SP2 drove me to open source

[Greg Burns]

Did you install the chipset drivers for your motherboard this second go
round?

Greg

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
Well, that is your opinion and you are free to maintain your computer as you
see fit.
How much time have you spent on this current issue vs. how much time to
reinstall on a system that is still a new install?
The suggestion is given since your installation is so new.
In such cases, it is often much quicker to start over rather than spend the
time troubleshooting and possibly reinstall anyways.

If you want a more precise solution to otherwise resolve your issue, you
need to post the details you have so far left out such as hardware
configuration.
With the details, someone may be able to give a specific answer.

 

[Jason Bowen]

All the drivers are from Microsoft, off the XP CD or from Windows update.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
You are usually better off getting the drivers directly from the hardware
manufacturers.

Microsoft gets the drivers from the manufacturers.
Tests are performed at the manufacturers expense and only then does
Microsoft release them.
This and other reasons often lead to newer drivers being available from the
hardware manufacturer.

 

[Jason Bowen]

It's my opinion that something should work right consistently?

Mobile Athlon XP-M 2400+(runs at 1.87Ghz)
512 MB RAM
60 GB hard drive
DVD-CDRW drive
2 USB 1.1 ports
1 Firewire 400 port
National Semi DP83815 (MacPhyter) 10/100 Ethernet
ALi Corporation M5451 PCI AC-Link Controller Audio Device
ALi Corporation M5457 AC-Link Modem
PS/2 mouse port
RS-232(serial) port
Parallel port
VGA out
S-VHS out
1 CardBus slot

All the drivers come from the Original XP install or Windows update, all
my hardware was supported by XP out of the box. Basically I've done all
the monkey boy check lists, I need more expertise than following the
scripts. I've done the uninstall/reinstall the software schtick. I want
to know why XP, when it run the new hardware wizard says, it can't find
the drivers for anything I've plugged in. I'd just like to get real
answers instead of stabs in the dark. The problem is there doesn't seem
to be a real answer, just stabs in the dark.

It is a default install of XP Pro with XP SP2 applied and nothing other
than drivers distributed by Microsoft. If something went wrong during
any of the installation or subsequent install of SP2 there was no
notification.

 

[Jason Bowen]

Jason;
You are usually better off getting the drivers directly from the hardware
manufacturers.

Microsoft gets the drivers from the manufacturers.
Tests are performed at the manufacturers expense and only then does
Microsoft release them.
This and other reasons often lead to newer drivers being available from the
hardware manufacturer.

So you are telling me that Microsoft distributes drivers it doesn't test
with it's operating system and subsequent updates?

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
I never said that, you just did.
Microsoft only tests the drivers sent by the manufacturers at the
manufacturers expense.
There are often newer drivers available from the manufacturers.
Read my post again for what I said.
It is difficult to test anything for compatibility issues with "subsequent
updates" since often the update does not exist when the driver is submitted
to Microsoft for testing.
Try the latest driver from the manufacturer.

 

[Kerry Brown]

It's my opinion that something should work right consistently?

Mobile Athlon XP-M 2400+(runs at 1.87Ghz)
512 MB RAM
60 GB hard drive
DVD-CDRW drive
2 USB 1.1 ports
1 Firewire 400 port
National Semi DP83815 (MacPhyter) 10/100 Ethernet
ALi Corporation M5451 PCI AC-Link Controller Audio Device
ALi Corporation M5457 AC-Link Modem
PS/2 mouse port
RS-232(serial) port
Parallel port
VGA out
S-VHS out
1 CardBus slot

All the drivers come from the Original XP install or Windows update, all
my hardware was supported by XP out of the box. Basically I've done all
the monkey boy check lists, I need more expertise than following the
scripts. I've done the uninstall/reinstall the software schtick. I want
to know why XP, when it run the new hardware wizard says, it can't find
the drivers for anything I've plugged in. I'd just like to get real
answers instead of stabs in the dark. The problem is there doesn't seem
to be a real answer, just stabs in the dark.

It is a default install of XP Pro with XP SP2 applied and nothing other
than drivers distributed by Microsoft. If something went wrong during any
of the installation or subsequent install of SP2 there was no
notification.

Jason

Is this a laptop? If so it will need the drivers from the manufacturer or at
least the chipset manufacturer. It is very rare to see a laptop that works
properly with a generic XP install. If you don't have the disk that came
with it check the web for drivers. So far I have always been able to get the
right drivers on the web but it sometimes is quite a hunt for generic
laptops. I've had to strip them down so I could physically identify the
motherboard.

Laptop manufacturers routinely ship with slightly modified Windows
installations to support their non-standard hardware. Expecting Microsoft to
support non-standard hardware is unrealistic. Also calling most of the
people on this newsgroup "monkey boys" isn't a great way to ask for help.
Diagnosing complex problems by newsgroups will always be a stab in the dark.
If you want better support talk to the manufacturer of your computer.

