
time.
2158 = 9:58 PM (most likely Pacific time)

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


"Michael J. Carter" wrote in message
...
Yeah, it appears that they messed up on the version string.

The only way to tell that you have the final version is if it says
xpsp_sp2_rtm. Notice the date is incorrect as well, since the final
build date was 2004-08-04 not 2004-08-03. It seems they were under
the gun to get the final version out and this just slipped between
the cracks. How unforunate, since it is very confusing.

The correct version string should have been:

Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040804-2180: Service Pack 2


"Nospam" wrote in message
...
I see Windows XP SP2 listed on the MSDN downloads site. Is this the
official release?

I d/l it, installed it. I thought it was supposed to be build
2180, but when I do a Winver I get the following:

Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_rtm.040803-2158: Service Pack 2 which sounds
like build 2158.

However, if I look at the AUTORUN.DLL file on the CD I burned I see
5.1.2600.2180 as the version of that file.

So is this the correct official release?





  #58  
Old August 11th 04, 01:48 PM
Lawrence Groves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

"Robert Comer" wrote in message
...
Supported and works are two very different things.

FTP does indeed work, but you have to tell the firewall to let it pass.


Well I installed SP2 this morning and having read all this have just checked
FTP and VPN. Both work fine under SP2, and I haven't made a single change
from the default firewall settings. I haven't specifically allowed this
traffic to pass though anyway.

Loz.

PS. Yes, my firewall is enabled.


  #59  
Old August 11th 04, 02:43 PM
Lawrence Groves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

Eyal,

He originally said....

Please send me your resume there is a position open that pays 150,000US

Which means the job pays the equivilant of $150000, not that the job is
necessarily in the US itself.

Loz.


  #60  
Old August 11th 04, 02:58 PM
Robert Comer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default SP2 Behavior ...

I think it matters if you use passive or active FTP, but anyway, I had to
allow it so it's hard to tell why. some do and some don't.

I didn't have to change anything to allow VPN, but I had to add quite a few
of my other networking stuff to the exemptions list. (WSEP, VNC, syslog,
remote desktop, an iSeries client utility, Brightstor client.)

- Bob Comer


"Lawrence Groves" wrote in message
...
"Robert Comer" wrote in message
...
Supported and works are two very different things.

FTP does indeed work, but you have to tell the firewall to let it pass.


Well I installed SP2 this morning and having read all this have just
checked FTP and VPN. Both work fine under SP2, and I haven't made a single
change from the default firewall settings. I haven't specifically allowed
this traffic to pass though anyway.

Loz.

PS. Yes, my firewall is enabled.



 




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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MSDN Cd Bill General XP issues or comments 2 July 25th 04 10:22 AM






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:23 AM.


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