W
Wislu Plethora
spx
Please show us where in this thread you posted an
intelligent *answer* "...that could possibly lead to a
solution..."
Please show us where in this thread you posted an
intelligent *answer* "...that could possibly lead to a
solution..."
P
Peter R. Fletcher
I think that you intended to reply to the root of this thread - I
certainly don't disagree with you.
Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
Peter R. Fletcher
certainly don't disagree with you.
Hi:
First of all, I don't think Microsoft is so stupid that it wishes to screw
up everyone's system unless it wants to close down for good.
The intension is surly good and the problems are definitely exist.
I have never seen a single "perfect" product in any categories without any
problems. Please enlighten me, if you have seen a perfect product in the
world.
As a user who also knows a bit of computer, I can fully understand the
frustration when we encountered problems; sometime I just wished to kick
someone's butt.
There are many experts and reviews out there discussing if SP2 is truly
needed. Many think it's good and others think differently.
I do think MS is trying to "help" its customers and "do" its part of works
on more safe computing and using Internet technologies.
If we don't think that we need SP2, let's use other ways to solve the
problem.
If we think we need it, we just install it.
If we need helps from here, I ask and hope someone will be kind enough to
provide.
The point is, there has never been a perfect product in the world regardless
of it's a software, hardware, or even an airplane, and there will never be
one.
There is not need to use limited facts to argue about if SP2 is good or bad.
The choice is ours, right? It has been always like that
Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
Peter R. Fletcher
T
Tom
Carey the Parrot made that statement, and one from blind MS zealotry, not of one from any techincal experience.
S
Shenan Stanley
H
Hugh
Well I certainly touched a few nerves there!!
I like to think I am very careful: Norton firewall and
AV, update all the time from Windows update, regularly
use AdAware and SpyBot, back up my data, including
mailboxes and address books, If you don't believe the
last I can show you the DVDs!
To be doubly sure, because I had a hardware problem prior
to it (power supply died and MoBo was rather ancient)I
installed the new hardware (ASUS MoBO - A7N8X with an
Athlon 2400XP processor 512 mb RAM) and then I went for a
completely clean install of XP (reformatted HD), updated
as required by the Windows Update site and then
downloaded SP2. So apart from the aforementioned Norton
there was nothing on the HD apart from Win XP.
I posted the below on the newsgroup too and then read
other people's posts about probs they were having.
Still can't see the WinXP supported (yes I looked at all
the SP2 documentation on the site and checked
compatablities) AC97 sound chip nor the on board RJ45
10/100 Ethernet port. Made sure I got the latest drivers
from Windows etc. My BIOS reports both chips but Win XP
does not see them.
So I installed a stand alone PCI LAN Card, having first
disabled the RJ45 on-board in BIOS, WInXP sees it,
installs drivers and then "hides" it so it doesn't appear
in Netwrok Connections and I can't set up my network!
Sense my frustration yet?
Hugh
I like to think I am very careful: Norton firewall and
AV, update all the time from Windows update, regularly
use AdAware and SpyBot, back up my data, including
mailboxes and address books, If you don't believe the
last I can show you the DVDs!
To be doubly sure, because I had a hardware problem prior
to it (power supply died and MoBo was rather ancient)I
installed the new hardware (ASUS MoBO - A7N8X with an
Athlon 2400XP processor 512 mb RAM) and then I went for a
completely clean install of XP (reformatted HD), updated
as required by the Windows Update site and then
downloaded SP2. So apart from the aforementioned Norton
there was nothing on the HD apart from Win XP.
I posted the below on the newsgroup too and then read
other people's posts about probs they were having.
Still can't see the WinXP supported (yes I looked at all
the SP2 documentation on the site and checked
compatablities) AC97 sound chip nor the on board RJ45
10/100 Ethernet port. Made sure I got the latest drivers
from Windows etc. My BIOS reports both chips but Win XP
does not see them.
So I installed a stand alone PCI LAN Card, having first
disabled the RJ45 on-board in BIOS, WInXP sees it,
installs drivers and then "hides" it so it doesn't appear
in Netwrok Connections and I can't set up my network!
