XP SP2

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

I would not go so far as to say all with compromised computers are ignorant.
But some are, whether some is 2% or 98% is another story.
Most malware is avoidable with safe computing and many users have not yet
learned and others are learning now how to take care of their computer.
Not knowing how may be called ignorance.
Leythos also says "then install anything", that suggests those that install
almost anything possibly because it seem good at the time.

People have come a long way in the past few years, but we still have a long
way to go to keep our computers secure.
Unfortunately it often seems those creating malware are moving at least as
fast.

 

[R. McCarty]

A Personal Computer has still not reached the appliance status. It
still requires some level of involvement to maintain safety. SP2 does
help with a baseline Firewall and everyone should have AV running.
But even with that, indiscriminate downloads, P2P and opening the
socially engineered Spam leaves the PC exposed. Most people do
want to be safe, it's just a lack of knowledge about what they need
to do and not do when using a PC.
I've never had someone who asks about safety, fail to get or use a
recommended solution.

 

[Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)]

Lou

I know of more than a few people who accepted the SP2 update with little
idea of what it was, and whose machines worked perfectly well after the
install..


--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

 

[Lou]

How hard is it to check with the software vendors to see if a update/SP is
approved for their application? About as easy as going to the vendors
website and checking, or calling them, or sending them an email. If the
vendor has already tested it the home user doesn't really need to have a
test machine to validate it.

Since the day personal computers hit the market for the common person
(around 76), there has been a need for proper backups. It doesn't matter
if the user is one of the ignorant masses (notice I didn't say stupid, I
mean Ignorant), or if they are just plain lazy, a proper backup is always
the method to follow BEFORE making any changes to a computer system.
Anyone that has 5 minutes to read about updates/SP will see that a proper
backup is always requested/advised before the installation.

If the information has been available since the mid 70's, and people don't
already know about it, then it's a classic case of ignorance - often self
imposed ignorance due to laziness.


In the US there is hardly a person that hasn't read about or learned about
those things called VIRUSES. There are almost no people that own computers
that have not already been told about Identity theft in the media or from
friends. There are almost no people that WANT those two things to happen
to them.

Being the above is true, the only reason it happens is, again, ignorance.
They have not taken the time to learn something as basic as securing their
computer by any means. How can you argue that those people are not
ignorant - note, there is a difference between being ignorant and being
stupid.


Yea, if you question my other replies/posts, I suspect you are one of
those that had a compromised machine and you don't want to believe that
you could have prevented it with just a little care on your part. Just
look at the MS website, look at security, and start reading - if you can
afford a computer/time to use it, you can spend some time learning about
it too, it will save you a lot of time/money later.

You couldn't be more wrong. There is a non-zero probability I have
forgotten more computer technical matter than you've ever amassed.

I get really tired of the ignorant masses complaining about their systems
being compromised or losing all of their data due to a fault - they didn't
take the time to do a backup at any time, didn't update the virus
software, didn't secure their computers, didn't think it would happen to
them.....

If you get so tired of the ignorant, compromised whining masses, get
another avocation. Belittling others in your pompous manner is
unbecoming.

The simple fact is that anyone with a clue understood what SP2 was, to
read about it before installing it, and to have a backup also - anyone
that didn't either didn't care if something broke, or they were just
another one of the ignorant masses.

Of course you are not and have never been one of the ignorant masses
relative to any subject matter known to man. Grow up!!

 

[Leythos]

You couldn't be more wrong. There is a non-zero probability I have
forgotten more computer technical matter than you've ever amassed.

I would never suggest that there are not people that know more than I do,
but I can say that since the 70's I've been designing boards and circuits,
programming in more languages that they teach in any school, and doing
network security work for systems and enterprises, and that I currently
own a company that provides network and security design services to
companies all across the USA. I can also say that I've never had a
computer compromised, mine or clients, in all that time, based on the
methods we enact at each installation/site.

If you get so tired of the ignorant, compromised whining masses, get
another avocation. Belittling others in your pompous manner is
unbecoming.

How is pointing out the obvious belittling anyone? If they don't have a
clue, you point it out to them so that they can learn from their ignorance
- which moves them out of the status of ignorant. If they still don't take
action to resolve the problem or to do the research, well, that makes them
just lazy or, and I hate to say this, it makes them stupid. The pompous
part never enters into it, you just took it that way.

