Is XP Service Pack 1 required for XP Service Pack 2?

[Chris Maleski]

I've allowed Windows Update to install every single
security update for XP over the past few years. However,
upon installing XP Service Pack 1 last October, my high
speed internet connection stopped working. I backed out
SP1 and reinstalled all of the other security updates.
I've been fine and happy ever since.

My question is, am I required to have SP1 installed on my
machine in order to be able to install SP2?

I haven't seen any indication from Microsoft anywhere that
this is a requirement. Does SP2 supercede SP1 (that is,
if you haven't installed SP1, you shouldn't at this point
and just let SP2 install)?

Any ideas?

 

[Alias]

It includes SP 1.

Alias

 

[CS]

I've allowed Windows Update to install every single
security update for XP over the past few years. However,
upon installing XP Service Pack 1 last October, my high
speed internet connection stopped working. I backed out
SP1 and reinstalled all of the other security updates.
I've been fine and happy ever since.

My question is, am I required to have SP1 installed on my
machine in order to be able to install SP2?

I haven't seen any indication from Microsoft anywhere that
this is a requirement. Does SP2 supercede SP1 (that is,
if you haven't installed SP1, you shouldn't at this point
and just let SP2 install)?

Any ideas?

SP2 includes SP1 so you do not need to download and install SP1 first.
But if your connection stopped working when you installed SP1, might
be a good idea to contact your ISP and ask what if any effect
installing SP2 will have on your connection.

SP2 contains many security enhancements and you should be prepared to
deal with them. That may or may not impact on how you access the net.

 

[Ken Blake]

In

Chris Maleski wrote:

No

You replied with a single word, "no," to the two opposite
questions asked above. The answer "no" is correct for the first
question, "am I required to have SP1 installed on my machine in
order to be able to install SP2?" but wrong for the second
question, "Does SP2 supercede SP1 (that is, if you haven't
installed SP1, you shouldn't at this point and just let SP2
install)?"

The correct answer to the second question is "yes."

 

[lonny]

I've allowed Windows Update to install every single
security update for XP over the past few years. However,
upon installing XP Service Pack 1 last October, my high
speed internet connection stopped working. I backed out
SP1 and reinstalled all of the other security updates.
I've been fine and happy ever since.

My question is, am I required to have SP1 installed on my
machine in order to be able to install SP2?

I haven't seen any indication from Microsoft anywhere that
this is a requirement. Does SP2 supercede SP1 (that is,
if you haven't installed SP1, you shouldn't at this point
and just let SP2 install)?

Any ideas?

No

 

[S.Sengupta]

No ,you don't require SP1,as SP2 includes all.
Yes SP2 supercedes SP1.

check it here:-http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/default.mspx

regards,
ssg MS-MVP
pronetworks.org

 

[JimBob]

Hello,
I'm not sure that is entirely correct. I have the 266MB SP2 downloaded and
saved. I have not reinstalled XP since I first installed it so decided to do
a new clean install of my XP Pro SP1 upgrade CD (after removal of my printer
and scanner). After the clean install (of course I had to use my Win98 CD as
proof of prior ownership) I installed XP SP2. Microsoft drivers were
correctly auto installed for my various PCI cards. I then set up my dial-up
ISP and activated XP via the Internet. I then went to the Windows update
site (which showed as V5) and was told I needed to download new update
software. I let it download and everything appeared to install OK. I then
elected to check for the various critical, optional, and driver updates. It
showed me zero critical updates needed, several optional and drivers updates
were available (these were expected). The next time I went to check the
updates I was told I needed the critical update 816093 MS03-011 (a rather
old Microsoft Virtual Machine update). I did not have to download because I
had saved it from a previous update install for XP Pro SP1. Prior to the
update jview shows VM v5.00.3805. After the update jview shows VM
v5.00.3810. So I think it would be safe to say SP2 superseded SP1a (which
does not include Microsoft Virtual Machine) but not SP1. Why it didn't show
the VM critical update when I first checked for updates I have no idea. Just
wanted to pass on my experience.
regards

 

[Barry Watzman]

The answer that Chris gave (that SP2 is all inclusive and supercedes
[inclusively] SP1) is correct EXCEPT for MSJava.

From my own actual testing, installation of SP2 into a running system
seems to leave MSJava's status, whatever it is, unchanged (which means
that a subsequent upgrade may be required if the system had a version of
MSJava prior to build 3810), while slipstreaming of SP2 into a CD [with
autostreamer, at least] seems to actually remove MSJava from the
resulting slipstreamed CD entirely.

However, excluding MSJava, SP2 is all-inclusive as of August 10th.

That's what I'm finding, anyway. I'd appreciate any additional input n
this subject.

 

[Barry Watzman]

The problem is, there are things (quite a few, in fact) that work with
MS' Java that don't work with Sun Java, and I use one of them extensively.

 

[Test Man]

You can forget MS's version of Java and get the proper version from Sun at
http://java.sun.com

 

[Barry Watzman]

It's not exactly my app. The voice Chat feature in Yahoo Messenger
doesn't work without it if you are in a large chat room in IE.

 

[Test Man]

Ah OK.

Only thing is as far as I know, MS's Java is out of date due to Sun's
litigation against Microsoft. It might be best to recode your Java app to
work on Sun's latest version as more and more people will be using this
version due to it's immediate availability.

 

[JimBob]

I thought I read they kissed and are now friends again.