Where i can find?

[xtremee]

Hi all,

i wanna to know where i can download SP3 (unofficial) as i seach on the net and i find one and download it but i find that it is contain the updates as i download it from Microsoft

Wat i search for is One that link SP2 that i can integrate it with my windows .

Reagrds,

Xtremee

[chilifrei64]

That was all the Unofficial SP3 was was a collection of hotfix's with an installer that installs all of them.. I myself do not recommend installing it as does MS, it contains hotfix's that may be unnecessary to install. You are better off using RyansVM Pack or any of the other ones that you can find by fishing through this site....

That and as far as I can tell.. that SP3 has not been maintained..it was a package that someone created but has not kept up with other hotfixes....

[ripken204]

http://www.ryanvm.net/msfn/updatepack.html

theres a link, this is definetly the best way to go

[xtremee]

http://www.ryanvm.net/msfn/updatepack.html

theres a link, this is definetly the best way to go

i will give it a try

Regards,

Xtremee

[CLASYS]

There needs to be a major clarifiction about the so-called SP3 package. Many people really don't understand what's really going on here:

1) Microsoft has very low credibility with regard to actually maintaining Windows - ANY VERSION!

2) The so-called SP3 package is major damning proof of this with regard to XP.

3) What Microsoft currently offers through Windows Update is widely believed as an authoritative copy of what you need to patch XP so it is "perfect", no more and no less. This is patently wrong!

I am one of the contributors to the Unofficial Win98SE Service Pack. The reason it even exists is that Microsoft hasn't had a service pack for ANY member of the Win9x family except for a brief flurry of relatively minor activity early on in the era of Windows 95 where it went from 95 [now known as 95 0] to 95A. By PURCHASING 95B or eventually 95C we got slight improvements, and yes, there were some hotfixes, but nothing ever rolled any of it up, and worse, a lot of updates were never released in any meaningful way. Hardy individuals obtained them in various ways, no thanks to Microsoft.

While there is interest in Windows 98 [aka First Edition] or Me, most of us in this arena want 98SE because we consider 98SE superior to the versions before and after. [And some are "grafting" the best ME has to offer onto 98SE]. Again, no service pack ever happened, so we are writing our own.

As has become the custom since the days of Windows 95, Microsoft often actually fixes many things and then "hides" them from the general public. We have all heard the language about "regression testing" and related deflection of responsibility, but the point is simply this:

a ) Microsoft has actually assigned people to fix known problems, probably from people willing to shell out support money to report a bug. There often is a fix.

b ) You probably won't be able to get it, or at least get it easily. Go read thousands of Knowledge Base articles that basically say over and over again, that a specific problem fix exists, but not for you!

c ) Someone in Microsoft is making decisions as to which ones are "important" enough to rise to the occasion of being included into some more "official" list that often results [sometimes incredibly late!] in inclusion into Windows Update. As more and more problems appear, fully expect the priority of any of these updates to drop. They are simply running on gross overload.

Back when 95 and 98 and SE were being heavily worked on, virtually all [not literally all!] updates were thoroughly tested enough to be considered safe enough to apply, even if you didn't "need" them. They were either benign or beneficial. At some point in time, quite a few of them were even appearing in Windows Update. However, due to the general sloppiness of Windows Update, some fell through the cracks only to never be seen again, and not superseded by a replacement update either. This is not an official "withdrawal" because a problem was found, just a "lost" update problem.

So, today, with the emphasis on XP and company, what is happening is merely that Windows Update, which actually has a shoddy record in general, is getting worse.

Here's a few tidbits:

1) Some updates used to be in Windows Update. They aren't there now, aren't part of SP2, not replaced, just gone!

2) Some updates were relatively recently added to Windows Update. However, the actual updates themselves have been available [quite difficult to get your hands on, but not impossible!] for as long as nearly a year before Windows Update finally added them very belatedly. [As I stumble upon them, I maintain a list I call "Why isn't this in Windows Update?" because they seem to be general purpose, sometimes even the subject of a security problem or clearly are a clear fix to a problem that ought not to be withheld because it could be risky, etc. Some of these have "graduated" into actually appearing in Windows Update, while some were "demoted" back into my list because they no longer are in Windows Update.]

3) Some updates are in Windows Update, presumably because they WERE tested sufficiently to be trusted. Yet, they had to be replaced because they are actually buggy despite the claims. [Go read Knowledge Base articles with titles like xxxxx doesn't work after applying hotfix zzzzzz.]

So, we have a dichotomy here: Articles are withheld because they haven't been tested enough as a general policy, selectively applied. Other articles are claimed tested enough only to find that this was wrong and need to be fixed because they cause more harm than good.

This can only lead to a distrust of Microsoft "recommendation" as might be ascribed to membership at any particular time in Windows Update. And conversely, an update not ever offered by Windows Update may be perfectly valid, but wasn't ever entered into the "popularity contest" that is an unfortunate aspect of Windows Update as practiced currently.

