Coffeehouse Thread

140 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

XPSP2 -- Anyone having troubles?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    lars

    imekon wrote:

    However, there is a subtle difference between a small patch (even one for a kernel) and an 80MByte Service Pack


    In a way the 80Mb option is better since it's been tested as a whole.

    imekon wrote:

    "If it ain't broke..."


    Man, you've not been paying attention this summer. I'm surprised that there has not been more problems in the wild considering the vulnerabilities that SP2 fix. With the line of reasoning I don't see why you run a firewall or antivirus either. That's also proactive measures.

    In any case, not installing SP2 is your choice. I don't have a problem with that. I just think it's a bit irresponsible to tell other people - who rely on your expert advice - to not go ahead and protect themselves.

  • User profile image
    jsrfc58

    scobleizer wrote:

    In fact, why don't you go back to using an Apple II? After all, that worked just fine too.


    Hey now, no Apple II bashing here.  My IIc still works fine, even though I have not done any serious coding on it in years.  I still have an Imagewriter II also.  Remember, at the time that was state of the art. Wink

  • User profile image
    imekon

    scobleizer wrote:
    >Why should I be Microsoft's guinea pig?

    You shouldn't be. So far millions of people have installed XPSP2. So far the number of issues people have had are very small. Heck, you've posted more times than the number of issues reported here.


    And elsewhere? Or is this the Ra Ra Microsoft club?

    scobleizer wrote:


    But, you've already demonstrated that you aren't willing to install XPSP2 no matter what we tell you. We've given you a list of hundreds of bugs that have been fixed. We've detailed that yet another layer of security has been added on beyond what you are using today (recompiled Windows to not allow buffer overruns and closed down some APIs so that remote users can't cause as much damage, and closed a bunch of vulnerabilities in IE so that surfing the Web is far safer).


    I already have two independant and more advanced firewalls installed. I think I'm pretty safe behind them. As for IE, like I said before, I don't use it.

    scobleizer wrote:

    So, my advice to you? Don't install. If you don't want all that, definitely don't install.

    Don't be so daft Robert. I'm holding off installing because I have doubts about SP2. In a few weeks I'll revisit and see if anything has changed.

    scobleizer wrote:

    In fact, why don't you go back to using an Apple II? After all, that worked just fine too.


    I wouldn't know Robert, I never had an Apple II. I did have something called an Acorn Archimedes, somewhat ahead of Windows 3.1 in those early days.

    Now you're just being plain silly.

  • User profile image
    dbarjim

    Do you live your whole life from headlines you read in newspapers also???  Type is cheap on the Internet and costs nothing. How can you function without doing any simple research on so called problems with SP2. You do a dis-service to others and make yourself look VERY shallow.

    Jim

  • User profile image
    scobleizer

    Beer28: no, I wish I still had my Apple II so I could get Woz to sign it.

    The wood case was the Apple I. Those are now worth $40k or so. There's one in the Fry's in Sunnyvale.

  • User profile image
    Jazzynupe

    imekon wrote:


    And if I see no virii and survive, what then?


    imekon, I know you probably won't believe me, but I'm giving it a shot anyway (I'm a glutton for punishment... Smiley )

    What I call not seeing virii and surviving is... LUCKY... It just takes that one moment, one slip up... That one time where you think everything is fine and then in the background you are hit. Not saying it is your fault or that you didn't do things right, just that you COULD get hit and if you install the patch, your chances of getting hit are that much lower...

    imekon wrote:

    Yep, I patch 'em.

    Like I run Windows update.

    However, there is a subtle difference between a small patch (even one for a kernel) and an 80MByte Service Pack.


    Well that depends... A Kernel patch is pretty serious. I mean that is the CORE of everything. So to say that just because the number of MB's are smaller makes it any less important is not really correct is it? What I am getting at is that when you find out a patch is available for your Linux system and it is a "big" fix for a vulnerability, how long do you "sit on it"? My point being, the importance of the patch is not measured in its size but what get fixed in the update. Also as important is what is vulnerable without the update (discounting your fancy firewalls and so on Wink )? Sure the firewall may stop it, but the importance is that if given that split second of the firewall having a brain fart or something letting this particular traffic through and in that moment, you are hit. Yeah sure highly unlikely with two firewalls, but it is all about the potential of the of it happening.

    imekon wrote:


    The only way to test, is to install SP2. I do not know what the outcome of that will be. Will I lose some important application? Will my machine reboot? Can you guarantee that it will?