Of course you are not and have never been one of the ignorant masses
relative to any subject matter known to man. Grow up!!

Once I learn that I should know something I do what I can to learn enough
to no longer be one of the ignorant masses in that subject area. In the
case of nuclear medicine (as an example) I'm one of the ignorant masses,
but if it was something I was doing/working with, I would take the time to
learn about it and be removed from that classification.

What would you call the masses of people that have never made a backup of
their important files, never updated their systems, never checked for a
virus or malware, never updated any of their programs, and has a Windows
computer (in the default setup) connected directly to the Internet? There
are two groups of people that fit into the above, those that know better
and still do it, and those that don't have any idea and still do it. One
group is ignorant, one is just plain stupid.

My being critical of the OP in this thread was based on his content as
posted - it was another in the endless drivel of SP2 rants that indicated
people must love being ignorant or worse.

 

[Don Taylor]

As for compromised machines, heck, if people are ignorant enough to get
compromised, then install anything and blame the anything, they are just
too ignorant to be using computers in the first place (yea, that will
offend those types of people, but, it's really simple, if you can't
maintain it, get someone that can).

If that is your argument then why did they bother with SP2 at all?
Would have saved them a billion bucks and they could have ignored it.

 

[Leythos]

If that is your argument then why did they bother with SP2 at all? Would
have saved them a billion bucks and they could have ignored it.

Because there are many people that want the added security and fixes in
Sp2 and it also positions the product as more secure for a common SOHO OS.
It has nothing to do with the masses that won't install it or don't
install it, it has everything to do with making the OS more secure and
making that available to the masses that know/understand.

As a network designer I welcome SP2 and it's fixes and updates, in fact,
I've liked every SP they've produced except when we moved from NT4 SP3 to
NT4 SP6 (since we needed 6a to fix problems that 6 introduced).

Service Packs are directed at the OS and patching it for flaws in many
places, they are not directed at people that don't have a clue.

Automatic updates are directed at people that don't have a clue - which is
a nice method, but it has nothing to do with service packs in general.

 

[t0m]

I currently
own a company that provides network and security design services to
companies all across the USA.

Do you entertain network setup questions with network idiots like me
via email? I don't wish to bother everyone with network question in a
windows forum and I can't seem to get anyone to answer my questions in
the network groups.

Thank you in Advance,
t0m

 

[Leythos]

Do you entertain network setup questions with network idiots like me via
email? I don't wish to bother everyone with network question in a
windows forum and I can't seem to get anyone to answer my questions in
the network groups.

Thank you in Advance,

Tom, I've spent years learning from people on Usenet and always give back
when I can. I would rather you post your question in Usenet than send it
directly to me - your question might help others in the future. There is
also a chance that someone may come up with a better solution than I may,
or they may agree with my solution and make it easier for you to determine
your own solution path.

The email address in my sig (below) is valid - it's a throw-away account,
but it's currently valid (remember to remove the 999).

 

[t0m]

I would rather you post your question in Usenet than send it
directly to me - your question might help others in the future. There is
also a chance that someone may come up with a better solution than I may,
or they may agree with my solution and make it easier for you to determine
your own solution path.

Well, last time I posted an "off topic" question in a group, I got my
arse reamed for doing so. Not that I can't take a good arse reaming
(30 year military, retired) but it seems to be the game of the day for
a lot on these groups so I have decided to tread lightly so as to not
be the instrument of any of the millions of stupid fires starting up
out there. Soooo....... If you please....... I will start a new
thread called "Networking with Leythos" and ask my question there so
as not to disrupt this ongoing thread we are now in.

Regards,
t0m

 

[Treeman]

It's unfortunate the way at least a handful of things about SP2
were handled, and that trivial little changes, not rocket science,
could have made them far better.

I think your right Don.
If SP2 was a virtual install the first time you used it, with a lo
file of incompatabilities it saw, it would have helped people see wha
they needed to do, (get rid of spyware, update drivers, etc.) t
actually run it without problems.
Now BG is off on a program to sell us on the merits of XP and how t
use it.
Meanwhile the April 12 auto-updates have hosed some computers to th
point of non-functionality again!
_People_don't_want_to_fix_their_computers,_they_want_to_use_them.
That's what's expected from MS by the end user. That's why they picke
the OS to start with. It did such a good job of interfacin
applications with drivers & devices. Now it's locked down so hard, t
some it's unusable.
If I wanted a lego-set OS, I'd run out and get Linux, (no diss penguin
and build my own operating system.
Come on guy's, quit pointing the finger at the end-user long enough t
admit that SP2 could have been rolled out better.
Treema

 

[Jone Doe]

"_People_don't_want_to_fix_their_computers,_they_want_to_use_them._"

What, change the oil and make sure there is air in the tires? I bought this
car to drive it, not to work on it.

