XP SP-2

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?

Rick
51 answers Last reply
More about tomshardware
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I've had it since the public beta. I now have it on my two desktops & one
    laptop. No issues beyond having to update Norton.

    Do a good backup & smoke test it!

    --
    Steve
    OldManCompute

    "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com...
    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Steve and Peter,

    I have three home/office computers running XP Home and one laptop running XP
    Pro. Should I download SP2 from this site:

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en

    Halfway down the page it says:
    DO NOT CLICK DOWNLOAD IF YOU ARE UPDATING JUST ONE COMPUTER: A smaller, more
    appropriate download will be available soon on Windows Update. To receive
    this download, turn on the Automatic Updates feature in Windows XP to
    receive an optimized download of SP2. Please visit Protect Your PC for more
    information on receiving Windows XP SP2.

    All my PCs are connected via a network, so it seems more efficient to
    download SP2 once and copy the installation file to the other PCs rather
    than run Windows Update four times.

    What do you think? Am I asking for trouble downloading the installation
    file that is supposedly for IT professionals only? (I am definitely not an
    IT professional.)

    Thanks!

    John


    "Steve Colburn" <colddayDEL@MEgci.net> wrote in message
    news:10i85j8pkcr22cf@corp.supernews.com...
    > I've had it since the public beta. I now have it on my two desktops & one
    > laptop. No issues beyond having to update Norton.
    >
    > Do a good backup & smoke test it!
    >
    > --
    > Steve
    > OldManCompute
    >
    > "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote in message
    > news:lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com...
    > > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    > >
    > > Rick
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:

    >Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    >Rick
    >

    It has reduced performance on two systems of mine (noticably, but not
    tremendously).

    I turned the firewall off since I have a NAT gateway that only lets
    limited traffic through anyway.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    John Blaustein wrote:
    > Steve and Peter,
    >
    > I have three home/office computers running XP Home and one laptop running XP
    > Pro. Should I download SP2 from this site:
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en
    >
    > Halfway down the page it says:
    > DO NOT CLICK DOWNLOAD IF YOU ARE UPDATING JUST ONE COMPUTER: A smaller, more
    > appropriate download will be available soon on Windows Update. To receive
    > this download, turn on the Automatic Updates feature in Windows XP to
    > receive an optimized download of SP2. Please visit Protect Your PC for more
    > information on receiving Windows XP SP2.
    >
    > All my PCs are connected via a network, so it seems more efficient to
    > download SP2 once and copy the installation file to the other PCs rather
    > than run Windows Update four times.
    >
    > What do you think? Am I asking for trouble downloading the installation
    > file that is supposedly for IT professionals only? (I am definitely not an
    > IT professional.)
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > John
    >
    >
    I downloaded the huge copy, it makes for a better slipstream, in case I
    have to re-install any stations.

    Oh, and just FYI, it b0rks NERO Ultra Edition, I had to download an
    update to make it work again (how does firewalling and DEP affect a burner?)
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "singha_lvr" <singha_lvr@charter.net> wrote in message
    news:m5f8i0lrtjptfqd9c2dvqo30kij5avq9a6@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    > <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    > >Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    > >
    > >Rick
    > >
    >
    > It has reduced performance on two systems of mine (noticably, but not
    > tremendously).
    >
    > I turned the firewall off since I have a NAT gateway that only lets
    > limited traffic through anyway.

    You should be running other software firewall software in that case as a NAT
    gateway only stops incoming traffic.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I have installed on two machines, it totally borked one but the other is
    running fine. If really need to ask yourself if you need SP2, IBM I
    understand has put out a request too all there customers not to use it. The
    list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of Microsoft apps.

    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;884130
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com...
    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick
    >
    >

    I have it on two different machines(Intel/AMD) and it works fine.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I installed the SP2 RC-2 we get on CD and everything's fine.

    "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> ¦b¶l¥ó
    news:lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com ¤¤¼¶¼g...
    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I haven't downloaded it yet and think I will wait till I hear positive
    comments. If you are a gamer this link may cause you to wait like me. :-)

    http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warcraft3reignofchaos/news_6104980.html

    --
    Tip
    www.gotips.net

    "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com...
    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick
    >
    >
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    IBM Huh? I read the "IBM" Statement too and it was an admission that they
    had not bothered to do any internal testing of their own software for their
    own internal systems when they had many months in which to do that testing.
    Further it was an admission that the person that made the statement was a
    pillock. I wouldn't be surprised to find he is now unemployed for slating
    all those he worked with. IBM may not be my favourite company, but I am
    quite sure they have an enormous number of capable people working for them
    and not all of them would agree that it was appropriate to release the
    statement referred to.

    Do you have a reference to this next claim? I have such a list and it is not
    very long at all.

