SP2 stops valid program functions!!!

[Larc]

When I instruct a program on my computer to perform a function it's capable of
carrying out, I fully expect it to happen. But not since I installed SP2!

A download program I have can be set to shut down the computer after it
completes downloading. But that function no longer works since SP2. Is there
any way to override this uncalled for interference in my computer operations?

Protecting a computer against orders originating from an outside source is one
thing. But getting in the way of valid execution orders by the owner is quite
another.

FWIW, the XP firewall is turned off since I'm operating on a home network that's
behind a hardware firewall.

TIA for the solution.

Larc



§§§ - Please change planet to earth to reply by e-mail - §§§

 

[Stephen Harris]

That's why you should have tested SP2 on a non-production machine before
deploying it.

If you're using this at home, you shouldn't have installed it yet since it
hasn't been released to consumers.

Is your statement equivalent to: Microsoft has delayed the automatic
update method of obtaining SP2 because companies and corporations
don't want their employees to install SP2 until that company has had
time to test compatibility with their other programs?

I think the opposite is the case. SP2 is readily available to home
users, some of whom have only one computer so that the production
machine and the non-production machine wear the same hat. It is
business employees who don't have access to SP2 because they
are part of domains which can prohibit large downloads. The
delay was to give businesses time to enforce policies of disabling
automatic downloads within the business not to restict home users.

Consumers are typically home users. Though delaying automatic
updates impacts both consumers and business employees, it has
not been released only to business/corporate employees and
home users have had the option of downloading SP2 since the 10th.

The implication of your post was that if you have a 56k modem
you better wait until automatic updates are enabled or order a
cd because that will give you time to go out and acquire another
computer so that you can test SP2 against your programs before
you use it on your "production" machine.

He is complaining about a situation which exists. You are criticizing
him because you think he found out about too soon. As if in two
weeks program incompatibilites for the home user with SP2 will
magically disappear. Your pretentious use of computer jargon
does little to diguise your muddled, arrogant incompetence.

Don't drop out of high school if it isn't too late,
Stephen

 

[jeff4379]

No, what I am saying is that users shouldn't just go installing software
without knowing the consequences of doing so...expecially something as major
as a major service pack to the operating system.

 

[Chris Kusmierz]

No, what I am saying is that users shouldn't just go installing software
without knowing the consequences of doing so...expecially something as major
as a major service pack to the operating system.

<snip>

Umm...just how can one know the consequences of installing something without
actually installing it?

Chris

 

[Steve Nielsen]

No, what I am saying is that users shouldn't just go installing software
without knowing the consequences of doing so...expecially something as major
as a major service pack to the operating system.

It doesn't matter, it would have happened anyway and it's going to
continue to happen. Microsoft has been doing a good job of convincing
everyone to use AU and it is clear from the very long list of
applications that "may behave diferently" with SP2 installed (many of
which are MS products!) that this is going to impact an awful lot of
users in a very negative way. As far as this IT Pro is concerned "behave
differently" equates to "being broken" because it is we IT Pro's who are
going to have to go in and "fix" the "different behavior".

Steve

 

[Russell]

What about the people who have auotmatic updates turn on,
and just find it installed one day. Thier the ones who
are least likely to know what happened. Once it gets into
the 'MS update' arena, that is when the really consumer
testing begins. And they are the ones who least likely
know what is being installed.

Could be an interesting time.

 

[Tom Pepper Willett]

It won't install without user intervention. Requires agreeing to the EULA.

Tom
What about the people who have auotmatic updates turn on,
and just find it installed one day. Thier the ones who
are least likely to know what happened. Once it gets into
the 'MS update' arena, that is when the really consumer
testing begins. And they are the ones who least likely
know what is being installed.

Could be an interesting time.

 

[jeff4379]

I never implied that the update would "Break" any software...that being
said, certain software will behave differently, and in some situation,
behaving differently does mean the software will not work. I am not about
to install software that will make software work incorrectly until I find a
way of correcting the problem that will be caused. This is the nature of
every IT person's job. I'd rather have a fix to a problem before it happens
rather than plop down a patch or service pack and put out the fires
afterwards.


BTW, here's an article you should check out:

Some programs seem to stop working after you install Windows XP Service Pack
2
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=842242&product=windowsxpsp2

No, what I am saying is that users shouldn't just go installing software
without knowing the consequences of doing so...expecially something as major
as a major service pack to the operating system.