">> That's what's expected from MS by the end user. That's why they picked
The ads said "Like a rock" and that's why I bought a Chevy in the first
place.

It's unfortunate the way at least a handful of things about SP2
were handled, and that trivial little changes, not rocket science,
could have made them far better.

I think your right Don.
If SP2 was a virtual install the first time you used it, with a log
file of incompatabilities it saw, it would have helped people see what
they needed to do, (get rid of spyware, update drivers, etc.) to
actually run it without problems.
Now BG is off on a program to sell us on the merits of XP and how to
use it.
Meanwhile the April 12 auto-updates have hosed some computers to the
point of non-functionality again!
_People_don't_want_to_fix_their_computers,_they_want_to_use_them._
That's what's expected from MS by the end user. That's why they picked
the OS to start with. It did such a good job of interfacing
applications with drivers & devices. Now it's locked down so hard, to
some it's unusable.
If I wanted a lego-set OS, I'd run out and get Linux, (no diss penguin)
and build my own operating system.
Come on guy's, quit pointing the finger at the end-user long enough to
admit that SP2 could have been rolled out better.
Treeman

 

[Shooter]

"_People_don't_want_to_fix_their_computers,_they_want_to_use_them._"

What, change the oil and make sure there is air in the tires? I bought this
car to drive it, not to work on it.

Hi Jane.... Actually it is hard for people that try to maintain some
resemblance of computing knowledge by following the related news
groups and research related tech sites, like those on here, to
understand that the majority of computer users out there (your basic,
run of the mill, Mom & Pop computer owner) do not have a clue beyond
how to turn it on, write the kiddies a letter and then turn it back
off. They do not change the oil in their car and check the air in
their tires any more than checking the health of their computer.

I wouldn't be afraid to guess that 90% of the computing public know
nothing more, nor want to know any more, than the above example of Mom
& Pop. The only reason that most/some of them are up-to-date on their
criticals is that their copy of XP is set to do auto upgrade downloads
and installs only because XP comes defaulted to do it that way.
Otherwise, they wouldn't even be getting critical updates.

In short, the biggest majority of the computing public is
computer/computing illiterate. This is not to say they are stupid...
They just never had the formal evolution associated with growing up
with a computer that anyone born after 1980 was privileged with.

Now, it is easy for us to say, "they should get a clue" or "they need
to get off the pot and educate themselves". Myself being from the
same generation as the majority, I did educate myself, or at least
educated myself enough to keep out of most trouble associated with
computers. But that is only because I developed an interest in
computers beyond your basic turn it on, word process your business and
turn it off level of understanding. I have a "SEMI" clue I guess.

Anyway, it would seem that Bill Gates assumes that everyone has the
mental metal that his "so called" system developers have. In other
words, here is a complicated upgrade that will only work if you have
your system wired tight like people in the know do. Well, if you are
one of the 90% of the computing public that are not in the know, then
you are going to get bit. In the beginning of SP2, Bill Gates made it
an auto download/install feature of XP update. He did not take into
account that 90% of the public's computers were not "Wired Tight",
clean and ready for that level of upgrade. He didn't even incorporate
code in the upgrade to check for compatibility or "known" problem
areas and program the upgrade to NOT install if certain parameters
were not met. I call that corporate level arrogance or.... Here it
is.... Good Luck!

Now we have another critical that has come out and is wrecking havoc
with some systems. And this one seems to be biting even systems that
belong to people that do have a clue. Its getting to be business as
usual when associating MS with system meltdowns. And MS just keeps
putting them out there without any regard to the computing public....
Here it is.... Good Luck!

I have a friend who's son worked for MS a few years back before moving
on. He says that the mentality of MS was to "code it up as quickly as
possible and throw it out there and see what happens". Well, with
what I have seen going on these past few years, I am inclined to
believe what his son says was and is the on-going philosophy at MS.