    "The list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of Microsoft
    apps."
    _______________________________________________________________
    How many MS Windows Apps are there?

    I think the answer to the above equation is very close to ZERO. If you cross
    reference the above supposed LONG list with the list of software products
    that need firewall configuration (Q842242) , you will find there are
    specific issues and fixes for many of them.

    You need to do a little bit more research.

    I get seriously pissed off when something good comes along such as SP2 and
    uninformed people regurgitate erroneously and out of context often
    misreported information that has little if any bearing on reality. The
    reality is that daily many many thousands of people are deploying SP2
    without issue. The biggest single source of problems would be systems that
    are already stuffed with virii and worms. Quite frankly I think it is
    downright irresponsible to express an opinion that is flawed as Pete D has
    that will discourage users from installing a much needed service pack which
    will help protect them *and others* from the scum of software writers.

    - Tim


    "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
    news:MOXUc.710$F7.334@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    >I have installed on two machines, it totally borked one but the other is
    > running fine. If really need to ask yourself if you need SP2, IBM I
    > understand has put out a request too all there customers not to use it.
    > The
    > list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of Microsoft
    > apps.
    >
    > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;884130
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Tim" <Tim@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:cg1rof$j68$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
    > IBM Huh? I read the "IBM" Statement too and it was an admission that they
    > had not bothered to do any internal testing of their own software for
    their
    > own internal systems when they had many months in which to do that
    testing.
    > Further it was an admission that the person that made the statement was a
    > pillock. I wouldn't be surprised to find he is now unemployed for slating
    > all those he worked with. IBM may not be my favourite company, but I am
    > quite sure they have an enormous number of capable people working for them
    > and not all of them would agree that it was appropriate to release the
    > statement referred to.
    >
    > Do you have a reference to this next claim? I have such a list and it is
    not
    > very long at all.
    >
    > "The list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of
    Microsoft
    > apps."
    > ______

    Encarta Enzyklopädie 2002 Microsoft
    Age of Empires II: Age of Kings --- Microsoft
    Application Center 2000 SP2 --- Microsoft
    BizTalk 2004 --- Microsoft
    CMS 2001 Microsoft
    Combat Flight Simulator 3 1 Microsoft
    Excel 2003 Microsoft
    Halo Combat Evolved (Arabic and Hebrew) Trial Microsoft
    MapPoint Europe 2004 Microsoft
    Microsoft Operations Manager 2000 SP1 Microsoft
    MS License 3.7 Microsoft
    MSBN --- Microsoft
    MSN 7.02 Microsoft
    MSN 9 QFE1 and 9.1 beta 9 Microsoft
    Office 11 Microsoft
    Office - Power Point 2002 (German) 2002 Microsoft
    Office Access 2002 2002 Microsoft
    Office System - Power Point 2003 Microsoft
    Office XP Access 10 Microsoft
    Office XP Professional Excel 10.0 SP2 --- Microsoft
    Office XP SP2 - PowerPoint 11 Microsoft
    Office XP Standard 10 Microsoft
    Outlook 2000 9 Microsoft
    Outlook 2002 10 Microsoft
    Outlook 2003 11 Microsoft
    Outlook Web Access x Microsoft
    Revenge of Arcade v1.0 Microsoft
    Server Administrator Tools --- Microsoft
    SMS 2.0 SP5 Microsoft
    SMS 2.0 SP5 Microsoft
    SMS 2003 RC2 Microsoft
    SMS 2003 RTM Microsoft
    SMS --- Microsoft
    SNA Server 4.0 SP4 --- Microsoft
    SQL --- Microsoft
    SQL 7 Microsoft
    SQL 2000a SP3 Microsoft
    TaxSaver 1999 Microsoft
    Virtual PC 2004 Microsoft
    Visual Basic 6 Microsoft
    Visual C++ (16-bit) 2 Microsoft
    Visual Studio 7 Microsoft
    Visual Studio 97 Microsoft
    Visual Studio .NET Enterprise 2003 --- Microsoft
    Visual Studio 98 6 Microsoft
    Windows Sharepoint Services 2 Microsoft
    Windows Sharepoint Services --- Microsoft
    Word XP Microsoft
    Works Suite 2004 2004 Microsoft
    WSS 2 Microsoft


