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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The XP SP2 Horror to come.
The list of programs that will work “differently” after the service
pack 2 has expanded to 200 applications on the eve of the consumer roll out of the update. (Microsoft's update troubles deepen further) http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=457 Believe it or not... The List includes a lot of MS's own applications including Office! http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130 But what the hell... Bill's still going to release it and let the public sort it out as usual. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
changing just one little word What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" What you wrote "will work "differently"" At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words "may" and "will". May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have reported. You would make an interesting journalist. -- Jupiter Jones http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/ "TR" wrote in message ... The list of programs that will work "differently" after the service pack 2 has expanded to 200 applications on the eve of the consumer roll out of the update. (Microsoft's update troubles deepen further) http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=457 Believe it or not... The List includes a lot of MS's own applications including Office! http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130 But what the hell... Bill's still going to release it and let the public sort it out as usual. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" to imply that they encountered
anomalous behavior of the program at least under SOME (not all) conditions running XP2. You or I may or may not encounter the same behavior depending on how we use such a program? No matter how one parses it or interprets it, 200 programs is a bunch, enough for people to set a restore point before installing SP2 and then to tread carefully. Others have stated that SP2 is a major release, despite its service pack designation. Given past history with Microsoft operating systems, one should go forward carefully with a major release. Actually, DOS 6.2 was pretty much free of problems... Ben Myers On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones" wrote: Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by changing just one little word What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" What you wrote "will work "differently"" At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words "may" and "will". May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have reported. You would make an interesting journalist. -- Jupiter Jones http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/ "TR" wrote in message .. . The list of programs that will work "differently" after the service pack 2 has expanded to 200 applications on the eve of the consumer roll out of the update. (Microsoft's update troubles deepen further) http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=457 Believe it or not... The List includes a lot of MS's own applications including Office! http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130 But what the hell... Bill's still going to release it and let the public sort it out as usual. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I never heard anyone, at least not someone with any computer
experience, suggest a Service pack is anything but a major release. Also much of what Microsoft publishes shows Microsoft considers SP-2 a major release. Otherwise there would not be near as much information about SP-2. A restore Point is always a good idea before any major change, not just Service Packs. But many use them improperly. Many are already uninstalling SP-2 at the first sign of trouble ignoring the possibility there is a simple fix already arranged from Microsoft or the application or hardware vendor. So far my experiences are less issues with SP-2 than SP-1 However that depends greatly on the prior maintenance of the computer. Most problems will have simple fixes. But I still hear of people formatting the computer Microsoft messed up because they can no longer get attachments because "OE has removed access..." after getting a bunch of updates. The easy but long solution many take is to blame Microsoft and either format or uninstall which in itself is another major change. When the correct solution is usually easy to locate. -- Jupiter Jones http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/ ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers) wrote in message ... Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" to imply that they encountered anomalous behavior of the program at least under SOME (not all) conditions running XP2. You or I may or may not encounter the same behavior depending on how we use such a program? No matter how one parses it or interprets it, 200 programs is a bunch, enough for people to set a restore point before installing SP2 and then to tread carefully. Others have stated that SP2 is a major release, despite its service pack designation. Given past history with Microsoft operating systems, one should go forward carefully with a major release. Actually, DOS 6.2 was pretty much free of problems... Ben Myers On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones" wrote: Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by changing just one little word What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" What you wrote "will work "differently"" At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words "may" and "will". May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have reported. You would make an interesting journalist. -- Jupiter Jones http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/ "TR" wrote in message . .. The list of programs that will work "differently" after the service pack 2 has expanded to 200 applications on the eve of the consumer roll out of the update. (Microsoft's update troubles deepen further) http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=457 Believe it or not... The List includes a lot of MS's own applications including Office! http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130 But what the hell... Bill's still going to release it and let the public sort it out as usual. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
