Rating for SP2

[alphagamma212]

I voted IT'S MY WORST NIGHTMARE!!!!!.

Two Main Reasons:

1. It has broken many of the program my company uses.

2. It has totally messed up my main work station.

And to think I even considered deploying it on the network *shudders*

~Alph

[shaokahn]

**** i hate it,

all apps works fine but i have a lot of network issues.

first the home network configuration wizard configures host and client but ICS does not work, before sp2 it worked, now i have to had manually dns of internet connection to the client computer.

i am also having issues with p2p software on the client computer, haven't figured out how to fix them yet.

i am thinking on going back to sp1a now

EDIT: please let me vote 1000 times on the IT'S MY WORST NIGHTMARE!!!!!

[discarnet]

HI

Have slipsteamed SP2 and it works well, a few problems but then MS warned us all about modded boot screens.

Not to sure about the firewall ADVANCED well I managed to get a response from most ports and gain access from 2 ports. I thought the idea of a good firewall was to stealth the ports to the outside world not shout back HERE I AM.

Shame it doesnt pick up Nortons at the moment (not a major problem but I hate programs that don't do what they are meant to)

in all not a bad service pack despite the many bugs, but thats nothing another 2 years of patches and updates wont fix. (do we really expect anything but buggy software from MS)

have installed it on another 18 machines with problems on only 1 which refused to boot afterwards but found error report explained what the problem was and how to fix it

now looking forward to october 12th so i can play with the new windows edition

Tim

[Charro Greg]

Service Pack 2 kept crashing my computer with a blue screen of death even in safe mode, i reformatted, reinstalled windows xp. it works great, i won't put service pack 2 back on my system because it causes nothing but problems for me. take care.

[sven]

i dont like it. firstly, i had a nat hardware firewall protecting my entire network and now i have 2, doing the exact same thing.

Secondly, i have 2 pop-up blockers, and the new one is awful

Thirdly, my computer worked so much better before putting it on.

Fourthly, none of the features that it put on were required on my computer.

Fifth, i do not like these new features for when you open a program, it has to ask you twice about openning it. if you knoew it was bad, why did you open it and keep it in the first place?

This is just a waste of time, and i didn't need any of this agervation.

[cxxxkies]

For me SP2 is a ok for me.. I slepstream SP2 without any problem.. installed more than 20 pcs now and everything is working perfect..

[Fezik]

Voted bad: some old proggies don't work, load of services and applications I don't need. . .tgfnlite.

[cassy309]

my pc got really sick no matter what i do it keeps rebooting went into safe mode and had to uninstall it.

[SiMoNsAyS]

as i see, install sp2 once is installed xp gives a lot (a LOT) of problems. i recommend every1 to slipstream it into the original installation files and then remove services and so on with nlite.

then, when the f***** security center and those amount of unnecessary services and tools are removed, it works like charm

ps: i can see superb and great... where is "flawless victory" (just a stupid joke from a Mortal Kombat fan )

[BIGbadjohn]

Says I have already voted in this poll but I don't know where.

Update is my worst nightmare.

[albator]

In fact spk2 is for newbie. Those who never heard about a 3rd party firewall. How many times a month do you xp firewall update ?

Just to back what I said read this:

However, for many IT administrators and security experts, whose daily existence revolves around the battle of keeping systems up and running while trying to stay one step ahead of human-generated attacks, SP2 is more about system failures, and the purported benefits are not viewed as very attractive.

"Any operating system upgrade has the potential to break existing applications. In a large organization, that could be catastrophic," says Bruce Schneier, founder and CTO of security services firm Counterpane Internet Security. "The security benefits of SP2 are minimal enough that some IT managers didn't think them worth the risk."

http://www6.tomshardware.com/column/20050414/sp2-01.html

THere are no real benefits of spk2. But there are amy incovenients:

-It add services that cannot be disable without losing compatibility of installshield. Then it downgrade perfomance.