Don't get me wrong... I am not a windows hater. I like XP and have
never had a meltdown associated with an upgrade (Knock On Wood).
However, its MS's ethics (or lack of) and how they indiscriminately
throw questionable code on the pipeline that I have a problem with.
As my friend's son said, "code it up as quickly as possible and throw
it out there and see what happens".

It is not MS's money, power or semi monopoly that I see that most
people have a problem with, its MS's attitude toward the computing
public when it comes to throwing stuff out there and waiting to see
what happens.

If you are going to TRUELY serve the public and if you TRUELY give a
rat's arse about your customer base, then you must supply your
supporting infrastructure/product upgrades to not only NOT be more
harmful than the ailment it is created to cure but also be created
with the level of operation in mind that the majority of systems out
there are being operated at. In this case, and as sad as it is, the
majority of systems out there are operating as the lowest common
denominator. So if you really give a hoot, you must structure your
upgrades/updates to the lowest common denominator, which is the
majority instead of "code it up as quickly as possible and throw it
out there and see what happens".

Keep in mind that those on these news groups and tech info sites are
the computing minority.

Regards,

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

The reality you seem to ignore is modern computing is hi tech.
Consumers MUST endeavour to learn more.
Microsoft also has further to go.
But Microsoft has come a long way in the last few years with such basic
changes as a firewall now enabled by default.
Something that has always been easy to do with Windows XP and yet so many
users neglected this basic security that Microsoft was forced to change the
default settings of the firewall.
If automobiles needed the type of default security a computer needs, all
seatbelts would attach automatically and there would be some automatic
system to perform an oil change whether the owner thought of it or not.

As bad as spyware is, ignore that and if every user simply had an adequate
and well maintained firewall and antivirus with Windows Updates, many of the
current problems on the web and personal computers would go away.
While Microsoft is slowly moving forward, it often seems that users are not.

For the most part proactive users can prevent most problems without the help
of Microsoft.
But there is almost nothing Microsoft can do to achieve reasonable security
until more people take the safety and security of their computer more
seriously.

Then there is always the option of getting rid of the computer and going
back to paper and pencil.
Even then pencils have erasers and occasionally need a sharpener.

 

[Shooter]

The reality you seem to ignore is modern computing is hi tech.
Consumers MUST endeavour to learn more.

Yes, and in a perfect world they would. However, the reality you
refer to also dictates that the majority of the today's computing
world is still made up of "old school", Mom & Pop types that for
whatever reason, do not have the time, do not wish to take the time,
could care less, its over my head or any other number of reasons do
not wish or want to know any more than how to turn it on, do their
business and turn it off. Until my generation dies off, the majority
of computer users will be that way.

My argument is not that MS should stop progressive developments and
enhancements to its product(s) but that it needs to use a little more
common sense in the administering and distribution of those
developments and enhancements as far as looking at who the majority of
its clientele is at this specific time in computing history.

Remember, when MS first made SP2 available, they made it through the
auto update feature. Even knowing and even presenting multiple pages
on their site to the fact that SP2 will jump up and bite you in the
arse if you don't have all ducks in a row on your system, they still
made it an auto update knowing full well that all those Mom & Pop
systems out there set on auto update/install were NOT going to have
their ducks in a row. A disaster in waiting if you will....

I have nothing against SP2 but I do think MS was derelict for not
taking into account the known fact that at this time in computing
history that the majority of computer users are still Mom & Pop users
with systems set on auto update/install and no matter what you do,
will never have their computing ducks in a row. Now, we see that MS
took SP2 off auto update and made it where you have to physically
commit to its installation instead of having it automatically
installed in the background. The way such a "volatile" upgrade should
have been offered in the first place.

Whether any of us like it or not, the present day majority of the
computing public is the lowest common denominator and nothing but the
passing of that generation (of which I am one) will change that. For
MS to disassociate itself with that fact and do business as if
everyone has their ducks in a row is nothing short of a misplaced
arrogance.

But Microsoft has come a long way in the last few years with such basic
changes as a firewall now enabled by default.

Yes but you and I are talking apples and oranges Jupiter. I am
talking about upgrades and updates that can be extremely hazardous if
installed on a system that has certain and/or specific problems that
have not been addressed before the installation. It is my argument
that MS needs to at the least incorporate code in volatile
updates/upgrades to check for those problems before installing itself
and to abort the installation if certain parameters/situations are not
met. Again, saving the Mom and Pop majority out there from their own
computing illiteracy. After that generation is gone, then those
safeguards will not have to be incorporated in all volatile
upgrades/updates but until then.......