    _________________________________________________________
    > How many MS Windows Apps are there?
    >
    > I think the answer to the above equation is very close to ZERO. If you
    cross
    > reference the above supposed LONG list with the list of software products
    > that need firewall configuration (Q842242) , you will find there are
    > specific issues and fixes for many of them.
    >
    > You need to do a little bit more research.
    >
    > I get seriously pissed off when something good comes along such as SP2 and
    > uninformed people regurgitate erroneously and out of context often
    > misreported information that has little if any bearing on reality. The
    > reality is that daily many many thousands of people are deploying SP2
    > without issue. The biggest single source of problems would be systems that
    > are already stuffed with virii and worms. Quite frankly I think it is
    > downright irresponsible to express an opinion that is flawed as Pete D has
    > that will discourage users from installing a much needed service pack
    which
    > will help protect them *and others* from the scum of software writers.
    >
    > - Tim
    >
    >
    >
    > "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
    > news:MOXUc.710$F7.334@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > >I have installed on two machines, it totally borked one but the other is
    > > running fine. If really need to ask yourself if you need SP2, IBM I
    > > understand has put out a request too all there customers not to use it.
    > > The
    > > list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of Microsoft
    > > apps.
    > >
    > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;884130
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=Microsoft-Lists-XP-SP--Problems&story_id=26344&category=entcmpt


    "Tim" <Tim@NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:cg1rof$j68$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
    > IBM Huh? I read the "IBM" Statement too and it was an admission that they
    > had not bothered to do any internal testing of their own software for
    their
    > own internal systems when they had many months in which to do that
    testing.
    > Further it was an admission that the person that made the statement was a
    > pillock. I wouldn't be surprised to find he is now unemployed for slating
    > all those he worked with. IBM may not be my favourite company, but I am
    > quite sure they have an enormous number of capable people working for them
    > and not all of them would agree that it was appropriate to release the
    > statement referred to.
    >
    > Do you have a reference to this next claim? I have such a list and it is
    not
    > very long at all.
    >
    > "The list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of
    Microsoft
    > apps."
    > _______________________________________________________________
    > How many MS Windows Apps are there?
    >
    > I think the answer to the above equation is very close to ZERO. If you
    cross
    > reference the above supposed LONG list with the list of software products
    > that need firewall configuration (Q842242) , you will find there are
    > specific issues and fixes for many of them.
    >
    > You need to do a little bit more research.
    >
    > I get seriously pissed off when something good comes along such as SP2 and
    > uninformed people regurgitate erroneously and out of context often
    > misreported information that has little if any bearing on reality. The
    > reality is that daily many many thousands of people are deploying SP2
    > without issue. The biggest single source of problems would be systems that
    > are already stuffed with virii and worms. Quite frankly I think it is
    > downright irresponsible to express an opinion that is flawed as Pete D has
    > that will discourage users from installing a much needed service pack
    which
    > will help protect them *and others* from the scum of software writers.
    >
    > - Tim
    >
    >
    >
    > "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
    > news:MOXUc.710$F7.334@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
    > >I have installed on two machines, it totally borked one but the other is
    > > running fine. If really need to ask yourself if you need SP2, IBM I
    > > understand has put out a request too all there customers not to use it.
    > > The
    > > list of affected software is very long and includes a lot of Microsoft
    > > apps.
    > >
    > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;884130
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Yes, it's been out for over a week (came out last Tuesday). You can get
    it here:

    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en

    In my opinion, the update itself is near perfect and bug free.
    Basically all of the issues fall into one of two categories:

    1. The firewall blocks ports needed by some applications. However it's
    easy to unblock them, and they are unblocked only for that application.

    2. A few -- very few -- programs truly have issues, but from what I've
    seen, the bugs are in those programs, not the service pack, and updates
    for those programs are being released very, very quickly (most are
    already out).

    The link above is to the FULL SP2 update. It's bigger than most people
    will need, but it is the final "gold" release. What's not out yet are
    both various distribution channels (e.g. you can't get the update
    "delivered" via Windows Update -- yet), and the "breakdown" smaller
    versions of the service pack for only specific versions of Windows (only
    Home, only Pro, only Tablet PC, only Media PC, etc.). However the link
    above has EVERYTHING, and will update an original Windows XP (without
    even SP1) to SP2 with every security patch and update (including
    DirectX, Windows Media Player and IE) as of last week. It also works
    for any version of Windows that had been fully or partially updated. In
    short, it's the one you want when you want the very best [all of the
    scary "network and system administrator only" warnings at the microsoft
    downloage page above not withstanding].