Sense my frustration yet?
Hugh
H
Herb Fritatta
Shenan said:
A great source for tech info--the Associated Press. And it still doesn't
answer the question.
X
xfile
Hi:
Just a thought. One of my home systems using Asus P4P800 with onboard LAN,
which according to technician, the LAN chip has never failed even when some
MBs are dead.
Well, it just happened a few days after I installed SP2 and switched MB with
another system without any reasons. BIOS can detect but Win XP cannot, and
there is no such green light on after the system boot.
So I just sent it back to Asus for a complete check up. Could it be also a
MB problem for your case?
Anyway, just a thought.
Good luck.
Just a thought. One of my home systems using Asus P4P800 with onboard LAN,
which according to technician, the LAN chip has never failed even when some
MBs are dead.
Well, it just happened a few days after I installed SP2 and switched MB with
another system without any reasons. BIOS can detect but Win XP cannot, and
there is no such green light on after the system boot.
So I just sent it back to Asus for a complete check up. Could it be also a
MB problem for your case?
Anyway, just a thought.
Good luck.
S
Shenan Stanley
Herb said:
Shenan said:
Herb said:
See, here is the point I am trying to make - again - if you read the
article, it does not just have to do with Spyware - they suggest (as I do)
to PREPARE your system for SP2. They do make reference to scanning your
system for spyware, but they also suggest upgrading and patching and general
safety precautions...
The point of all these articles are the same - the information is out
there - if someone is foolish enough not to look at the paint before they
put it on the wall, then they deserve the hunter orange/puke green bedroom.
http://www.halifaxlive.com/windows_xp_sp2_09062004_7854.php
Read this, he actually recommends against SP2.
http://channels.lockergnome.com/new...scan_for_spyware_before_downloading_sp2.phtml
No - I don't CARE if they ever mention a specific piece of spyware - it's
all trash, it should all be killed. The impression I am getting here is
that you think everyone is just jumping on the bandwagon that Spyware is the
reason all SP2 installs have gone wrong and that with a perfectly maintained
system, SP2 would work everytime. I see that there will be people unable to
install SP2. It's a fact - I accept it and I see nothing wrong with it. To
me SP2 was never a minor upgrade, I mean it is huge, it obviously changes a
lot of the playing field. It's like getting the next version of Windows but
not having to pay.
Maybe Microsoft should have taken the Macintosh approach, introduced 130
fixes rolled up in a "new OS" for $129 (less than $1 per "feature"!)
*shrug* I don't care. I just want to make sure that the point is out there
that although 2% to 5% of users out there will have legitimate gripes, the
rest probably just need to be sure they are ready to upgrade before they do.
And I see nothing wrong with NOT listing a specific piece of spyware and
telling people to get rid of it before they install SP2. "Common Sense"
tells you that getting rid of trash is a good thing.
R
Richard Urban
Hugh! There's your problem. You did all that to your "clean" computer. That
is, a computer without the requisite latest M/B drivers having been
installed. I own 3 Asus A7N8X Deluxe 2.0 M/B's, so I think I know.
You need the chipset drivers installed! Load the O/S. Then install the
latest version of Directx (you need this to install the chipset drivers).
Then, install the M/B drivers. Suggest Nvidia version 5.10 (although ver.
4.27 are stable also)! Then, update to your hearts content!
--
Regards:
Richard Urban
aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard
is, a computer without the requisite latest M/B drivers having been
installed. I own 3 Asus A7N8X Deluxe 2.0 M/B's, so I think I know.
You need the chipset drivers installed! Load the O/S. Then install the
latest version of Directx (you need this to install the chipset drivers).
Then, install the M/B drivers. Suggest Nvidia version 5.10 (although ver.
4.27 are stable also)! Then, update to your hearts content!
--
Regards:
Richard Urban
aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard
Z
zibby
Hugh said:
How about all of you that complain or have issues switch to Linux.
I'm sure everything would work great for you. You may have to write your own
drivers,
compile software before you can install it (all with Unix commands) and
other Linux related crap.
Just remember one thing, there is no perfect OS. Windows or Linux have so
many hardware/software possibilities,
there is no way to make it perfect. Someone will always have problems.