    I don't have your EXACT setup so I can't guarantee anything. I could fix it for you though Wink

    But seriously, if you are that concerned about data, do a backup before the install. If you are worried about the applications, copy the installs for them to CD or a seperate hard drive "just in case" (one of the things I do).

    Some of the issues that were mentioned here are not quite as common as you may think. The vast majority of installs go fine and usually the only hicups are with the Windows firewall. But if you have your own version, it should detect the firewall and disable the windows firewall (of course get the update for your particular firewall before hand so it is detected).

    imekon wrote:


    "If it ain't broke..."

    Why should I be Microsoft's guinea pig?


    And the root of the problem is that if your fancy protections fail, you WILL find out it is vulnerable (broke means it does not work and that is not the case...).

    I would urge you to at least get a machine, a Virtual PC image, do some backups before installing and see for yourself. I can tell you there are no problems... Everyone else can tell you they HAD problems... But until you actually see it, which is the truth for you (in Physics, this is general relativity and the Uncertanity Principle Smiley )?

    But the root thing is this, SP2 is a major change moving toward being more secure in XP. If you advise people to not install it, not only current security issues are not patched, but potential holes that SP2 can prevent are not covered either.

    I mean if you know about the changes to [D]COM (thanks Don, but individual links need fixing) alone, you would want to insall it in a heart beat...

    http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/dbox/default.aspx?month=2004-06
    http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/dbox/default.aspx?month=2004-07

    (you have to browse throu them a little, but they are there)

    So anyway, I understand your fears of loosing data and so on, but what you have here is something that was available as 2 release canidates and I am sure several betas before that. While there still may be problems here and there, IF you take the right percautions, I WILL GUARANTEE that you will not loose anything more than time if a problem occurs.

  • User profile image
    mminyard

    imekon wrote:
    >> Will my machine reboot? Can you guarantee that it >> will?

    Jazzynupe wrote:
    > I don't have your EXACT setup so I can't guarantee > anything. I could fix it for you though Wink


    Instead of debating the issue of whether to intall, I did post an actual problem (c0000135 blue screen / winsrv problem).  Any ideas on how to fix that?  My system is back and running, but I can't get SP2 to install. 

    Repeating my earlier post, several people have reported this problem in the MS newsgroups but no solutions.

    Matt

  • User profile image
    scobleizer

    Beer: yeah, he got me my start in this crazy business. I interviewed him in college, built up a friendship with him (we studied together in West Valley Community College's cafeteria). Then I talked him out of $40k worth of Macs for our journalism department. I've written about him a few times on my blog. One of the more famous ones was when Dave Winer took me to his Superbowl party: http://scobleizer.manilasites.com/discuss/msgReader$52

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    mminyard wrote:


    Instead of debating the issue of whether to intall, I did post an actual problem (c0000135 blue screen / winsrv problem).  Any ideas on how to fix that?  My system is back and running, but I can't get SP2 to install. 



    Have you got any custom boot screens, Windows skinning applications or virtual CD drives? Throughout the SP2 testing phase they seemed to be the biggest culprits for this sort of thing.

  • User profile image
    mminyard

    > Have you got any custom boot screens, Windows
    > skinning applications or virtual CD drives?
    > Throughout the SP2 testing phase they seemed
    > to be the biggest culprits for this sort of
    > thing.


    Nope

    Matt

  • User profile image
    Jazzynupe

    I would recomend BootSkin from StarDock.net if you want the custom boot screens. It does not modify or change the kernel at all and it is relatively easy to create your own screens.

    I would say that if a custom bootscreen is the culprit, this might be a viable replacement and it works with SP2 just fine (have it installed on my work PC)

  • User profile image
    imekon

    lars wrote:


    In any case, not installing SP2 is your choice. I don't have a problem with that. I just think it's a bit irresponsible to tell other people - who rely on your expert advice - to not go ahead and protect themselves.



