Windows XP SP2 will not upgrade.

[Guest]

I have been using XP home with Service Pack 2 installed. I had a system
problem the other day and decided to install XP over the top of the old one
to repair any problems. When I started the system up after reinstalling it
took a good 2 minutes to fire up and then I found that SP2 had been
eliminated.
Ive tried two goes at installing SP 2 . . one from a CD which took ages
and then I was told that it failed to install with a little window saying
access denied.
I then went to the windows update site which anylised my computer and gave
me heaps (about 50) SP1 updates and a restart. After this I went to the
update site again for SP 2. It was 26MB and I am on ISDN . . it took about 2
hours. When I chose to install it . . it went through the whole rigmarole
of installing and then told me again the same as the disk install . .
'failed' and 'access denied' Any body help please??

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi Bill,

Start here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/873148

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

 

[Guest]

Quick work Rick . . thanks mate . . I will try that when I have a space in
time . . Bill.
==================================================

 

[Tim.T]

LOL and people frown at me for not installing SP2. It makes me laugh when
the MS pages say "make a backup of all your data prior to installing SP2".
In other words SP2 could potentially mess up your pc so bad you may need to
format! Wow, yea great way of instilling confidence in your customers. Cryin
out loud. A good firewall will make your "radar signature" on the net as
small as possible, stealthing as many unused ports as possible, making you
less (admittedly not completely!) vulnerable to hackers, which surely is the
point of 90% of these patches in the first place. A hacker cannot hack a pc
and exploit vulnerabilities if they can barely see it among all the internet
noise! Before any hacker can even begin accessing your pc and "take it over"
they need to establish connection through an open port. Or to use an
analogy, a burglar cannot steal things from your house if they cannot enter
the damn thing in the first place!

I may be taking a big risk in not installing SP2, but frankly after all the
headaches I've had installing SP1 patches and trying to resolve consequent
software failures and general XP errors because of them, I really don't give
a wet slap. I only have SP1 and four recently released critical patches,
that's it. By comparison - even with the occasional but relatively minor
error - it's been plain sailing. I have read so many "SP2 error" messages on
newsgroups like this for me to be wary.

Tim

 

[Doug]

Fine, be stubborn...WE don't care. OUR systems work fine with
SP2. Have had NO problems installing on three machines.

Doug W.

 

[vern]

I don't blame you for not going to sp2. I have 2 computers, 1 with, 1
without sp2. I have no problems with the one with sp1.
I hate the dam security bars that come up in sp2. If they really cared about
their customers, instead of $$$, they would give us the option to turn the
dam thing off.

I will never pay them to upgrade to vista. I am reverting my sp2 puter back
to sp1, or maybe even 98.

Like u say , a good firewall and virus program is all u need.

 

[Rock]

LOL and people frown at me for not installing SP2. It makes me laugh when
the MS pages say "make a backup of all your data prior to installing SP2".
In other words SP2 could potentially mess up your pc so bad you may need to
format! Wow, yea great way of instilling confidence in your customers. Cryin
out loud. A good firewall will make your "radar signature" on the net as
small as possible, stealthing as many unused ports as possible, making you
less (admittedly not completely!) vulnerable to hackers, which surely is the
point of 90% of these patches in the first place. A hacker cannot hack a pc
and exploit vulnerabilities if they can barely see it among all the internet
noise! Before any hacker can even begin accessing your pc and "take it over"
they need to establish connection through an open port. Or to use an
analogy, a burglar cannot steal things from your house if they cannot enter
the damn thing in the first place!

I may be taking a big risk in not installing SP2, but frankly after all the
headaches I've had installing SP1 patches and trying to resolve consequent
software failures and general XP errors because of them, I really don't give
a wet slap. I only have SP1 and four recently released critical patches,
that's it. By comparison - even with the occasional but relatively minor
error - it's been plain sailing. I have read so many "SP2 error" messages on
newsgroups like this for me to be wary.

Tim

The choice to install SP2 is of course individual, but some of your
arguments are not very logical. The fact that the MS documentation says
to backup all data prior to installing SP2 is only common sense. One
should never do any kind of OS upgrade without a full and complete
backup. Taking it further, you should always have full and complete
backup at all times.

Software firewalls are important and necessary but they are not full
proof, nor is using a NAT router.

With all the systems out there running SP2 the number of problem posts
we see in here that are SP2 related are small. Problems caused by 3rd
party software are overwhelmingly more common. I am not saying you
should put SP2 on your system, but don't use your reasoning as
justification for why others should not.

 

[Rock]

I don't blame you for not going to sp2. I have 2 computers, 1 with, 1
without sp2. I have no problems with the one with sp1.
I hate the dam security bars that come up in sp2. If they really cared about
their customers, instead of $$$, they would give us the option to turn the
dam thing off.

I will never pay them to upgrade to vista. I am reverting my sp2 puter back
to sp1, or maybe even 98.

Like u say , a good firewall and virus program is all u need.

Why not DOS for that matter?