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
    imekon

    MisterDonut wrote:
    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.



    Why? You mean you like having open security holes like IE and OE,. no firewall or virus checker? I'd hate to be in the company you work for!

  • User profile image
    lars

    It's pretty bold to count on Firefox (or any other browser) to have no vulnerabilites that you don't know about. There is also the fact that there is a certain time between an outbreak of a new virus/worm/trojan and the time when you get your antivirus updated to detect it. You also count on your friends to always keep their firewall on and correctly configured. I guess in the standard car analogy world this would be to not use the seatbelts since you don't intend on having an accident. 
    This may work for you if you never make any mistakes. But can you count on all your friends never slipping up? It's is wise to have more than one layer of security. That means antivirus, spyware scanners, LUA, firewall and patching. The security hole that isn't there cannot be exploited if the other layers fail. This is what the service pack is all about. Again, you may do as you wish - after all its you that gets to clean up your own mess. Smiley

  • User profile image
    warren

    imekon wrote:


    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.


    So let's get this right.  You believe that XP SP1 is "not broken and doesn't need to be fixed", and yet you are too chickenshit to use Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, because you believe that they are not secure enough?

    Actually, yeah, I think that's all it is... you're too fucking scared to try new software, because you're frightened it will break something.  Guess what, brother, XP SP2 is working fantastically for a great many people, and we're getting the many benefits of SP2 that are separate from security, including the improved wireless networking support, complete IPv6 support built-in, across-the-board performance improvements due to the entirety of XP being recompiled with a much improved compiler, a much more flexible and efficient system of software updates (smaller downloads, faster installs, properly functioning hands-off automatic patch installation, etc.), and a whole whack of other features big and small. 

    For administrators, there's several hundred new Group Policy entries; you can now control things like whether or not the "customer experience improvement program" stuff is displayed in MSN Messenger... you can disable writing to external USB devices (good for high-security environments).... there's lots of other stuff as well, including configuration of Internet Explorer that goes far beyond what Firefox offers in terms of granular, multi-layered security.


    You snub Service Pack 2 at your peril.  Continue along this path, and you will soon find yourself marginalised like those wackos who think that Windows 2000 is somehow superior to XP because it has fewer useful and relevant features.


  • User profile image
    imekon

    warren wrote:
    imekon wrote:

    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.


    So let's get this right.  You believe that XP SP1 is "not broken and doesn't need to be fixed", and yet you are too chickenshit to use Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, because you believe that they are not secure enough?


    Evidently you can't get it right.

    warren wrote:

    Actually, yeah, I think that's all it is... you're too fucking scared to try new software, because you're frightened it will break something.  Guess what, brother, XP SP2 is working fantastically for a great many people, and we're getting the many benefits of SP2 that are separate from security, including the improved wireless networking support, complete IPv6 support built-in, across-the-board performance improvements due to the entirety of XP being recompiled with a much improved compiler, a much more flexible and efficient system of software updates (smaller downloads, faster installs, properly functioning hands-off automatic patch installation, etc.), and a whole whack of other features big and small. 


    Mozilla, Firefox and Thunderbird are newer than Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, and they get updated regularly. Can the same be said of IE etc.? No?

    warren wrote:

    For administrators, there's several hundred new Group Policy entries; you can now control things like whether or not the "customer experience improvement program" stuff is displayed in MSN Messenger... you can disable writing to external USB devices (good for high-security environments).... there's lots of other stuff as well, including configuration of Internet Explorer that goes far beyond what Firefox offers in terms of granular, multi-layered security.


    warren wrote:

    You snub Service Pack 2 at your peril.  Continue along this path, and you will soon find yourself marginalised like those wackos who think that Windows 2000 is somehow superior to XP because it has fewer useful and relevant features.


    I use Windows 2000 at work. Seems to give me what I need. As for snubbing SP2, I'll wait and see. If no vulnerabilities appear shortly, I'll give it a whirl. Otherwise, I'll wait and see.

  • User profile image
    warren

    imekon wrote:

    Evidently you can't get it right.


    I think I have it exactly right.  You want to talk about how it isn't broken, but SP1 IS BROKEN.  I understand that your ego will prevent you from backtracking now, since you've already committed yourself to an indefensible point.  Go for gusto, right?