It doesn't matter, it would have happened anyway and it's going to
continue to happen. Microsoft has been doing a good job of convincing
everyone to use AU and it is clear from the very long list of
applications that "may behave diferently" with SP2 installed (many of
which are MS products!) that this is going to impact an awful lot of
users in a very negative way. As far as this IT Pro is concerned "behave
differently" equates to "being broken" because it is we IT Pro's who are
going to have to go in and "fix" the "different behavior".

Steve

 

[luminos]

No, what I am saying is that users shouldn't just go installing software
without knowing the consequences of doing so...expecially something as
major
as a major service pack to the operating system.

It doesn't matter, it would have happened anyway and it's going to
continue to happen. Microsoft has been doing a good job of convincing
everyone to use AU and it is clear from the very long list of
applications that "may behave diferently" with SP2 installed (many of
which are MS products!) that this is going to impact an awful lot of
users in a very negative way. As far as this IT Pro is concerned "behave
differently" equates to "being broken" because it is we IT Pro's who are
going to have to go in and "fix" the "different behavior".

Steve

Then you, as an IT professional, must be omniscient. How can MS test with
every single program in the computing universe? Further, the different
behaviors in their own products are not flaws, or failures, but issues
related to the firewall and pop up add program. These are easily managed.

 

[Larc]

| That's why you should have tested SP2 on a non-production machine before
| deploying it.

You're making a rash assumption based on very limited data. Perhaps that's why
you're wrong! SP2 is installed only on the least critical system in my network.
And since my crystal ball is unfortunately broken, I had no way of knowing how
it would affect my computers without actually *installing* it on one.

| If you're using this at home, you shouldn't have installed it yet since it
| hasn't been released to consumers.

That's not true! It's not available via the Windows Update program, but it is
available. Otherwise, how would all of us who downloaded it from a public
Microsoft site have it? True, it's intended for network installation. But I
see nothing on the download page that specifies commercial networks only.

Larc



§§§ - Please change planet to earth to reply by e-mail - §§§

 

[PA Bear]

Have a wade through all sections of...

Changes to Functionality in Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/sp2chngs.mspx
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE), AH-VSOP

Are You Ready for WinXP SP2?
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=windowsxpsp2

What You Should Know About Spyware
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/devioussoftware.mspx

AumHa Forums
http://forum.aumha.org

 

[jeff4379]

I started reading that document about a week ago...it's actually laid out
pretty nicely.

Jeff

 

[Steve N.]

jeff4379 wrote:




It doesn't matter, it would have happened anyway and it's going to
continue to happen. Microsoft has been doing a good job of convincing
everyone to use AU and it is clear from the very long list of
applications that "may behave diferently" with SP2 installed (many of
which are MS products!) that this is going to impact an awful lot of
users in a very negative way. As far as this IT Pro is concerned "behave
differently" equates to "being broken" because it is we IT Pro's who are
going to have to go in and "fix" the "different behavior".

Steve

Then you, as an IT professional, must be omniscient. How can MS test with
every single program in the computing universe? Further, the different
behaviors in their own products are not flaws, or failures, but issues
related to the firewall and pop up add program. These are easily managed.

"Easily managed" still equates to us "fixing" things. It's still work to
do and that's my point.

I certainly know that any service packs for any OS or application have
inherent possible risks. That is NOT what I was addressing, rather the
fact that XP SP2 WILL be pushed to workstations via AU in the near
future unless action is taken, and that it WILL break some apps in some
situations. Either way, I, as an IT professional, will have more work to
do, as if there was not enough as it is.

Steve

 

[Steve N.]

I never implied that the update would "Break" any software...that being
said, certain software will behave differently, and in some situation,
behaving differently does mean the software will not work. I am not about
to install software that will make software work incorrectly until I find a
way of correcting the problem that will be caused. This is the nature of
every IT person's job. I'd rather have a fix to a problem before it happens
rather than plop down a patch or service pack and put out the fires
afterwards.


BTW, here's an article you should check out:

Some programs seem to stop working after you install Windows XP Service Pack
2
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=842242&product=windowsxpsp2

I've read the article, thanks. I didn't say you implied anything about
SP2 breaking software, I said that, and in some cases it will. With over
3500 computers to support I'm certain we will get hit with problems. I
also know what an IT person's job is, I've been doing it for over 20
years. My point was that it is inevitible with AU that SP2 will be
pushed to workstations unless things are done to prevent it and either
way it's more work that I simply don't need.

Steve