SP2: any problems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ToolPackinMama
  • Start date Start date
You are under the mistaken impression that the BIOS is broken. On many of
the machines in question, the latest BIOS version available works just fine
without SP2 installed. That could hardly be called "broken".
Click to expand...

IT IS ****ING BROKEN YOU DUMB BASTARD.

There are a set specific standard requirements for BIOSes for certain
things. SP2 is written to comply with those requirements. BIOSes that
follow the standards haven't a problem. Those that don't do have a
problem.
 
How many mainboards have a BIOS that does not support the processor it's
spec'd to run? If they exist, you wouldn't be installing SP2 on that
system, as the damn thing wouldn't boot to start with. -Dave
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO...Intel LX chipset anyone?
 
HUH?!? You're saying that someone who can install a software firewall and
antivirus program should intuitively know to disable L1/L2 cache if SP2
causes Windows not to boot at all?
Click to expand...

Well YOU'RE the one telling us about Joe Average PC user. Joe Average
doesn't have a feckin clue about firewalls.
 
But your definition of a proper BIOS conflicts with reality. If your car
starts up in the morning and takes you to work and back OK, do you CARE if
the spark plugs installed weren't one of the brands recommended by the
manufacturer?
Click to expand...

You would do if the wrong heat rating spark plugs were used and they
ended up putting a hole in the piston crown.
 
Dave said:
You are simply talking out of your ass, now. The only way they are not
"perfectly working" is that they were not "perfectly working" to David
Maynard's standards.
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with 'my' standards. It has to do with the standards of
the processor manufacturer who issues microcode to fix known problems that
the mainboard manufacturer is supposed to incorporate into their BIOS, in
order to support their processor, so it isn't delivered with a rash of
correctable problems.
But guess what . . . you don't own most computers in
the world, and according to most computer owners, their systems work
perfectly, thank you very much.
Click to expand...

Being unaware of a problem doesn't make it go away.
That is, some of them DID work perfectly
before SP2 was installed.
Click to expand...

No they didn't if they didn't have the proper microcode. The user was just
blissfully ignorant of the problem.
 
Dave said:
How do you explain color to a blind person?
Click to expand...

Now you're back to suggesting they're brain dead.
I can see this issue from both
sides. If someone wants a technical explanation, I can give it to them. In
many cases, that won't be very helpful, though.
Click to expand...

That's because you're not trying to explain it but prefer to rant about
Microsoft.
If someone asks me if they
should install SP2, I would advise them to wait a while. Period.
Click to expand...

And why should someone with an AMD XP2500+ be 'waiting' because of an Intel
Prescott BIOS problem?
Why
confuse the issue by going into great lengths about improper microcode and
such that means nothing to 99.99% of the computer using population?
Click to expand...

No 'great lengths' are needed. Specific CPUs in conjunction with an
improper BIOS have a known problem and known solutions.
At the
same time, I know the dangers of a failed BIOS flash, so that's not an issue
I would bring up unless there was a real need to. Without SP2, there is no
real need for a BIOS flash.
Click to expand...

Simply not true. They don't have the proper microcode for their particular
processor and that IS a problem regardless of the service pack.
You want to help people, you've got to learn to
give them enough information to be helpful without confusing the heck out of
them, which will do more harm than good. The average computer user doesn't
speak our language, and neither should we, when communicating with the
average computer user. I know all that probably went right over your head,
but oh well, I tried.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't presume that simply because you're unable to put it in
correct and understandable terms that everyone else has the same problem.
 
Dave said:
How hard would it be for Microsoft to program windows update to check for
the proper microcode before installing SP2? Aw hell, you're going to argue
with me now just because you CAN, aren't you? -Dave
Click to expand...

In A you said the "issue is resolved completely" but that's untrue. It only
hides the problem of improper microcode; it doesn't fix, or 'resolve', it.
 
ToolPackinMama said:
I agree.
Click to expand...

And I second that! If a person has a working computer and installs SP2
on it and it now won't boot. Then that problem is caused by SP2 and
Microsoft needs to fix SP2. It's not the fault of the computer. The
problem is that Microsoft has been releasing buggy crap for years. And a
lot of people just accept that. Microsoft has screwed up and needs a
great big wake up call. They need to quit worrying how to make more
money and actually fix the crap they are releasing to us.

