Is WinXP Sp3 update necessary?

[Daave]

No, I disabled the kaspersky before I did that update procedure.....

I might be confusing you with another poster, then, who thought he had
completely disabled his AV but one of its processes ran anyway. If so,
sorry about that. But still, didn't you tell me you didn't configure a
Clean Boot? If that's the case, there's still the possibility that
*something* interfered with the installation in some way. I'm not saying
that that's what definitively happened, but the possibility certainly
exists.

But one thing that keeps me thinking if the space for the hard drive
for such is just less than 2 gig then how come my C drive which had
4.7 GB of free space before the Sp3 intal would pose a problem?

Although 4.7 GB is not *lots* of free space, it still should have been
enough; that is, it probably didn't pose any problem. I think the reason
you lost an extra 2-3 GB was the colossal restore point that was set
automatically. If you have less than 2 GB of free space now, that will
lead to all sorts of problems.

Were you able to boot off the Acronis CD and restore the image? That
would at least take you back to a more stable point where you have your
4.7 GB of free space once more.

 

[Roy]

Roy wrote:

But still, didn't you tell me you didn't configure a

Clean Boot? If that's the case, there's still the possibility that
*something* interfered with the installation in some way. I'm not saying
that that's what definitively happened, but the possibility certainly
exists.

I did a Clean Boot twice after i installed that Sp3..

Although 4.7 GB is not *lots* of free space, it still should have been
enough; that is, it probably didn't pose any problem. I think the reason
you lost an extra 2-3 GB was the colossal restore point that was set
automatically. If you have less than 2 GB of free space now, that will
lead to all sorts of problems.

Well after I installed the Sp3, the accumulated restore points amounts
to more than a gig in size.

Were you able to boot off the Acronis CD and restore the image? That
would at least take you back to a more stable point where you have your
4.7 GB of free space once more.

When the acronis produced bugs, and it nonfunctional after the system
restore I remove it and have not reiinstalled it yet.
BTw, supposing the Acronis is running what is the best way to restore
the image to the C drive, do I have to format the C partition and
reinstall the image. Well I am not familiar with reinstallation of
such acronis image on a formatted or similarly prepared hard drive, or
is there a need for such...?
Another related question, how about the back up of system tools which
is similar in size to the acronis image what is the best way to apply
a restore to to the C drive...?
What are the requirements for that to be properly restored or
installed?
Roy
Is there an easy and surefire way to to such, I am thinking in that
direction also

 

[Roy]

InRoy typed on Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:22:21 -0700 (PDT):



Microsoft declares that SP3 will use no more than 500MB when everything
is all said and done. MS Works said in Add/Remove that it ate up 401MB.
So I removed it and I only got back less than 200MB. So Roy, it seems
very clear to me that the people at Microsoft knows nothing about math.
Otherwise how do you explain this nonsense? I expect this nonsense from
things like Linux (which freeware means you have nobody to complain
too), but Microsoft should know better!

Yes , I got your point bill, but likely the residues( discrepancies)
are the restore points and back ups created as an outgrowth to the
instal?

 

[Daave]

But still, didn't you tell me you didn't configure a

I did a Clean Boot twice after i installed that Sp3..

The Clean Boot needs to be done *before* the installation!

(An alternative is to boot into Safe Mode to install SP3.)

Well after I installed the Sp3, the accumulated restore points amounts
to more than a gig in size.

When the acronis produced bugs, and it nonfunctional after the system
restore I remove it and have not reiinstalled it yet.

You shouldn't reinstall Acronis now. In fact, there may be no need to
reinstall it at all once you restore your image.

BTw, supposing the Acronis is running what is the best way to restore
the image to the C drive, do I have to format the C partition and
reinstall the image. Well I am not familiar with reinstallation of
such acronis image on a formatted or similarly prepared hard drive, or
is there a need for such...?

When you use the phrase "supposing the Acronis is running," it sounds as
if you are referring to a hypothetical where you are running Windows and
you start Acronis. That is *not* what you want to do!

There is no need to format anything. Simply boot off the Acronis CD and
choose restore. Navigate to the location where the good .tib file is
located. Then indicate where you want that restored to. That simple!

