Windows XP Service Pack 2 Build 2082

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Aloone:
[qb]Service packs are defiantly a good thing,

I agree.  IF THEY WORKED!  If one was to use a patching process on any other OS.  That patch would solve the problem  that was there in the first place.  The ONLY OS that this is not true is with Microsoft,  Thus they are the ones that get heavily critisized.  This pluse the fact that they have the most market share and have been out for a long time now, they should now what they are doing.  They do not!

   

quote:
 they are an indication that MS is trying  to fix their bugey  operating system.

Covering up a hole rather than actually fixing it is NOT an indication of them fixing the problem.

   

quote:
 I must admit that in the past, one service pack contained a bug that was responsible  for a new exploit,

Well at least you acknowledge the problem.

   

quote:but the net result of using it was good, as it fixed other exploits.

Code Red, Nimda, my doom ... Just to name a few, pluse the agrivation to what those patches caused (Slow downs, crashes etc... ) If that shows a net result of using these patches are good.....

   

quote:
Despite what some people say, Windows has improved a lot over the last decade.

windows 3.1 to 95 is not a decade!  There HAS BEEN NO improvments if THE SAME PROBLEMS ARE present in ALL OF THEM!

   

quote:
 I would admit that these improvements have not been good enough.

Well, they haven't improved at all.  The only thing that has changed is their PR and the FUD campain has been more intense.  when it comes to the actual performance to the OS, it has not changed since the days of windows 95!


   

quote:Windows 3.1 was the first reasonably mature version,

I'd say windows 95.  Even with those instability and security problems that continue in ALL M$ OS'es anyways.. You can install alot of software that was available at that time.  Pluse it had some sort of hardware detection process where it would ask for a driver.  Where as windows 3.1 didn't even have that much!

   

quote:and it has only seen 2 major upgrades. Windows95 & Windows 2000, both of these have been a significant improvement on the previous.

I agree.  That windows 95 was better than windows 3.1.  Pluse windows 2000 was better than NT4.  BUT in the current scheme of things windows XP, 2k3 et all have been a vast disapointment and annoyance!

   

quote:
I can give technical details as to why each major upgrade of Windows is significantly better to the previous,

Of course you can.  But thats all BS when in the end ALL OF THEM HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS!

   

quote:
 when all that some people can come up, are BS accounts of their personal experiences and similar here say.

You mean when YOU say that people are stating BS.  When infact allot of these complaints have been in the news, forums and even from regular windows users!

Its even reconized by M$ themselves.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=b997cc5f-4483-4edc-a17e-6f659a033b0d&DisplayLang=en

You can NOT discount the majority of complaints when pritty much everyone that uses M$ software in some way have the same complaints!

They are not there to look at the technical aspect.  They want their shit to work and to give the enduserbadhardwaresoftware exuse all the time is not fixing the problem!


   

quote:MS does not  release services packs and upgrades for no reason,

Of course not.  When they release a service pack for WMP.  Instead of fixing the actual problems in the software.  They added stronger DRM that nocked off some codecs  Causing more problems to the end user.

This is news on WMP9.  But a pach has autmatically downloaded and installed to do the same thing in Windows Media player 7 and 8 as well via auto update.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/24/1030052995857.html?oneclick=true


   

quote:
 they don't do it to fuck your computer up!

Read above!

   

quote:
They do it for a good reason.

Yes, for their own benifit and reason!

   

quote:
I know Linux has improved at faster rate than Windows but this doesn't mean that Windows has stood still.

If you mean that little sentence of windows 95 being better than windows 3.1 and windows 2000 being better than NT4 then yes agree they have not stood still! But when it comes to the actual progress of M$.

Windows 95 to Windows 2k3 then yes they have!  The only thing that is different is their tight intergrating has gotten alot tighter over the years.

But that reflects M$ stratagy for the up comming Longhorn where software (Including the OS) is rented rather than owned. and the GUI of M$ windows.  Meaning that its now skinnable.  Somthing that has been done in KDE since version 1.

[ August 08, 2004: Message edited by: kn0wn / BOB ]

[skyman8081]

Solaris, your logic in this debate is wrong.

You have not provided any new information at all, which changes this from debate to argument/flamewar.

your logic is: If X is true and Y is in the same class as X, then Y is true, e.g.  

quote:If some of the class "Windows Patches" causes crashes, then ALL instances of that class cause crashes.

 you can see where this logic falters.

I apologise if that is not your intent.  However, that is that implication of the choice of words that you used.

nlother logical error that you are making is that you base your arguments that your main point is unrevocably true and any contradicting evidence is wrong., e.g. if X is true and Y contradicts X, than Y is wrong.  While this is not incorrect per 'se you fail to provide evidence foryou claims, assuming that the reader knows exactly what you mean.