Bob
 
David said:
Oh, for heaven's sake, people. What the hell do you do when your car breaks
down? Are you completely clueless on how to get your TV fixed if it fails?
And I suppose you just sit there and freeze to death if the heater goes out
because, woe is me, you don't know what to do?

The only difference is that doing a simple web search for the problem takes
5 minutes, if you're slow, and is free. But if you're REALLY clueless you
end up with the same situation you have with everything else: finding
someone who isn't clueless to fix it for you.
Click to expand...

Oh for heaven's sake why in the hell should someone have to pay for
Micro$oft's screwup? SP2 needs to be fixed by Billy Bob Gates and his
cult in Redmond right now! Either that or Microsoft needs to pay for
these people that have to take their previously working computers into
the shop to have them fixed. My God. Take your head out of Gate's ass
long enough to see this.

Bob
 
A pack of biosii
A herd of biosii
a school of biosii
a pod of biosii
a litter of biosii
a group of biosii
a congregation of biosii
a plethora of biosii



spodosaurus said:
JAD said:
<requirements for BIOSes>

that would be BIOSII
Click to expand...

BIOSii? Perhaps it's BEESE, like geese, or BISE, like mice...
Click to expand...
 
But your definition of a proper BIOS conflicts with reality.
That's just plain silly. There's no 'conflict with reality' in expecting
the mainboard manufacturer to use the proper microcode.
Click to expand...

And for the thousandth time, there is nothing wrong with the BIOS until SP2
is installed. -Dave
 
On certain
The new version of XP conflicting with a poorly written BIOS? Shaun
Click to expand...

OK, I think poorly written is pretty harsh, but I'll concede that point.
Still, as I've posted before, is it easier for microsoft to change a few
lines of code or is it easier to expect dozens of mainboard manufacturers to
reprogram their BIOS so many clueless computer users can risk their
mainboard with a BIOS flash just so SP2 MIGHT work? -Dave
 
They wouldn't be necessary if Mickeysoft would just
The only 'fix' they can do is cover up that the BIOS is broke.

I contend that isn't a 'fix'.
Click to expand...

On that point, I could agree with you. However (you knew there was a
catch), it is irresponsible for Microsoft to release SP2 knowing what it's
going to do to many systems that need their BIOS code updated. I find it
shocking anyone would disagree with that, but I'm sure many will. -Dave
 
Simple question . . . how hard would it be for Microsoft to program
Windows
I don't know, for sure, and I'll bet you don't either.

I have, however, wondered what it would take to do that.


You presume things not in evidence: for one, that it's 'simple'.
Click to expand...

You've GOT to be kidding. Microsoft already has the program (to check for
the correct microcode) posted on their web site, so no new code would even
need to be written. If they can't find one programmer to spend five minutes
fixing SP2, I think Microsoft needs to fire ALL their programmers. Then
again, this is Microsoft we're talking about so maybe you have a valid
point. :) -Dave
 
Here speaks someone with no clue of how Windows is put together. Teams
are assigned to specific parts of Windows. The team dealing with
motherboard resources may only have one or two people in it.
Click to expand...

What the frick are you blabbering about? Microsoft already has the program
(to check for the correct microcode) posted on their website. How long
would it take you to change a tire on your car? Probably a lot longer than
it would take one Microsoft programmer to fix SP2, considering no new code
needs to be written. -Dave
 
Most
Actually, they do; if they can read and follow simple step by step
instructions.
Click to expand...

Yeah, all they have to do is search google. So they turn their computer on
and . . .
 
How many mainboards have a BIOS that does not support the processor it's
I don't know. But there are apparently some with Prescotts or Celeron Ds in
them or else we wouldn't be talking about it.


Not true. It's only a specific stepping of Prescott and Celeron D that has
the problem, or at least those are the only ones identified so far.
Click to expand...

Talk about side-stepping the question. Explain to me how the computer would
run at all if the BIOS doesn't support the processor it's spec'd to run.
Oh, never mind. -Dave
 
Back
Top