Another related question, how about the back up of system tools which
is similar in size to the acronis image what is the best way to apply
a restore to to the C drive...?

I still don't know what you mean by the phrase "the back up of system
tools." The bottom line is if your Acronis image archive is good, that
is *all* you need. If you're referring to XP's own ntbackup program,
it's not necessary (as long as the Acronis image is a good one).

 

[Unknown]

"> That could explain why upgrading to SP2 was hell for me. One would think

as big and wonderful Microsoft is, they would run a verify and make sure
everything is going to plan. And if it doesn't, to report back and guess
what is going wrong. But I guess Microsoft programmers are as dumb as
nails. I am just a simple electronic engineer and that seems to be
programming 101 to me. But I am just a hardware engineer who only
understands 1's and 0's. <grin>

If Microsoft were to test their programs against all other programs in
existence would
you hazard a guess as to total time for release?

 

[BillW50]

In Unknown typed on Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:22:03 -0500:

"> That could explain why upgrading to SP2 was hell for me. One would
think
If Microsoft were to test their programs against all other programs in
existence would
you hazard a guess as to total time for release?

Having an update do a verify has nothing to do with testing against all
programs in existence. What screws up updates is that some parts are not
really saved to the hard drive. A simple verify would catch this.

 

[BillW50]

In
Roy typed on Wed, 22 Apr 2009 07:15:04 -0700 (PDT):

Yes , I got your point bill, but likely the residues( discrepancies)
are the restore points and back ups created as an outgrowth to the
instal?

Yes in your case, this is most likely true. Although in my case on my
netbooks, System Restore is turned off. Although I do make Ghost images
of the 4GB SSD. It only takes 7 minutes. And I routinely sync the data
files between other computers.

 

[Unknown]

They would have to verify updates against many virus and malware programs.
The verification would be far more complex. Think about all the various
system configurations, fragmented files etc. etc.

 

[BillW50]

In Unknown typed on Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:00:58 -0500:

They would have to verify updates against many virus and malware
programs. The verification would be far more complex. Think about all
the various system configurations, fragmented files etc. etc.

Not so. When you burn a CD/DVD you can do a verify to see if everything
got written correctly. Same idea with Windows Updates. Even the commands
Copy and Xcopy has verify switches. It is very simple to implement.

 

[BillW50]

In Unknown typed on Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:02:58 -0500:

Are you then saying each time you do an update you should burn a CD?

No, what I am saying Windows Update should do a verify to make sure
everything was written correctly. Or at least give you the choice. What
it does now is it just assumes it was written correctly. That is just
bad programming practice.

 

[Unknown]

BUT, what I'm saying is that it is almost an impossible task due to the
multitude of computer configurations
If it were a simple program it would be easy but an update?????? .

 

[BillW50]

In Unknown typed on Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:10:17 -0500:

BUT, what I'm saying is that it is almost an impossible task due to
the multitude of computer configurations
If it were a simple program it would be easy but an update?????? .

No, not so. Say the update wants to change the xyz.dll file. It
overwrites it and then verifies to see if it was really written. If not,
something blocked it like an anti-virus program. It has nothing to do
with multiple configurations.

 

[Roy]

The Clean Boot needs to be done *before* the installation!

(An alternative is to boot into Safe Mode to install SP3.)

Not sure if that is universally applicable for any Sp3 installation,
as I installed Sp3 on one of my workplace computer and it was a
trouble free installation . It was done a week before I did with my
personal PC..

When you use the phrase "supposing the Acronis is running," it sounds as
if you are referring to a hypothetical where you are running Windows and
you start Acronis. That is *not* what you want to do! Thanks for that info

There is no need to format anything. Simply boot off the Acronis CD and
choose restore. Navigate to the location where the good .tib file is
located. Then indicate where you want that restored to. That simple!

So this Acronis Back up would overwrite the Tib file over the existing
file in the C drive?

 

[Roy]

The Clean Boot needs to be done *before* the installation!

(An alternative is to boot into Safe Mode to install SP3.)

What I mean by my recent post is I did the Sp3 installation without
even using the Clean Boot and the Safe Mode in its installation and
it was smooth...