If this is not a laptop please ignore my post

Other than the monkey boy part

Kerry

 

[Jason Bowen]

Jason;
I never said that, you just did.
Microsoft only tests the drivers sent by the manufacturers at the
manufacturers expense.
There are often newer drivers available from the manufacturers.
Read my post again for what I said.
It is difficult to test anything for compatibility issues with "subsequent
updates" since often the update does not exist when the driver is submitted
to Microsoft for testing.
Try the latest driver from the manufacturer.

There are wires crossed here. I only have drivers from Microsoft,
including the ones from Windows Update or the ones distributed with SP2.
I have no drivers from any other source. Shouldn't these all be tested?

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jason;
Yes, they were tested at some point.
As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.
Are the drivers dated before or after the release of SP-2?
If you used these same drivers before, they should still work.
Anything can get corrupted and there is nothing anyone can do anywhere with
anything that can permanently eliminate chances of corruption.

In any event drivers is a good place to start since a reinstall is not an
option for you.
Start with chipset and any other motherboard drivers from the manufacturer.

 

[Jason Bowen]

Jason;
Yes, they were tested at some point.
As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.
Are the drivers dated before or after the release of SP-2?
If you used these same drivers before, they should still work.
Anything can get corrupted and there is nothing anyone can do anywhere with
anything that can permanently eliminate chances of corruption.

In any event drivers is a good place to start since a reinstall is not an
option for you.
Start with chipset and any other motherboard drivers from the manufacturer.

I re-installed, did the same install path I always did and everything
worked. The issue is that I have always taken this XP Pro CD and
installed it and just used the drivers from the XP CD and Windows
update. It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any
"motherboard" drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The
files they provide are the same I got from Windows update, I compared
the files installed and the driver versions. I could find no reason for
the behavior of the last install and this is precisely why people get
frustrated with Microsoft. I am an operating system hobbyist, like to
play with whatever I can get my hands on, and I've never had the issue
be uninstall/reinstall ad nauseum with other operating systems. It's
simply unacceptable and smacks of poor software engineering.

 

[Kerry Brown]

I re-installed, did the same install path I always did and everything
worked. The issue is that I have always taken this XP Pro CD and
installed it and just used the drivers from the XP CD and Windows update.
It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any "motherboard"
drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The files they provide
are the same I got from Windows update, I compared the files installed and
the driver versions. I could find no reason for the behavior of the last
install and this is precisely why people get frustrated with Microsoft. I
am an operating system hobbyist, like to play with whatever I can get my
hands on, and I've never had the issue be uninstall/reinstall ad nauseum
with other operating systems. It's simply unacceptable and smacks of poor
software engineering.

Have you tried installing Linux on the laptop? Did it work immediately?
Nothing against Linux, just using it as an example. Operating systems are
complex. Laptops have non-standard hardware. It is very rare to install an
OS on a laptop and not have to do some tweaking. Compaq should have shipped
a recovery CD with the laptop. That is the only OS guaranteed to run on it.
Blame Compaq (the original OS supplier), not Microsoft or any other OS
supplier. I find that in cases like you describe it is usually a
dirty/scratched CD or marginal drive. The OS seems to install Ok but
something is not right. Reinstalling with a different CD or cleaning the CD
and reinstalling usually fixes it. It's a stab in the dark but based on my
experience it could be close to the mark.

Glad to hear you got it going.

Kerry

 

[Jason Bowen]

Have you tried installing Linux on the laptop? Did it work immediately?

Yep, it actually did. The only thing that wasn't supported was the
winmodem and support for it can be bought for $15. There is a
difference between supporting hardware and the operating system not
working correctly. Like I've said, I've never had such a solution for
any other operating system. OpenBSD installed smoothly on this laptop.

Nothing against Linux, just using it as an example. Operating systems are
complex. Laptops have non-standard hardware.

The chipset is used by other laptops, the cpu is, the winmodem is, the
soundcard is... What do you define as standard? The manufacturers all
made windows drivers available for the hardware.

It is very rare to install an

OS on a laptop and not have to do some tweaking. Compaq should have shipped
a recovery CD with the laptop. That is the only OS guaranteed to run on it.
Blame Compaq (the original OS supplier), not Microsoft or any other OS
supplier. I find that in cases like you describe it is usually a
dirty/scratched CD or marginal drive. The OS seems to install Ok but
something is not right. Reinstalling with a different CD or cleaning the CD
and reinstalling usually fixes it. It's a stab in the dark but based on my
experience it could be close to the mark.

Sorry but what you describe happening should be caught, a scratched cd
won't read and the drives have error detection taking place. It's all
hand waving really. I know about uninstall/reinstall/wash/rinse/repeat,
I came here looking for something more in depth.

 

[Plato]

update. It is a laptop and the manufacturer, Compaq, didn't have any
"motherboard" drivers, just drivers for sound, video, modem etc. The
frustrated with Microsoft. I am an operating system hobbyist, like to

Then use a standard, non proprietary pc to play with.