Hey Jupiter, do it for your tired old mother (grin).

For the most part proactive users can prevent most problems without the help
of Microsoft.

Very true. Too bad the majority of the computing public isn't there
yet.

But there is almost nothing Microsoft can do to achieve reasonable
security until more people take the safety and security of their computer more
seriously.

True again but they can take measures to guard the computer
illiterates from having their systems melt down due to volatile MS
updates/upgrades by incorporating code to do a pre check of the system
before allowing the installation.

Then there is always the option of getting rid of the computer and going
back to paper and pencil.

No, just wait for the paper and pencil crowd to pass on.

Just to sum the whole mess up.... we are in a transition era of
computing history. There are two main groups involved. Your basic
pencil and paper crowd trying to look cool and hip with a computer and
your techno generation born with computers. Right now, the majority
is made up of that pencil and paper crowd and whether we or MS likes
it or not, they are the big consumer right now and MS better address
the way it supplies its support for that crowd. Let me say that one
more time.... That paper and pencil crowd is your major consumer right
now, even in their own blind computer illiterate way. When the
majority becomes the present day techno crowd, then MS can offer
support the way it does now... which is assuming you have your ducks
in a row before letting this latest thing install itself.

Regards,

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

"Now, we see that MS took SP2 off auto update and made it..."
Completely false.
SP-2 can still be received through Automatic Update.
Nothing has changed with the distribution of SP-2.
Unless you are talking about that tool Microsoft designed to temporarily
delay SP-2.
Did you fall for that articles spreading FUD?
This had no effect on the "Mom & Pop users" you are referring.
The security community is pushing Microsoft hard for auto update for
Critical Updates, other security defaults as well.
For the most part if a Service Pack or update seems to break the computer,
it was already broke.
But instead of ignorantly continuing with their infected computer spreading
Trojans and other malware, in some cases the computer has symptoms and now
the user knows there is a problem and may seek to fix it.

As much as I hate Automatic Update, it is needed and should stay.

 

[health_wellness]

Just laughing here about the fact that you are getting the infamous MVP
dodge when it comes to your real point.

Why doesn't M$ have the common decency to add code to their updates
that will check a system before installing itself to make sure all
known problems this update might have with a system are taken care of?

Answer, show me where M$ has ever given a crap in the past about such
things and there is your answer and the reason you are getting the MVP
dodge. M$'s own track record shows that they don't give a crap, never
ever gave a crap and don't intend on starting any time soon at giving a
crap. What was it your friend's son that worked for them said?
Something like Code it as quickly as possible and throw it out there
and see what happens.

FYI, don't try to discuss common sense about M$'s ethics and way of
doing business with an MVP. That's like trying to discuss wife abuse
with Henry the 8th.

You made one single mistake about M$ taking SP2 off the auto update
market and that is what the MVP capitalized on instead of what your
articulate message was really all about. The MVP dodge we call it.
You make too much common sense to be wasting your time trying to have a
proper conversation with M$'s clone squad. They are hard wired to be
nothing less than 100% Praise the Gods for M$ and everything it stands
for and everything it does. Let us all bend down and kiss M$'s rosy
red butt hole types.

Later Dude,
NIK

***Email address is a spam trap***

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Clearly you have no clue.
Can you provide anything of value?
Or are you only capable of insults?
Your posting history suggests the second.

 

[Leythos]

Why doesn't M$ have the common decency to add code to their updates that
will check a system before installing itself to make sure all known
problems this update might have with a system are taken care of?

Now that's rich - None of the OS's I've used since the 70's do what you
complain about above, not Unix, not HPUX, not AIX, not Linux, not Windows,
not Apple OS/x, etc....

Most updates and service packs only check to ensure that the needed
components are available, that the SP is not being installed on a higher
level SP, and that the files in the SP are valid.

Get off the MS kick until you learn that you don't have to apply ANY SP,
you are responsible for your own machine and it's management, and you
should have a good backup at all times, and this applies to ALL OS'S.

 

[Alias]

and this applies to ALL OS'S [sic].

--

Don't mean to be picky but plurals NEVER use an apostrophe.

Alias