Just ask here for help.
H
Herb Fritatta
Shenan said:
Again, I might be barking up the wrong tree with you, but there's a
valid point here. First, I asked for references regarding any specific
piece of ad-or-spyware that is known to conflict with SP2 and you
responded with a link to mostly irrelevant mass-market AP story. You
and I both can cite post after post after post, from bright people and
obvious dopes, that accuse users of having systems full of malware and
adware when an SP2 install goes south. The FACT is that this is all
mindless parroting on the part of people who were *fortunate* enough to
have a successful (so far) installation and are either too dumb, too
lazy or too biased to see that there are people out there who are
getting their butts kicked by SP2 for no good reason. And the reason
that SP2 is necessary is that the original product was full of holes to
begin with.
No, you can't point me with any spyware or adware that's known to
conflict with SP2 because none has been identified. People need to be
smart enough to realize that one of the easiest ways for MS to shirk
responsibility is to blame problems on a nebulous but sinister-sounding
source. Problems with SP2? Your fault, probably, or as I said in an
earlier post, I fu*#$ed up--I trusted them.
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
On these and other forums there have been many reports of SP-2 failing
specifically related to spyware etc.
The run one of the spyware killers and the problem goes away.
I for one do not keep track of the specifics because it seems so
obvious and there is no point.
Whether you accept it or not spyware and other malware does cause
problems for SP-2.
The computer needs to be clean and running properly if updates,
especially Service Packs are expected to install.
Even then there are an almost limitless list of other things to cause
problems.
"The FACT is that this is all mindless parroting on the part of people
who were *fortunate* enough to have a successful (so far) installation
and are either too dumb, too lazy or too biased to see that there are
people out there who are getting their butts kicked by SP2 for no good
reason."
Most of those with successful SP-2 installations are not just
"*fortunate*", they planned ahead to prepare their computer.
This usually included checking for spyware and other malware.
I do not really consider myself fortunate that SP-2 installed, I
expected it because I planned for it.
But I was also prepared if something did go wrong.
It is also not always "mindless parroting" as you suggest.
It is a fact I have seen almost countless times.
"...no good reason." Spyware, malware and other problems IS a good
reason for an installation failure, not just for Service Packs but for
anything.
"People need to be smart enough to realize that one of the easiest
ways for MS to shirk responsibility is to blame problems on a nebulous
but sinister-sounding source."
Are you suggesting spyware and other malware does not cause problems?
Yes, it is apparent from this post of yours.
What is wrong with "People need to be smart enough to maintain their
computers"
Do you think Microsoft should do it all because the people are
incapable?
It sounds like it.
I for one think they are smart, but some need to first learn what
needs to be done.
You are free to allow spyware and other malware on your computer and
wonder why there are performance and other issues.
While I know what it can do and take efforts to keep it off.
My issues are minimal and Service Packs seem to always go in
flawlessly for me.
specifically related to spyware etc.
The run one of the spyware killers and the problem goes away.
I for one do not keep track of the specifics because it seems so
obvious and there is no point.
Whether you accept it or not spyware and other malware does cause
problems for SP-2.
The computer needs to be clean and running properly if updates,
especially Service Packs are expected to install.
Even then there are an almost limitless list of other things to cause
problems.
"The FACT is that this is all mindless parroting on the part of people
who were *fortunate* enough to have a successful (so far) installation
and are either too dumb, too lazy or too biased to see that there are
people out there who are getting their butts kicked by SP2 for no good
reason."
Most of those with successful SP-2 installations are not just
"*fortunate*", they planned ahead to prepare their computer.
This usually included checking for spyware and other malware.
I do not really consider myself fortunate that SP-2 installed, I
expected it because I planned for it.
But I was also prepared if something did go wrong.
It is also not always "mindless parroting" as you suggest.
It is a fact I have seen almost countless times.
"...no good reason." Spyware, malware and other problems IS a good
reason for an installation failure, not just for Service Packs but for
anything.
"People need to be smart enough to realize that one of the easiest
ways for MS to shirk responsibility is to blame problems on a nebulous
but sinister-sounding source."