-Lots of apps don't work with XP SP2 including some of Microsoft's own. (even Halo by Microsoft )

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...ct=windowsxpsp2

-It still vulnerable, the it lie with the illusion of security.If you think security, dont think Microsoft. (compare vulnerabilities found before and after spk2 )

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/windows/0...39173703,00.htm

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1638037,00.asp

-SP2 breaks network connectivity by limiting the number of connections you can make in a given amount of time. ( dont ask why you have slow bittorent download )

-It dont change anything to the old IE. (should replace it with firefox )

I think people should try using spk1a and see. If like me you dont need all xp services, After spk1 you will only miss 11 security update. Only 11 ! I integrate them and the trick is done. How could you support message like : Your about to run a .exe this could bla bla bla !

[Marsden]

If better inherent system security is not an improvement, I don't know what is.

Most security companies have reported a huge drop in "bots" after the August '04 release of SP2. They can't contribute that effect to anything else but the release of SP2 and its expanded security.

The links you quote from are outdated at best and ignorant at worst. Of seven laptops running XP Pro SP1 that have crossed my path, all seven benefited from SP2 and fixed wireless connectivity issues. I'd say that is another improvement over SP1.

What you fail to comprehend is SP2 is just not for newbies but anyone who desires a better and safer system. Millions have benefited from SP2. Admins have had 6 months to fix incompatibilities with legacy apps that might have broken before.

Many have stayed from SP2 because they are running pirated copies of XP and can't get SP2 even if they wanted too because their systems fail product validation with MS.

Too bad for them...

The bottom line is millions of home users and most Fortune 500 companies have deployed SP2 and it is working for them. What amazes me are those who think they are smarter than the folks that created the OS, MS partners who deploy and use it every day and the millions and millions of users who are using it without issue and benefiting from it everyday...

[Treeman]

Less than a quarter of businesses in North America have installed Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) according to a new study, April 05, 2005 by AssetMetrix.

http://www.scmagazine.com/news/index.cfm?f...%20News&s=n

The problem is no choice . . .

Do I want this to install this part of SP2 or that part of SP2 on my computer?

(pick what you need & kill the rest)

Sorry, No choice for you,

you will be assimalated, resistance is futile, the borg, er Microsoft.

We know what's best for you. BG

[member11]

after installing sp2, i have some problem with my hardware driver. like robotic modem thing. I hope it will be fixed in SP3 or whatever it is.

[Martin Zugec]

2albator: I deployed SP2 to more than 2000 machines. It is best SP/FP ever. And the real true is SP2 is great for home users AND for domain administrators.

What do you understand under "real" firewall? Show me any firewall with domain/standart policies, boot time protection, safe lockdown mode and compatibility with GP? There are only few - Absolute Firewall and CyberArmor.

Do you know that 60% of people that uninstalled any FW said it was because it was annoying to unblock outcoming communications? That is why MS included only incoming traffic and it was right choice.

About Bruce Schneier, this sentence was quite catastrofic to his "professional" look - applications are not working because they included bugs, that SP2 reveiled, like anonymous DCOM calling and similar. And I really appreciated that MS said they also had buggy software and patched it rather than leaving the holes.

Services? You mean essential changes like dividing RPC to two (local and network) services? The stuff CSO all around the world was calling for? Or you mean DEP protection?

Network limit is one of the most favourite hoaxes all around the internet - it is limit for UNCOMPLETED TCP HANDSHAKE, it is not system-wide limit! So the only stuff it is blocking is speed of P2P, scanning tools and MOSTLY viruses.

Dont change nothing to IE??? Most changes were made to IE - like binary behaviors and what is most important, finally they tried (successfuly) to solve IZ0 (Local Machine) problems... "Minor" changes like windows restrictions are just the bonus. Just have a look at Secunia - last two months only one exploit for IE, but 7 for FireFox - or you could have a look at today bugtraq - two for FF, 0 for IE.

About "Your about to run a .exe this could bla bla bla " - this IS NOT the support message. This is much more important change, because it is message from AES and it means that applications like OE, Messenger or IE will be much safer.