    You equate "install SP2" with "protect yourself". I equate "firewall, virus check and DO NOT RUN IE/OE" as "protect yourself". My way works and has been working for some time. Your way is unproven.

  • User profile image
    Sidibe

    Chill out guys, This is "Anyone having troubles?"  not "Am I going to install it or not?"

    I've installed it on about 10 PC's so far.

    8 of the installations were great, no problems whatsoever, and I've really liked the new features (especially in the Zero Configuration Wireless).  I was surprised at how many of the little bugs that were RC2 were now fixed.

    I've had trouble with 2.  One is a MCE, and the other a standard install on an older box.  MCE is having trouble interfacing with WMP.  I assume it is a permissions problem with framework, or with the Media Library.  But, when I try to launch My music, I get the following (also affects Internet Radio Braodcasts):

    AUDIO ERROR:
    To play music in Media Center, install Windows Media Player 9 or repair your current installation.


    This has been occuring with others with MCE and SP2, documented here:  http://www.xpmce.com/forum/ftopic84543.html

    Still haven't resolved this one, but would sure love some help.

    The other problem, which a few others have addressed, is the WinSVR STOP error on startup.  I fixed this by uninstalling SP2 from PE (using spuninstall.txt as a batch file) and Doing an in-place upgrade/install of an integrated XP SP2 CD.  It worked great, just frustrating up to the reinstall point.

  • User profile image
    MisterDonut

    imekon wrote:
    I equate "firewall, virus check and DO NOT RUN IE/OE" as "protect yourself".


    Not trying to get in the middle of a flame war.. But shheesh.. I'm glad you aren't managing me or my company's computers.



  • User profile image
    Keskos

    imekon wrote:
    lars wrote:

    In any case, not installing SP2 is your choice. I don't have a problem with that. I just think it's a bit irresponsible to tell other people - who rely on your expert advice - to not go ahead and protect themselves.



    You equate "install SP2" with "protect yourself". I equate "firewall, virus check and DO NOT RUN IE/OE" as "protect yourself". My way works and has been working for some time. Your way is unproven.


    You are saying that you are being malicious and give bad advice to others and expect people to respect that? I don't think you are any different than creators of spyware and adwares. You give bad advice to others, period. But I don't see a big problem with that, as long as they know that you are the one screwing them, not Microsoft.

  • User profile image
    Jazzynupe

    Hey mminyard,

    Does this look similar to the issue you see?

    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=173309

    or

    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=318159


    The first one is for older versions of NT, but maybe the screen you are seeing is related to this problem.

    Any idea why this might happen guys?

    [NEW INFO]
    Hey Could this be it???
    http://www.experts-exchange.com/Operating_Systems/Q_20820709.html

  • User profile image
    mminyard

    Yeah, I have seen those articles, but they didn't help solve the SP2 problem.  Although, one of them did help me get running again.  I've googled this thing to death and not turned up a solution.

    Looks like someone hear left a message that an install with XP2 slipstreamed CD solved their problem.  One person in the newsgroups also reported this.  I guess I will try that.

    Thanks,

    Matt

  • User profile image
    Karim

    Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth:

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1738&e=6&u=/zd/133763

    Attack Pierces Fully Patched XP Machines

    "Security researchers have identified a new version of the Download.Ject attack that is now being used on the Internet and can compromise fully patched Windows XP machines.

    "The new version of the attack just appeared Thursday afternoon, and while details are still sketchy, experts say its main purpose is to install a back door on compromised PCs.

    "But machines running SP2 (Service Pack 2) for XP are not vulnerable to the new attack. Larholm added that the vulnerabilities exploited in this attack have been known for some time."

    Golly gee, I guess all those people taking a prudent "wait and see" attitude toward SP2 can now "wait and see" their computer get backdoored by hackers.

    Their credit card numbers might be in the hands of the Russian Mafia by this weekend, but hey, at least they're not "Microsoft's guinea pigs."

    As someone once said, "If it ain't broke..."

    ...oh wait... is it broke now?

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.