Are you suggesting spyware and other malware does not cause problems?
Yes, it is apparent from this post of yours.
What is wrong with "People need to be smart enough to maintain their
computers"
Do you think Microsoft should do it all because the people are
incapable?
It sounds like it.
I for one think they are smart, but some need to first learn what
needs to be done.
You are free to allow spyware and other malware on your computer and
wonder why there are performance and other issues.
While I know what it can do and take efforts to keep it off.
My issues are minimal and Service Packs seem to always go in
flawlessly for me.
C
cquirke (MVP Win9x)
False. Go through MS's "front door" on SP2, and in the "before you
install SP2" section, there's a link for specific checks.
Follow that, and it will mention two issues known to kill SP2
installation; Prescott vs. SP2, and a particular commercial malware
(referred to as "unwanted software") that is known to crash SP2 .
I'm sure that's not the only malware that breaks SP2, and there may be
others that are known as well. But as that one is so "known" that
even MS singles it out; enough to refute your assertion ;-)
"I think it's time we took our
friendship to the next level"
'What, gender roles and abuse?'
H
Herb Fritatta
cquirke said:
I see no evidence of what you're referring to on the MS site, other than
links to AdAware and Spybot S&D. If I missed something, please post a
link. My original challenge stands, for you, Jupiter and all of the
other Microsycophants--unequivocally identify one single instance of any
type of spyware or adware that is known to conflict with SP2
installation. No one has done it yet--just vague, "I know there is one
but can't think of it right now" stuff. Put up or shut up.
X
xfile
Hi:
Just for everyone's information:
http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,96046,00.html?nlid=OS
(1) Symantec: Viruses Aimed At Microsoft Rise Sharply - Nearly 5,000 new
Windows viruses and worms were documented in the first half of 2004, up from
about 1,000 in the same period a year earlier, according to computer
security firm Symantec.
(2) More importantly, "Symantec also said it expects more viruses and worms
to be written to attack systems that run on the Linux operating system and
handheld devices as they become more widely used." -- This is similar to
what I've shared my thoughts before.
Not a Microsoft fan and as said before and to be fair, it might not just
MS's problem alone and it's a problem for all users and IT professionals.
Live with the fact and stop complaining.
Just for everyone's information:
http://www.computerworld.com/newsletter/0,4902,96046,00.html?nlid=OS
(1) Symantec: Viruses Aimed At Microsoft Rise Sharply - Nearly 5,000 new
Windows viruses and worms were documented in the first half of 2004, up from
about 1,000 in the same period a year earlier, according to computer
security firm Symantec.
(2) More importantly, "Symantec also said it expects more viruses and worms
to be written to attack systems that run on the Linux operating system and
handheld devices as they become more widely used." -- This is similar to
what I've shared my thoughts before.
Not a Microsoft fan and as said before and to be fair, it might not just
MS's problem alone and it's a problem for all users and IT professionals.
Live with the fact and stop complaining.
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
Herb;
I see your requests as ludicrous since the nature and purpose of
spyware is often against good order for a computer.
You are free to search the newsgroups because the specifics are there.
But the issue is so obvious there is no reason for many of us to keep
track of which spyware, malware etc causes which issues.
Spyware and other malware needs to be gone not just for Service Pack
installation but more importantly for safe computing.
The fact I have seen some and Shenan has seen some is enough for us
and others to suggest the computer be cleaned of all that garbage.
For me to suggest only removing the ones I have personally verified
cause issues with SP-2 would be giving only a fraction of necessary
information.
If you want an actual list, you could probably start here and get
them:
http://spybot.eon.net.au/en/index.html
http://www.lavasoft.de/
Somewhere on those links may be specifics including the damage they
cause.
Lastly your need to insult others shows us something of your own
character.
If you had a point it was lost when your feeble need for insults
overshadowed you desire for facts.
I see your requests as ludicrous since the nature and purpose of
spyware is often against good order for a computer.
You are free to search the newsgroups because the specifics are there.
But the issue is so obvious there is no reason for many of us to keep
track of which spyware, malware etc causes which issues.
