General discussion


Is Microsoft at fault

By jterry ·
Why do I read about so many poeple who say they are not going to update windows to SP2 or install any Microsoft updates and than want to blame Microsoft when there PC gets corrupted? They are not only making their own PC vulnerable but opening themselves to be a Bot to infect others.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I say a blanket answer is a bad answer.

by apotheon In reply to I say install it

If someone has an up to date backup and isn't going to lose significant resources (time, money, whatever) in the process, I certainly won't recommend just installing SP2 on an already-running system: rather, someone under those circumstances should wipe the system clean, install XP from scratch, then install SP2. Then and only then, the person should reinstall all software and make configuration changes as needed. Restart it a few times when you're done and use it for a little while before restoring data from backup.

Anything less risks an unstable system that might cause tremendous problems. I've seen SP2 installs on already-used systems screw up the system significantly often enough to never recommend an install of SP2 that doesn't involve wiping the hard drive and starting over.

Collapse -

For exactly the same reason that

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Is Microsoft at fault

They do not want to be among the first to use a new M$ Windows. You currently know exactly what you have what problems you need to look out for and importantly what software will run on the system and how to control things.

When you rush in to install the latest patch or Service Pack all of that goes out the window and you have to start from scratch again.

While SP2 has some good new features they still come no where near what the better third party apps do and in business downtime has a measurable cost so unless you can afford the possible costs involved you don't even consider it.

For Home users things like Wireless and network printers are not likely to be a problem so if they have a solid backup they are welcome to play to their hearts content and if they are forced to reload what's it to them after all the vast majority only use their computers as game consoles and they only stand to loose their highest scores on whatever game it is that they are currently playing.

I've seen far too many people who blindly trust M$ get their fingers burnt and after experiencing a total systems failure from what should be a noncritical install I now tread very carefully.

Col ]:)

Collapse -

too true

by apotheon In reply to For exactly the same reas ...

Considering that SP2 rewrites a significant percentage of the OS, it's a more significant change than going from XP Home with no service pack to XP Pro SP1. One simply cannot reasonably trust that, coming from Microsoft.

Collapse -

MS is not to blame!

by comp1systems In reply to Is Microsoft at fault

I've heard it so many times: "I installed SP2 and now my
computer doesn't work any more." blah blah blah. It's the
same old story that Microsoft screwed up their computer.
Rather than taking a look at compatibility issues that may
have something to with other programs they are running
(i.e., SBC Yahoo! DSL software), they find it easier to blame
Microsoft. Now I do remember reading a long while back,
an article that said something to the effect that some of MS
security patches had to be recalled (or something like that)
because they posed serious threats to PC's. But they've
long since straightened up their act in that area.

They need to quit their whining and consider going to the
source of the problem, not MS, of course. Rumor has it, if
you don't have SP1, you can't do SP2. But I'm new at what do I know. But I will still say it's a
compatibility issue that does not stem from MS SP2.

Collapse -

that's just funny

by apotheon In reply to MS is not to blame!

With something that is not identified as a new operating system, or even a new operating system version, compatibility issues such as SP2 can raise should not in any way be a problem. The fact that they are says something about Microsoft's way of doing business. To blame that on the end-user is irresponsible and unfair.

What evidence do you have to support the notion that Microsoft has "straightened up [its] act" in the area of security patches that posed security threats? SP2 itself poses security threats, including by way of increased remote access to the system (primarily by Microsoft) and by way of inclusion with a firewall that actually increases certain types of vulnerability to malicious activity. Are you just making this up as you go along?

How can you make claims about whether or not SP2 is a problem when you don't even know what the requirements for installing it are?

Collapse -

Stop trying to make me laugh

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to MS is not to blame!

If you really believe that try installing MS Java onto a high end workstation one of the Dual CPU types with inbuilt SCSI and LAN.

I did and the machine booted up perfectly provided you didn't want a LAN any SCSI drives or for that matter any external storage media IDE CD/DVD or floppy. But it worked great otherwise.

Or better still try installing SP2 on a P4 that is over 12 months old as a clean install and see if you can even get past the POST screen without a BIOS Flash.

Or like a problem that I have right now an ASUS A7S333 AMD 2100, M'Board 512 MEG of RAM and a Nvidia Geforce 440 chip-set video card it falls over about once a day for no reason that is discoverable and currently it only has Windblows on it and a LAN driver to do the patching.

While I've put this on the T Q & A site you can quite obviously answer this just what the hell does this error message mean?

Check hardware and software is installed properly. Do a windows update

Tech specs: 0x0000000A (0xce42400, 0x00000002 x 0x00000000, 0x8056ae04).

Now as it is fully updated and prior to SP2 being installed it worked perfectly just where would you go looking for the fix?

Col ]:)

Collapse -

Go looking at...

by Michaelea In reply to Stop trying to make me la ...

Personally, I'd be looking at the NVidia chipset and then the ASUS board.

I learned long ago to use Intel chips on Intel boards. It might not be the fastest or most 'tweakable' but It's shaved years off my stubble :)


Collapse -

Well what can I say?

by HAL 9000 Moderator In reply to Go looking at...

I didn't make the thing I'm only trying to fix it and it is driving me nuts!

What's even worse is I'm not getting paid for it either as it belongs to a young girl doing "Work Experience" for me and I did say no problem was toooooo big boy was I wrong!

The only good thing is that it is a home computer so I'm not rushed off my feet to fix it and it isn't as if money is being lost while it is down. But I really have to learn to keep my Big Mouth Shut in future.

Col ]:)

Collapse -

Been there

by jdclyde In reply to Well what can I say?

DOING that.

I have three systems backlogging at my house that I need to get to. Not getting paid for any of them.

With the divorce and the following house makeover all the projects got thrown into the basement and told them I would get back on them by next week.

no good deed goes unpunished after all.

Collapse -

ASUS vs. Intel

by apotheon In reply to Go looking at...

Intel makes some very good chipsets. So does ASUS, and the nForce chipset from nVidia is a good one as well. On the other hand, Intel also makes some very bad chipsets.

Have you dealt with the Intel 815 chipset at all? I recommend you avoid it, if you want to keep your high opinion of Intel chipsets. Really.

Were you complaining about the Geforce video chipset as well? That's some of the best video available on the market. Are you saying that we should all just avoid high-end video and get onboad video instead so that we can have Intel chipset video? That's insane.

Related Discussions

Related Forums