So, what of the so-called SP3 collection? It consists of literally hundreds of hotfixes for problems ranging from clearly narrow-focused problems that affect only a few users, but probably are innocuous to apply if you don't need them [or perhaps not!] to common problems most people would agree might affect them. In the latter category I have actually experienced some of the problems and found the hotfixes did fix the problem as advertised.

Many of these updates break down into several categories:

1) Fixed only to be cared about by XP clients of domain servers. Some seem quite serious and were probably reported by money-paying corporate clients to fix real problems. They likely work but admittedly only are needed by this segment of users. Loose machines and peer networks need not care.

2) More general networking which applies to a larger audience. Same considerations, just that more users may care.

3) A small category of newly discovered bugs dating back to the original release now fixed.

4) A distressing category having to do with a whole lot of things broken in XP as of SP2 [see below] that only pertain to laptops. I find these generally to work and fix a lot of problems with regard to suspend-related problems and the like.

4a) Related subcategories such as fixes that clearly fix problems with Firewire support [and seem to work fine; many are merely registry settings as workarounds so you need not work around, etc.]

5) This is the most distressing category and is partially related to 4), fixes for problems CREATED by Service Pack 2.

Back in August 04, many people were complaining that SP2 broke their machines. Microsoft did damage control and claimed everything from misinstalls to "your third-party application is broken and not compliant; SP2 just enforces rules that weren't enforced before". Yet, a lot of people were still grumbling that things were better before SP2.

It appears that as early as September 04, there has been a steady progression of hotfixes that clearly show Microsoft's position as a flat-out lie. This seems to be a major segment of the so-called SP3 collection.

In all, the SP3 collection shows that literally hundreds of things are broken, well, as long as you define that the definition of XP is XP as augmented by Windows Update.

Many have warned that you should not apply all of these updates. This is totally correct. Not all of the updates are final and some really haven't been tested.

Moreover, if you do the research by actually reading the Knowledge Base articles, you find that these hotfixes include obsolete versions. I am assuming that a recently revised Knowledge Base article's information is to be believed. If it indicates a revision of a replacement file as x.xx or better, it's likely correct. However, some of these hotfixes have older digital signatures and are apparently not the latest version of the hotfix. Moreover, this does tend to indicate some work is being done, since at the bare minimum, there are at least two releases beyond XP SP2 of the relevant files.

Generally, hotfixes that raise the revision level of most files can be trusted to implement fixes embodied by former changes to the same files as described in other fixes. In that sense, it is possible for a series of events to create a latest-date collection of files that supersedes all previous versions of all of the files in the collection. Thus, it is possible that some of these hotfixes are totally obsolete, albeit benign, because the affected files were further updates by other updates.

There are a small number of hotfixes in the SP3 package that are obsolete by this notion, but it's not a significent percentage of the collection. By and large these hotfixes just show that Microsoft has essentially made half-hearted efforts to fix literally hundreds of things, many broken by SP2, yet this fact is largely denied.

And what about the ACTUAL SP3? Arrogantly, several months ago Microsoft announced that there WILL be an SP3, but only AFTER they release Vista, now put off until at least Jan 07, [i wouldn't hold my breath for that date being real either!].

If the track record of Microsoft is consistent, many, but not all of these fixes should -- then -- be embodied in SP3. SP1 and SP2 listed things claimed to be fixed when they were released. Both of them broke things, many more in SP2 than in SP1, and both failed to fix things claimed to be included in their long list of things claimed to be fixed, and both failed to include things that should have been included, some of which even remained in Windows Update after SP2 was applied!

I consider Windows Update to be a cruel joke; the main thing is to understand just how irrelevant it actually is in the overall scheme of things. Microsoft has a vested interest in keeping as many people in the dark as possible about just how much of Windows is ACTUALLY broken and not yet fixed. So, Windows Update is considered the bellweather of just how rosy they want to believe the situation is. The SP3 hotfix collection proves just how lousy things are.

cjl

[Maelstorm]

So, what of the so-called SP3 collection? It consists of literally hundreds of hotfixes for problems ranging from clearly narrow-focused problems that affect only a few users, but probably are innocuous to apply if you don't need them [or perhaps not!] to common problems most people would agree might affect them. In the latter category I have actually experienced some of the problems and found the hotfixes did fix the problem as advertised.

I've actually had this myself. It's interesting that you mention Firewire and issues with laptop suspend because I've noticed something recently. When I do a defrag of my external FW HD, the machine will suspend right in the middle of the defrag!! I've actually called Microsoft and requested a specific hotfix to correct some weird issue that I was having. Yes, it's not easy to get your hands on "unpublished" hotfixes, but it is possible. To do this, open a support request online with Microsoft and specifically request the hotfix. I don't give the reason why I want it, I just tell them that I want it and they will give it to you...free of charge in most cases. But, you are on your own if it breaks something.