Spyware and other malware needs to be gone not just for Service Pack
installation but more importantly for safe computing.
The fact I have seen some and Shenan has seen some is enough for us
and others to suggest the computer be cleaned of all that garbage.
For me to suggest only removing the ones I have personally verified
cause issues with SP-2 would be giving only a fraction of necessary
information.
If you want an actual list, you could probably start here and get
them:
http://spybot.eon.net.au/en/index.html
http://www.lavasoft.de/
Somewhere on those links may be specifics including the damage they
cause.
Lastly your need to insult others shows us something of your own
character.
If you had a point it was lost when your feeble need for insults
overshadowed you desire for facts.
H
Herb Fritatta
Jupiter said:
You've made yourself a prime target for insults through your own dogged
and nonsensical defenses of the indefensible. Do you think me so stupid
as to not realize what the "mal" in "malware" means? You keep trying to
change the subject, which is a classic strategy for someone who has
proposed a lame argument and refuses to admit it. We're not talking
about whether or not spyware and adware is, in general, a bad thing. You
and others have claimed that people who have been screwed by SP2 must
have computers riddled with spyware and adware, and that if we had been
more careful, nothing bad would have happened. I say "bullsh*#," and
ask you or anyone else to point to ONE piece of adware or spyware that
is unequivocally KNOWN to conflict with SP2 installation or performance.
You can't do it. End of story.
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
I never suggested anyone is stupid, that is your idea.
You claim "You keep trying to change the subject"?
Really?
How?
While you put meaning in my post that I never said.
"...claimed that people who have been screwed by SP2 must have
computers riddled with spyware and adware, and that if we had been
more careful, nothing bad would have happened."
Where did I say that?
Look hard and long because you will probably never find it.
I never suggested eliminating that garbage will cause "nothing bad
would have happened".
However I have stated many times something to the effect that
preparing the computer to include eliminating spyware will help for a
trouble-free installation of SP-2.
If you read that as you stated above, you may have a reading
comprehension problem.
Or you may be simply confusing my posts with someone else's...again,
your problem.
You claim "You keep trying to change the subject"?
Really?
How?
While you put meaning in my post that I never said.
"...claimed that people who have been screwed by SP2 must have
computers riddled with spyware and adware, and that if we had been
more careful, nothing bad would have happened."
Where did I say that?
Look hard and long because you will probably never find it.
I never suggested eliminating that garbage will cause "nothing bad
would have happened".
However I have stated many times something to the effect that
preparing the computer to include eliminating spyware will help for a
trouble-free installation of SP-2.
If you read that as you stated above, you may have a reading
comprehension problem.
Or you may be simply confusing my posts with someone else's...again,
your problem.
C
cquirke (MVP Win9x)
[/QUOTE]
OK, let's have a look...
http://www.microsoft.com/
....clicking SP2 begats...
http://search.microsoft.com/search/results.aspx?st=b&na=90&View=en-us&qu=SP2
....top link is...
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.aspx
....reading this, I see...
<paste1>
Important: Follow these steps before installing Windows XP SP2 to
prevent potential conflicts with other software on your computer:
1. Back up your critical information.
2. Check your computer for spyware and other unwanted software.
3. Check for special update instructions from your computer's
manufacturer.
</paste1>
"unwanted software" is a link to here...
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/checkcomputer.mspx
....with "spyware" being a link to here:
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/default.mspx
So far, so generic, but there's another "front door" to SP2 link that
can be linked from "learn more about SP2":
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/default.mspx
From there, there's a link to "what to know before..."
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
And you know what; I can't find the two links I saw there before, that
specifically warned about Prescott and one particular item of
"unwanted software". Looks like they've changed the links around,
prolly after setting up WU to exclude both issues.
Which means there should be a "why can't I get SP2 from Windows
update" /kb article somewhere.
I'll certainly not shut up, in that anyone installing an OS over an
infected PC is terminally dumb if they expect no problems. But the
link I was thinking of has just plain evaporated, and that was an
interesting link in that it singled out one particular "unwanted
software" known to botch an SP2 install.