wrote: Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by changing just one little word What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" What you wrote "will work "differently"" At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words "may" and "will". May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have reported. And just like Bill Clinton, you took attention away from the article in point by debating what the meaning if "is" is. You would make an interesting journalist. And you would make a great politician the way you dodge the content and detour the subject matter away from what you don't like. BTW, the whole thing was copied and pasted from one of the MS NG's. I pasted it here because I thought people would be interested in following the links instead of making a big deal out of what the meaning of "is" is.... Now back to the actual point of the readings that were supplied in the links given (if you even read them)...... Sorry if all this steps on your love affair with MS but hey, sorry to burst your bubble but the profound revolation is.... I didn't code this mess, I just posted what I had read about the mess. If that hurts your feelings and you have to resort to detouring away from the subject by debating the meaning of what "is" is.... then get a job in politics where you would undoubtedly be a pro. Tell you what, let the ones interested in the article and links debate the actual substance and you can create a side bar crying and whining about what the meaning of "is" is.... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:00:20 GMT, ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net
(Ben Myers) wrote: No matter how one parses it or interprets it, 200 programs is a bunch, enough for people to set a restore point before installing SP2 and then to tread carefully. Yes Ben, it did seem to miss that point while debating what the meaning of "is" is, didn't it... But you are right that 200 possible is (or should be) a concern. A lot of my programs are listed there. Some other articles linked to from the MS NG's stated that a lot of tests had shown that restore would not take you back to "exactly" the condition you were in before implementing the upgrade. There were even instances where restore failed all together resulting in the need for a complete restoration of the system. From what I gather by following all the links and articles... most of the problem is with the firewall in SP2. It seems from what I have read that turning the firewall off after installation will not get things back to normal and MS coded this thing to install with the firewall turned on by default... Given past history with Microsoft operating systems, one should go forward carefully with a major release. Unless you blindly go into it while sidetracked in a discussion about what the meaning of "is" is.... Sorry, had to throw that in because people like that are so transparent and funny.... Anyway... you are right about the history of such companies. But like politicians and governments, no one learns from history... thus to repeat it. Now to a MS argument I read about this mess of which also has some merit to MS's credit.... He said that OS's evolve and programs that operate under evolving OS's must also evolve along with them in order to stay compliant (compatible). Okay... I buy that.... BUT! You don't just throw a new evolution to an OS out there before other major players have had time to conform their products. Remember, MS's own Office products are even having compatibility problems with this release. In other words, MS itself hasn't even had time to make all its own applications compliant with the new release. Another link stated that Norton has a fix for their suit of applications but has put a warning out that you MUST install the fix before installing SP2 because you can't back up later and make it work. If you install SP2 and then try to do the FIX, you are dead in the water and even a "Rollback" will not save you. A complete restoration of the system will be needed. Problem..... You will only know this if you visit certain sections of the Symantec site or hear it second hand.... I think it was about Norton SystemWorks mostly but do know that my version of NAV2003 will not be compliant and Norton is only fixing all 2004 versions of their stuff to be compliant. So, if I install this mess, I would be forced to pay the bucks to move from NAV 2003 to 2004 when 2003 was working just fine before the SP2 debacle. And that's just one program.... I added up what it would cost me to become compliant with SP2 if all my application on the list of 200 did in fact fail to work. I quit counting after seeing the cost of moving from Office Pro 2000 to the version that will (in the future) be fixed to be compliant with SP2 (it is my understanding that they haven't even started making the latest Office compliant yet because they don't know why it is having trouble with SP2). Which brings up another point.... MS is pushing you, on their upgrade page, to turn ON automatic download and install of upgrades so you don't miss getting SP2. In the face of what problems could come of this installation, I can't believe MS is actually suggesting people turn their upgrade option to Automatic download and Install.... Well, as you said... looking at their history... Yes I can! After all I have read, I think the prudent thing would be to hide and watch on this one. AND!!!! DO NOT turn on Automatic Download and Install of Upgrades as suggested by MS. because History shows that MS doesn't always know what's best..... Regards, TR |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:00:20 GMT, ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net
