oc-athlonxp.com - Some of us won't be installing SP2 for a while. Not until we absolutely have to.
The new Service pack is coming out soon - but I've heard a few people say they are staying well clear - can someone shed some light on what is so bad about it?
probably just to not ruin any customizing done on the PC....
or maybe because they fear a performance hit (similar to the one that affected some sp1 users).
No real performance hit with SP2.
I have been running both SP2 RC1 and RC2 and they both work just fine.
Sure, they kill all your modded system files but what did you expect.
SP2 is in general terms, a free upgrade for XP.
The is by far MS biggest SP release to date and replaces virtualy every core system file.
You also get a few added features and better security.
For those of you who complain about stuff getting locked out or performance hits due to additional services, these can all be disabled if you don't want to use the features.
I have SP2 RC2 running on a test PC and so far I have not found anything negative to say about it.
The test PC is just an old PIII 550Mhz with 256MB memory I had laying around. Beleive it or not, it runs very smooth. I have loaded Adobe PS 7, Office 2003, Visio 2003 and a few other large programs and they all run just fine.
does it hurt uxtheme.dll?
I expect so
(just as much as I expect that someone
will create us a new-sp2-compatible-uxtheme.dll
to use with the Visual Styles).
Then there is WindowBlinds...
which doesn't need uxtheme.dll.
Choises, choises...
Greetings,
WIEBEest
Yeah I think it's mainly for the customizing. I might install it
cause I mod all my system files myself and when sp2 is out
maybe I'll just mod the sp2 files 
We'll I'm going to install it (have 1meg connection so d/l is no issue ) and use it as an opportunity for a fresh start. This current install has been on my machine for over a year and I'm sure I've messed a few files in that time...
Originally posted by bobmcbobjunior@Jul 17 2004, 05:55 PMdoes it hurt uxtheme.dll?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yes... it has a newer and bigger uxtheme.dll.
As to the WindowBlinds response... yeah, it's cool if you want to spend $$$.
Just be patient, someone will replease a patch for it once it becomes final.
as rjohnstone said it's gonna change a lot of system files. So, it stands to reason that it's also going to break a lot of system files too. MS is trying to attempt a lock down of their OS, which is going to cause quite a few mishaps everywhere. All you need is some time to re-adjust the settings on your machine(s) and all will be well.
Originally posted by RoyalPain@Jul 21 2004, 06:38 PMas rjohnstone said it's gonna change a lot of system files. So, it stands to reason that it's also going to break a lot of system files too. MS is trying to attempt a lock down of their OS, which is going to cause quite a few mishaps everywhere. All you need is some time to re-adjust the settings on your machine(s) and all will be well.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Are you kidding??? Is that official?
Well if that continues then....then......
*begins looking for his linux distro...*
Originally posted by babypapichulo@Jul 22 2004, 12:32 AM
Are you kidding??? Is that official?
Well if that continues then....then......
*begins looking for his linux distro...*
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What do you mean if that continues... look at OS X.
New release every year and you have to PAY to get it.
Hell at least this OS upgrade is free.
one of the problems is that ms limits the number of max connections.
read the neowin thread: http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=192856
Originally posted by dreamz@Jul 23 2004, 04:07 PMone of the problems is that ms limits the number of max connections.
read the neowin thread: http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=192856
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It's a load of crap.
Windows has always had an 8000 port/socket limit.
As for this particular feature of SP2, it can also be turned of by stopping the Security Service that runs the firewall and NAT connection management.
Can't remember the name of it as I don't have it open right now.
You can also just remove the reg key that controls it.
People get paraniod over the smallest things.
Chill... it's still an RC, not GOLD.
Be patient and see what the FINAL SP will look like before freaking out.
lol, i didn't even read that thread. 
Too many people out there assuming way too much without checking the facts first.
I bet I could make at least 100,000 people freak and refuse to use SP2 in about 30 minutes by describing how my first install of SP2 destroyed everything on my test box.
Or at least that's what I would say without showing any real proof, just a bunch of default warning messages that show by default when enhanced security is enabled.
SP2 is harmless... people need to actualy test it and see how it works and realize that 95% of the security restrictions and the "OMG I CAN'T DO THIS ANYMORE!!!" or "IT BROKE ALL MY TOOLS FOR DOWNLOADING ILLEGAL SOFTWARE!!!" stuff can simply be turned off.
@rjohnstone,
I always like to make my pc be at tip top shape. I download drivers as soon as they comeout even if nothing was wrong with the old ones. I download motherboard drivers and all. Even Bios updates. Do you recomend that I download the latest build of SP2 even if it's in beta?. thanks in advance.
Originally posted by babypapichulo@Jul 23 2004, 07:03 PM@rjohnstone,
I always like to make my pc be at tip top shape. I download drivers as soon as they comeout even if nothing was wrong with the old ones. I download motherboard drivers and all. Even Bios updates. Do you recomend that I download the latest build of SP2 even if it's in beta?. thanks in advance.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I would never recommend anyone download a beta or even an RC version of a SP of this size and magnitude and install it on their primary system.
I have access to a wide range of equipment and never really throw out most of my older PC's.
Given that, I have the ability to install and test a lot of software without risking my primary workstation.
So to be brief, no, I would not advise installing this SP on your main system at this time.
Wait for the final release and to be even better prepared, read a review or two or three before you install.
That way you can minimize any risks or suprises ahead of time.
This baby has a few surprises, nothing I would call news worthy, but still very interesting.
That's just my opinion when it comes to testing software.
Just to give some actual information to support what has been hypothesized, the hosting company that serves the place I'm working at sent an e-mail saying that they received an advance copy of SP2, and that for three out of five computers, SP2 resulted in a blue screen, and a message about a missing "winserv" upon reboot (i.e., no more access to Windows.) Their engineers had to reboot to the recovery console, run a batch script to roll back SP2. Except it didn't work the first time, so they had to do that twice. Upon getting back into Windows, they had to run another batch script to roll back registry entries. After this was all completed, it became apparent that the rollbacks had not only uninstalled SP2, but also SP1, and all of the system drivers. They were able to get all of them back, except the video driver, whose directory was -deleted- by the rollback scripts. I'm pretty sure they did this whole process on a good number of computers, and that it wasn't just one computer that had those kinds of difficulties.
So... uh... yeah. I'm not very inclined to get SP2 at this point. I think I'll let others have a go at it first, see how it works out for them :-)
@pstr9er
Looks like they were running SP2 against a custom XP install.
Corporations that modify or strip features out of their Windows desktop builds have always run into one problem or another during SP installs.
I would be curious to find out what "batch scripts" they were running to "roll back" SP2. SP2 uses the standard Add/Remove Programs feature to uninstall, and it has worked EVERYTIME I've had to used it.
A former company I worked for stripped so much out of their Windows NT 4.0 Worstation builds that they were never able to successfuly apply any SP beyond SP3.
They had to rethink their desktop build policy and learn better ways to restrict and/or manage the users desktop.
Now I'm not saying that XP SP2 is perfect... it's not, but it does not produce the kind of results you stated above with a normal install.
Your IT guys need to learn a new phrase, "Policy Editor".
Use policies to restrict or modify access to windows components, don't strip them from the build. Can cause headaches later.
Aqua-Soft Forums