Think about what would happen if MS were to single out particular
commercial malware in this way; they could get sued by the crapware
vendor. They are not in the business of enumerating every specific
malware; there are others that do that, and MS points to them (e.g.
the links to AdAware all over the place).
I suspect it was legal jitters that caused MS to pull the information
I was looking for. If you want a list of software (including
commercial malware) that misbehaves in SP2, see the links you get if
you start from troubleshooting and FAQs.
And here's the one I was looking for:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=885523&product=windowsxpsp2
<paste2>
This problem may occur if the following conditions are true:
* T.V. Media (TvMedia.tvmbho) from Total Velocity Corporation
is installed on your computer.
* You try to install Windows XP SP2.
Microsoft is investigating reports of a compatibility issue between
Windows XP SP2 and a third-party advertising program that is named
T.V. Media. The issue occurs when you have T.V. Media installed on
your computer, and you try to install Windows XP SP2. You receive a
Stop error when you restart your computer, and the installation
process fails.
</paste2>
So, the evidence you seek is still there, just a lot more buried than
any of us would like (especially as it's a showstopper that botched
the OS). Obviously they aren't going to editorialize that T.V.Media
are commercial malware scumbags that should be burned to the ground
;-)
The most accurate diagnostic instrument
in medicine is the Retrospectoscope
H
Herb Fritatta
cquirke said:
OK, let's have a look...
http://www.microsoft.com/
...clicking SP2 begats...
http://search.microsoft.com/search/results.aspx?st=b&na=90&View=en-us&qu=SP2
...top link is...
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.aspx
...reading this, I see...
<paste1>
Important: Follow these steps before installing Windows XP SP2 to
prevent potential conflicts with other software on your computer:
1. Back up your critical information.
2. Check your computer for spyware and other unwanted software.
3. Check for special update instructions from your computer's
manufacturer.
</paste1>
"unwanted software" is a link to here...
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/checkcomputer.mspx
...with "spyware" being a link to here:
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/default.mspx
So far, so generic, but there's another "front door" to SP2 link that
can be linked from "learn more about SP2":
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/default.mspx
From there, there's a link to "what to know before..."
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
And you know what; I can't find the two links I saw there before, that
specifically warned about Prescott and one particular item of
"unwanted software". Looks like they've changed the links around,
prolly after setting up WU to exclude both issues.
Which means there should be a "why can't I get SP2 from Windows
update" /kb article somewhere.
I'll certainly not shut up, in that anyone installing an OS over an
infected PC is terminally dumb if they expect no problems. But the
link I was thinking of has just plain evaporated, and that was an
interesting link in that it singled out one particular "unwanted
software" known to botch an SP2 install.
Think about what would happen if MS were to single out particular
commercial malware in this way; they could get sued by the crapware
vendor. They are not in the business of enumerating every specific
malware; there are others that do that, and MS points to them (e.g.
the links to AdAware all over the place).
I suspect it was legal jitters that caused MS to pull the information
I was looking for. If you want a list of software (including
commercial malware) that misbehaves in SP2, see the links you get if
you start from troubleshooting and FAQs.
And here's the one I was looking for:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=885523&product=windowsxpsp2
<paste2>
This problem may occur if the following conditions are true:
* T.V. Media (TvMedia.tvmbho) from Total Velocity Corporation
is installed on your computer.
* You try to install Windows XP SP2.
Microsoft is investigating reports of a compatibility issue between
Windows XP SP2 and a third-party advertising program that is named
T.V. Media. The issue occurs when you have T.V. Media installed on
your computer, and you try to install Windows XP SP2. You receive a
Stop error when you restart your computer, and the installation
process fails.
</paste2>
So, the evidence you seek is still there, just a lot more buried than
any of us would like (especially as it's a showstopper that botched
the OS). Obviously they aren't going to editorialize that T.V.Media
are commercial malware scumbags that should be burned to the ground
;-)
The most accurate diagnostic instrument
in medicine is the Retrospectoscope
[/QUOTE]
So MS is investigating, and there "might be" a direct conflict, and your
links went nowhere I hadn't already been; what's your point, vis-a-vis
the original question?