Again, I apologise if that is not your intent.  That is just the assumption that you lead the reader to make.

[Zombie9920]

Solaris is just one of those blind zealots who one can't debate with. Every OS has its' blind zealots(Windows/MacOS/Linux/Unix,etc.).

Nothing that MS does will ever be good to him because he is a blind zealot. He acts as if non-=MS software doesn't have problems/bugs/holes/bloat(even though it does...nothing is perfect).


Anyways, there is no reason to debate with him because you will get nowhere.  

[ August 08, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Viper:
Solaris is just one of those blind zealots who one can't debate with. Every OS has its' blind zealots(Windows/MacOS/Linux/Unix,etc.).

Nothing that MS does will ever be good to him because he is a blind zealot. He acts as if non-=MS software doesn't have problems/bugs/holes/bloat(even though it does...nothing is perfect).


Anyways, there is no reason to debate with him because you will get nowhere.      

[ August 08, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]

Such as yourself.  no!  I have VALID arguments when it comes to M$.  If you agree or disagree that is your opinion.  But if I was wrong then those thousands of complaints, news stories etc... would not exist.  We ere talking about patching and aloone stated that M$ was patching to solve a problem.  I stated that this was incorrect then that problem would go away and not perpetuate into a bigger problem or have things fixed that really don't need fixing.

Of course other OS'es have their flaws.  Even OpenBSD has flaws!  The fundemental difference is that Microsoft is driven by Marketing and PR!  This is hwo Microsoft was born and survived.  They have not done nothing like all other OS manufactures have done.  That is make a quality OS with the people in mind.

However.  Like I've continually stated in the past M$ has its place.  As a hobby OS where writting viruses and discovering how trojans and spyware works is great for M$ boxes since its easy for newbies wanting to know such information to understand it.

Viper.  If you want to count anyone as a zealot.  Count yourself since zealots would make things up in mid air "Linux does not follow any standards."  

We have come to the conclusing of microsoft, not because of JUST absolut FUD.  But by their own actions that contradicts the FUD that they spread.

[skyman8081]

And that would be argumentum ad hominem.

Instead of disproving his postings, you say that they are wrong because it was Viper who said it.

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
Solaris, your logic in this debate is wrong.

You have not provided any new information at all, which changes this from debate to argument/flamewar.

your logic is: If X is true and Y is in the same class as X, then Y is true, e.g.    you can see where this logic falters.

I apologise if that is not your intent.  However, that is that implication of the choice of words that you used.

nlother logical error that you are making is that you base your arguments that your main point is unrevocably true and any contradicting evidence is wrong., e.g. if X is true and Y contradicts X, than Y is wrong.  While this is not incorrect per 'se you fail to provide evidence foryou claims, assuming that the reader knows exactly what you mean.

Again, I apologise if that is not your intent.  That is just the assumption that you lead the reader to make.

I'll try to clear myself up.

I was not debating that

"If X is true and Y is in the same class as X, then Y is true, e.g.    you can see where this logic falters."

I was just stating the argument that so many m$ zealots like to repeate.

That is, that because M$ is producing these pateches then they are doing what many of us complain about.

Which is infact wrong.  What they do is change things that do not need changing or when they fix things, do it in such a way that a simple two line exploit can just become three and the problem arises again.  Plus when said patch IS installed then the machine has all the ear marks of that of an infected machine.  The very thing that you installed the patch to avoid in the first place.

You are right these arguments are not new.  Far from it.  They are very old.  But the problems of M$ patches are old since the problem that they produce covers the entire windows family of OS'es and not just present on older windows then solved in newer up comming versions.

The problem covers the entire spectrum.  One is because the monoculture that M$ is in.  Second is the use of re hashed code that I don't think m$ themselves understand.  Or the problems would have been at least fixed years ago!  Third is that M$ is built and ran by PR and has no interest or idea for that matter about the buisness of Operating Systems.

One really does not care for the techinical aspect of things.  They just wan their stuff to work.  When one is left continually fixing things because of patches etc... then that to me is NOT what I call a 'good OS' on any standards if I'm into actual computing.

[ August 08, 2004: Message edited by: kn0wn / BOB ]

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Sauron / B0B:
And that would be argumentum ad hominem.

Instead of disproving his postings, you say that they are wrong because it was Viper who said it.

He assumend that I was a zealot just because I am making a valid argument?

If he can say such an assuption I can definnatly point out why he may be fitted to that definition more than me.