    But, as you say, you use Windows 2000.  Are you using the RTM version as released more than four and a half years ago?  After all, Windows 2000 without any service packs works just fine; some features are missing, sure, but hey, surely you could use it to get your work accomplished... and there's obviously no reason to upgrade to, say, Service Pack 4 with its metric assload of post-SP4 hotfixes.

    Right?


  • User profile image
    lars

    imekon wrote:

    Mozilla, Firefox and Thunderbird are newer than Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, and they get updated regularly. Can the same be said of IE etc.? No?


    Well, SP2 contains a lot of security updates for MSIE. So I'd say yes.

  • User profile image
    imekon

    warren wrote:
    imekon wrote:
    Evidently you can't get it right.


    I think I have it exactly right.  You want to talk about how it isn't broken, but SP1 IS BROKEN.  I understand that your ego will prevent you from backtracking now, since you've already committed yourself to an indefensible point.  Go for gusto, right?


    Broken how exactly? Is my system running? Is it working? Does it have virii? Nope. Is it slow? No. This must be a new definition of broken I've never heard of before.

    warren wrote:

    But, as you say, you use Windows 2000.  Are you using the RTM version as released more than four and a half years ago?  After all, Windows 2000 without any service packs works just fine; some features are missing, sure, but hey, surely you could use it to get your work accomplished... and there's obviously no reason to upgrade to, say, Service Pack 4 with its metric assload of post-SP4 hotfixes.

    Right?




    Wrong. I said I use Windows 2000 at work. Funny, you left that part out.

  • User profile image
    imekon

    lars wrote:
    imekon wrote:
    Mozilla, Firefox and Thunderbird are newer than Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, and they get updated regularly. Can the same be said of IE etc.? No?


    Well, SP2 contains a lot of security updates for MSIE. So I'd say yes.


    Until the updates come through for firefox et al. Then IE will start to lag behind again, until... say, SP3? Longhaul? Sorry, Longhorn?

  • User profile image
    eagle

    i-me-kon is broken...a broken record...

  • User profile image
    Jaz

    out of intrest, where have all the MS programs gone from the list of programs that might be broken?

  • User profile image
    eagle

    To the Tower of London where it’s “off” with their head.

  • User profile image
    Magic

    Hi,

    I had some trouble installing SP2 because of low diskspace.
    I thought 780 MB free space on drive C: is enough, but it wasn't.

    The point I don't understand is that SP2 was checking necessary diskspace before installing DLL files and everything seems to be ok. While installing DLL files (copy to dllcache directory) it ran out of diskspace and the system ended up in a mess ... - I reinstalled it -Smiley


    Greets,

    Magic

  • User profile image
    jonathanh

    They rewrote the list to add more information, include links to fixes, eliminate dupes, and take out stuff that shouldn't really have been there in the first place Smiley From an internal alias:

    For the curious among us, the reason Virtual PC was on that list in the first place was due to a single Win98 shareware app called AllChars.exe - even though it says in its own read me that it's "rumor[ed]" to run Windows 2000, it's so poorly written that it can cause FPU faults when running in a VM.
  • User profile image
    sriram_2001

    I just blogged about a problem I've been having with FTP connections.

    http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/sriram/archive/2004/08/19/22738.aspx

  • User profile image
    jonathanh

    I just tried outbound ftp from the command line, and got a pop-up prompt to add File Transfer Program (c:\windows\system32\ftp.exe) to the firewall exceptions list. It also let me use ftp:// URLs in Internet Explorer. In other words, everything was working as expected.

    What happens if you use ftp from the command line? That would narrow it down a bit.

  • User profile image
    sriram_2001

    The commandline said "Unknown connect error" and IE doesnt open it up either. Hmm..I'm checking to see whether I've messed up by changing the notification settings

  • User profile image
    sriram_2001

    I have "Display notifications" on - so there's some other problem. I'm totally lost now Smiley

  • User profile image
    jonathanh

    Quick way to restore the defaults: Windows Firewall, Advanced tab, then click the "Restore Defaults" button at the bottom.

Conversation locked

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