 

[Daave]

What I mean by my recent post is I did the Sp3 installation without
even using the Clean Boot and the Safe Mode in its installation and
it was smooth...

I don't doubt it at all. SP3 installations usually work without any
issues whatsoever.

Still, configuring a Clean Boot (or using Safe Mode) is very easy to do.
And in those relatively rare instances where a particular program would
otherwise interfere, using this "best practices" method eliminates that
possibility. That is why many of us recommend it.

 

[Daave]

On Apr 22, 11:16 pm, "Daave" <[email protected]>
wrote:

So this Acronis Back up would overwrite the Tib file over the existing
file in the C drive?

No.

In fact it doesn't matter at all what is on this drive. You can even use
a brand new one if you wish! Restoring the image file recreates the
complete structure (everything: OS, programs, data, all the directories
where they belong) of your hard drive the exact way it was when you made
the image.

 

[Terry R.]

The date and time was Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:59:17 PM, and on a whim,
John John - MVP pounded out on the keyboard:

or a laptoy... Around here one of the major bank was giving them away
for free if you opened an account with them. Most people said they
wanted a free toaster instead...

John

LOL!


Terry R.

 

[Roy]

No.

In fact it doesn't matter at all what is on this drive. You can even use
a brand new one if you wish! Restoring the image file recreates the
complete structure (everything: OS, programs, data, all the directories
where they belong) of your hard drive the exact way it was when you made
the image.

Sorry, I just want to clarify,supposing my C drive got corrupted and
it has barely 3 gigs of free space left and the Acronis TIB file is
15 gigs in size, how can it accomodate in the C drive Free space
without overwriting the existing files ?
I would like to hear more details about the mechanics how the Acronis
can fit that 15 G file into 3 gig free space in the C drive ?

 

[Daave]

Sorry, I just want to clarify,supposing my C drive got corrupted and
it has barely 3 gigs of free space left and the Acronis TIB file is
15 gigs in size, how can it accomodate in the C drive Free space
without overwriting the existing files ?

*Everything* is overwritten.

Let's assume your image archive (.tib file) is not compressed. It does't
matter what size your hard drive is. (OK, it matters if your hard drive
is smaller than 20GB, but that's it.)

It doesn't even matter if you use the same hard drive.

It doesn't matter what's on the hard drive!

When you restore an image, the result is a hard drive the way it was
when the image was made.

So if you had a hard drive that was 20GB and had 5GB of free space, you
really only had 15GB of actual data on it. If you made an image of the
entire hard drive and stored that image file somewhere else, that means
you can restore it. When the restoration is done, the hard drive is
identical to how it was when you made the image. You can use the
original 20GB drive if you wish. Whatever is on there gets wiped away
anyway in order to restore the image. You don't need to format the drive
before you perform the restoration (as I believe you asked about in
another post). The restoration does it all. If the original drive is
physically shot, you can replace the drive. The restoration still works
the same exact way. You can even put in a 250GB drive if you wish. You
will wind up with 15GB of data and 235GB of free space. But the 15GB of
data will be structured exactly as it was before, so your operating
system, programs, documents -- *everything* -- will all be there,
functioning just as they were when you made the image.

I would like to hear more details about the mechanics how the Acronis
can fit that 15 G file into 3 gig free space in the C drive ?

No, no, no, no, no! Think of your hard drive as *20* GB of free space!
It's *all* free space! All you are doing is going into the wayback
machine. If you made an image of your drive one week ago, it doesn't
matter if there is no free space on it today. It doesn't matter if today
your drive dies and you throw it away. Put any old drive into your PC,
boot off the Acronis CD, hook up the external hard drive (presumably
that's where your image is) and run the program. Choose Restore. The
result will be the PC will be functionally identical to how it was one
week ago (when you made the image).

Now, I am assuming you had made an image archive, not a file archive.
This must be an image of the entire hard drive!

 

[BillW50]

In Unknown typed on Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:10:32 -0500:

That is true, but you are talking about a very very simple update.
That is only one file.

No, whether one file or a zillion. The idea is exactly the same. When
you do a Windows Update, the Update knows what files it adds and
updates. And all it has to do is to verify it did what it was set out to
do. Double checking as it were. This is Programming 101.