[Aloone_Jonez]

quote:Originally posted by Viper:
Solaris is just one of those blind zealots who one can't debate with. Every OS has its' blind zealots(Windows/MacOS/Linux/Unix,etc.).

Nothing that MS does will ever be good to him because he is a blind zealot. He acts as if non-=MS software doesn't have problems/bugs/holes/bloat(even though it does...nothing is perfect).


Anyways, there is no reason to debate with him because you will get nowhere.          

     
True.

Solaris,
Give up, and shut the fuck up!

I've done this before; arguing about something when you

[solarismka]

quote:Originally posted by Aloone:
[QB]

       
True.

Solaris,
Give up, and shut the fuck up!

I've done this before; arguing about something when you

[Zombie9920]

At the moment there is no way to disprove his postings. SP2 is still new and we have yet to see any new vulnerabilities. At this point and time there is no way to prove wether it is going to do any good or not. He is posting that it isn't any good with no proof to back the statement up whatsoever.

[ August 10, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]

[Aloone_Jonez]

Solaris is arguing that Windows hasn't improved since 95 and that there is no benefit in using any of the previous patches.

We all know he is wrong and there also is a lot of technical evidence to prove him wrong too, so there's no point in trying to argue with him.

As you have already stated Solaris is a Linux zealot, even if  LongHorn is really good  (although very unlikely), he will still continue to ague that it's no better than XP.

[KernelPanic]

Roll-up, roll-up! Get yer Service Packs here!

http://bannedmusic.org/albums/WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU-exe.torrent

[WMD]

Or...how about a direct link from microsoft.com?

http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/6/5/165b076b-aaa9-443d-84f0-73cf11fdcdf8/WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe

Many at Slashdot said the torrents were slow.  Besides, why save MS on bandwidth?  

[hm_murdock]

Actually, Solaris, I don't support Apple anymore. I Have a Mac and OS X, but it certainly isn't my #1 thing anymore.

I support Linux and Windows.

Linux because it's the next big thing. Windows because, for me anyway, it just works, the same way OS X does.

Now, first, let's point out the problems with your "debate style"... and I use that phrase loosely. This is how I present my argument.

"I find Linux and Windows XP to both be equal in quality. In stability, security, and software/hardware support."

Your rebuttal:

"YOU A LIE!! Windows cannote be goode becas it is Micrasoft! The bloat and bloat and virus and bloat and IE and bloate and bloat and security and bloat!"

My reponse to you:

"I said that I have found this to be true. Your mileage my vary. For me, there have been no problems."

Your tirade:

"BUT WINDOWSE CANT'E BE GOOD! MIRCOSOFT DOES EVERTHING WRONG FOR TEH MONEY!! THE PR MACIHNE!! THE BLOAT THE BLOAT THE BLOAT THE BLOAT! BILL GATES! BLOAT BLOAT BLOAT BLOAT!! DRIVERS AND BLOAT!! BLOATED DRIVERS!! SECURITY BLOAT!!"

What is your personal stake in this? How is your life affected by what OS somebody runs? Somebody you'll never meet. What did Microsoft Corp. ever do to you to make you so damn hostile?

Chill the fuck out and shut your mouth. We're tired of you hijacking and ruining threads with your PR MACHINE.

SP 2 was designed to address all the things you constantly bitch about.

1) Security. Service Pack 2 includes numerous security updates. These range from revamped versions of IE and OE, to the new comprehensinve firewall, to low-level architectural changes that protect system memory.

2) Compatibility. SP 2 does break some things, particularly older (pre-Win98) apps, but what's more important to you? Running that decade-old calendar app, or security? For newer apps, compatibility is better, as SP 2 benefits from two more years nearly of compatibility development over SP 1.

3) Networking and hardware. SP 2 has greatly enhanced support for network hardware, especially wireless. Configuring wireless networking is now as brain-dead simple as it is on OS X.

4) New Microsoft Shut The Hell Up XP. I hear they put that in just for you, Solaris.

Here's a screenshot using the "Star Trek" theme in the app.



[ August 10, 2004: Message edited by: JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder ]

[hm_murdock]

Okay, I just installed it. First boot was kinda slow, but it always is after an update.

One curious thing... I dunno if it's some sort of graphics optimizer, or if they've simple changed a setting, but the fades on menus are MUCH faster. Menu fade-in and menu-item fade out both move much faster. About 3/4 the time. Apps seem much quicker to start and execute.

As for the firewall, it's already caught a piece of spyware that AdAware missed.

Add/Remove Software is faster now, as it seems to have gotten a nice revamp. It automatically hides system updates, which greatly unclutters the list and speeds up its generation.

It's good so far.