(Ben Myers) wrote: Others have stated that SP2 is a major release, despite its service pack designation. From http://channelzone.ziffdavis.com/art...1613230,00.asp "Microsoft has a history of major releases with understated names, and Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) is no exception." Regards, TR |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:54:07 -0400, TR
wrote: DO NOT turn on Automatic Download and Install of Upgrades as suggested by MS. From http://www.teamits.com/start/winxpsp2.php Warning: Windows XP Service Pack 2 TO: ALL ITS CLIENTS FROM: Steve, John, Amy, Simon What follows is a copy of a recent ITS news release you may have seen suggesting that businesses postpone their download of Microsoft’s Service Pack 2 security fix for Windows XP, officially named " Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies." While ITS applauds the increased security levels available with SP2, the news release encompasses our concerns about this “fix,” and following is information regarding specific programs that are known to have issues with SP2. Windows XP can be configured to automatically download and install all "critical updates" from Microsoft, which will include SP2. Below are instructions for disabling this download. Note this entire issue only applies to PCs running Windows XP. View the ITS press release http://www.teamits.com/start/winxpsp2_pr.php Small Businesses Urged to Postpone Microsoft XP Security ‘Fix’. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
wrote: Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by changing just one little word From one of the links posted in the message that you indubitably never followed much less read: "Now major applications including Microsoft’s own packages will act differently when the new service pack is installed onto a PC running Windows XP." The are called links.... the way it works is that you follow them. But then, you have to read them also. Now, if you did the first two things, and by a small twist of fate, you comprehend what you were suppose to follow and read, then you would see where the actual source of what was said came from and you wouldn't have made such a blundering ass out of yourself..... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
You now find it necessary to be insulting because I see a difference
in "will" & "may". I didn't "dodge" anything, I pointed out the bias in your post. The same type of bias found many places with a bias against Microsoft. Your excuse "copied and pasted from one of the MS NG's" shows little validity on your part. Quotes are normally appropriate if you desire others to know it is not your own. Quotes around one word does not say much in this case especially when no reference is given. I have read the articles, that is why I noticed the obvious error, how did you miss the error? If you think "will" is the same as "may", fine, but by posting, you invite comments and then cry and insult when you get a correction. Once you read the articles and do a little more research you may discover that many computers have no issues at all so "may" as used is correct. This newsgroup as many others is not exclusively for your bias, you invited comments and you got one. You also have this in another post: "From http://channelzone.ziffdavis.com/art...1613230,00.asp "Microsoft has a history of major releases with understated names, and Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) is no exception." " Where does Microsoft state SP-2 is not a major release? I doubt it is said anywhere...except by Microsoft critics. Microsoft would probably not publish so much about a minor release. The fact you need to insult as well as make irrelevant comparisons to Clinton is further evidence of your true position. So it seems anyone that disagrees with you has a "love affair with MS" and needs to be beaten by you so that you can prove you are correct. It fails miserably unless you wanted to show this ego need of yours. Perhaps if you could stick to facts, you could have something worthwhile to say, but apparently your facts are insults. Good bye TR, You clearly have little of value to pass on about this subject. Don't bother posting back unless you are actually posting to others. -- Jupiter Jones http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/ "TR" wrote in message ... On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones" wrote: Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by changing just one little word What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" What you wrote "will work "differently"" At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words "may" and "will". May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have reported. And just like Bill Clinton, you took attention away from the article in point by debating what the meaning if "is" is. You would make an interesting journalist. And you would make a great politician the way you dodge the content and detour the subject matter away from what you don't like. BTW, the whole thing was copied and pasted from one of the MS NG's. I pasted it here because I thought people would be interested in following the links instead of making a big deal out of what the meaning of "is" is.... Now back to the actual point of the readings that were supplied in the links given (if you even read them)...... Sorry if all this steps on your love affair with MS but hey, sorry to burst your bubble but the profound revolation is.... I didn't code this mess, I just posted what I had read about the mess. If that hurts your feelings and you have to resort to detouring away from the subject by debating the meaning of what "is" is.... then get a job in politics where you would undoubtedly be a pro. Tell you what, let the ones interested in the article and links debate the actual substance and you can create a side bar crying and whining about what the meaning of "is" is.... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|