 

[Jason Bowen]

Then use a standard, non proprietary pc to play with.

All the hardware does conform to standards such as VESA and IDE. That
is why an operating system like OpenBSD installed.

 

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:23:58 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"

Yes, they were tested at some point.
As to whether they are compatible with SP-2 is difficult to say.

This highlights something rather significant about SP2, and some
background reasons why this may be a taste of things to come.

Windows meshes several subsystems into one lump - i.e. while separate
dev teams dev the subsystems, they cannot be uninstalled and managed
separately by the end user. Thinking DirectX, WSH, IE, OE, WMP etc.

Current MS support policy draws lines between "still supported" vs.
"no longer supported" based on SP levels.

So there's a temptation to push the latest subsystems into each SP,
the sooner to set a new support baseline. For example, if you were
the DirectX team, you'd rather see SP2 push DirectX 9c rather than
leave (say) DirectX 8 in place, because a certain time down the line,
you could drop support for DirectX 8.xx through DirectX 9b once SP2
becomes the lowest SP level supported.

This breaks the principle of "do not add features to Service Packs".
Effectively, SP2 *is* a new OS subversion, just as much as Win98SE was
over Win98. But whereas Win98SE was marketed as a new subversion (you
had to buy it as an upgrade from Win98) SP2 is not.

That's good news, but the downside is that folks will apply SP2 on the
assumption it will fix a few security issues, and that's it. They'll
read up the caveats about how these security changes will affect
software that will fall foul of these, but they won't expect deep
driver-level incompatibilities e.g. Prescott vs. SP2, etc.

In fact, many of us who advocate installing SP2 (in the interests of
better malware safety) also advocate against installing a newer OS
over an older one to upgrade it - we know how wrong that can go.


It was several months before SP2 was released as an OS (e.g. the new
DSP and OEM CDs that are natively SP2). Without that, users have
other problems if they apply SP2...
- cannot use Recovery Console
- cannot do repair install
....because SP2 breaks compatibility with their license-legit (but now
comparitively useless) installation CD.

IMO, if an SP does this, then it is obliged to:
- include functionality to generate replacement installation CD
- document this issue in "before you install..."
- offer that during the installation process
- have this available after the installation process

MS should demonstrate good faith by releasing this functionality as a
free downloadable adjunct to SP2. As it is, their lecensing terms
disallow the creation of a "slipstreamed" installation disk, as is
possible via 3rd-party tools and advice. In essence, SP2 knocks you
down and MS's rules disallow you from getting up again. That SUCKS.

---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]> "cquirke (MVP

MS should demonstrate good faith by releasing this functionality as a
free downloadable adjunct to SP2. As it is, their lecensing terms
disallow the creation of a "slipstreamed" installation disk, as is
possible via 3rd-party tools and advice. In essence, SP2 knocks you
down and MS's rules disallow you from getting up again. That SUCKS.

I didn't read the license too closely, but I didn't see anything there
that forbids end-user creation of a slipstreamed disk.

Did I miss something?

 

[cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)]

In message <[email protected]> "cquirke (MVP

I didn't read the license too closely, but I didn't see anything there
that forbids end-user creation of a slipstreamed disk.

Did I miss something?

Probably. I had a client who needed something like this, as they had
a laptop with one of those lame "recovery" disks, and I wanted to do a
custom OS install plus ensure they could RC and do repair installs
whould the need arise. Although it was a new PC, the OS was pre-SP2,
so I figured doing a slipstream build would hit all the spots.

That's when I was told that technically, slipstream builds broke the
terms of the licensing.

Now one can shrug and ignore such issues, or confront them. Most of
us will do what we have to do, and that constrains us in how tall we
dare stand when something else needs to be confronted. My take is
that licensing terms that force you to be a warez bunny to get the job
done, even when you have paid for the software, suck++

In the end, we found a less sucky laptop brand with a "real" CD

---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <[email protected]> "cquirke (MVP

Probably. I had a client who needed something like this, as they had
a laptop with one of those lame "recovery" disks, and I wanted to do a
custom OS install plus ensure they could RC and do repair installs
whould the need arise. Although it was a new PC, the OS was pre-SP2,
so I figured doing a slipstream build would hit all the spots.

That's when I was told that technically, slipstream builds broke the
terms of the licensing.

Now one can shrug and ignore such issues, or confront them. Most of
us will do what we have to do, and that constrains us in how tall we
dare stand when something else needs to be confronted. My take is
that licensing terms that force you to be a warez bunny to get the job
done, even when you have paid for the software, suck++

In the end, we found a less sucky laptop brand with a "real" CD

I'm not seeing anything in the WinXP (full or OEM) licenses which forbid
slipstreaming -- If your OEM places additional restrictions on you,
that's a problem between you and your OEM.