    Rick & Darlene wrote:

    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I can only tell what happened to me...I used that version and installed it
    seperately on 2 networked computers...one was fine the other was not.The version
    that will be on the XP update site will not be as large ....as it will see what
    you have and then only update what you are missing....but I wanted a copy to
    keep for future use.
    I believe the failure rate is very very small if you follow most of the
    instructions.Something on my 2nd system did not agree with SP2..maybe my
    overclock...maybe the version of ZoneAlarm I was running...who knows.
    I would download it again from that site if needed ..it doesn't matter if you
    are installing for a network or stand alone system.
    peter
    "John Blaustein" <nomail@nomail.com> wrote in message
    news:xv-dnZwHhdfXh7ncRVn-gA@lmi.net...
    > Steve and Peter,
    >
    > I have three home/office computers running XP Home and one laptop running XP
    > Pro. Should I download SP2 from this site:
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en
    >
    > Halfway down the page it says:
    > DO NOT CLICK DOWNLOAD IF YOU ARE UPDATING JUST ONE COMPUTER: A smaller, more
    > appropriate download will be available soon on Windows Update. To receive
    > this download, turn on the Automatic Updates feature in Windows XP to
    > receive an optimized download of SP2. Please visit Protect Your PC for more
    > information on receiving Windows XP SP2.
    >
    > All my PCs are connected via a network, so it seems more efficient to
    > download SP2 once and copy the installation file to the other PCs rather
    > than run Windows Update four times.
    >
    > What do you think? Am I asking for trouble downloading the installation
    > file that is supposedly for IT professionals only? (I am definitely not an
    > IT professional.)
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > John
    >
    >
    >
    > "Steve Colburn" <colddayDEL@MEgci.net> wrote in message
    > news:10i85j8pkcr22cf@corp.supernews.com...
    >> I've had it since the public beta. I now have it on my two desktops & one
    >> laptop. No issues beyond having to update Norton.
    >>
    >> Do a good backup & smoke test it!
    >>
    >> --
    >> Steve
    >> OldManCompute
    >>
    >> "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote in message
    >> news:lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com...
    >> > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >> >
    >> > Rick
    >> >
    >> >
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Peter, Barry and others...

    Thank you!

    John
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    What has XP SP2 got to do with this group??
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Well, since we all need or will contemplate getting it, it has everything to
    do with this group! If you are running XP....nuff said!!! (However, I did
    not think it would generate this much interest!)

    Rick

    "Nero" <nero@rome.it> wrote in message
    news:41253aab$0$51061$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
    > What has XP SP2 got to do with this group??
    >
    >
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Re: "The version that will be on the XP update site will not be as large"

    That's not exactly right.

    The windows update version will download a 1.6 MB program that will
    examine your system and then further download only and exactly what your
    system needs.

    The 270 MB version has everything in it that ANY system might need. All
    files that the 1.6 MB program might possibly download and install.

    BUT, what actually ends up getting installed on any given system under
    these two installation schemes is EXACTLY the same, in the end. There
    is no difference.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    As I understood the size thing ...if you are up to date on your updates it will
    not be as large an update as the 270mb that you download
    which has all the updates in it since SP1
    ?????
    peter
    "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:4125635C.6040705@neo.rr.com...
    > Re: "The version that will be on the XP update site will not be as large"
    >
    > That's not exactly right.
    >
    > The windows update version will download a 1.6 MB program that will examine
    > your system and then further download only and exactly what your system needs.
    >
    > The 270 MB version has everything in it that ANY system might need. All files
    > that the 1.6 MB program might possibly download and install.
    >
    > BUT, what actually ends up getting installed on any given system under these
    > two installation schemes is EXACTLY the same, in the end. There is no
    > difference.
    >
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    ALL need it?
    that remains to be seen.
    I heard that when SP1 came out...........
    I never bothered with it and I never had any problems
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, in
    <lqKdnZQf9uu0jrncRVn-sw@comcast.com> (alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus)
    "Rick & Darlene" <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:

    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick

    I have the administrative (full 250Mb) version, and have applied it to
    four machines (two PIIIs, an AMD XP 1900+ and an AMD 64 3400+) without
    noteable incident.

    It will complain if you don't have XP Firewalling turned on, or if it
    can't detect your Antivirus Software's active status. I have an IPCop
    firewall that covers my LAN, and I always disable autoprotect before
    applying things like this service pack, so I told it as much and it
    became happy.

    It closes a load of ports that should have been closed by default
    before, so many things that relied on open ports will complain. It
    will also reset some security related settings to a more secure
    default, which may change the behaviour of some apps. All of these
    things are configurable however - this won't surprise you if you have
    Read TF Manual, but has caused a number of the Microphobes to froth a
    little.

    In conclusion I would say that it makes the OS safer, and is a sound
    update. Of course, any tool is potentially limited by whoever wields
    it :)

    Cheers


    --
    Charlie
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Depending on where you were up to: no SP, SP1, RC1, or RC2, the further back
    in time, the more will be downloaded. For my system it was about 35MB, for a
    normal up to date SP1 I believe it is 60 - 80 MB so is achievable via dial
    up as the downloader will resume interupted downloads from the point where
    it last stopped & use spare bandwidth.

    - Tim


    "peter" <peter@telus.net> wrote in message
    news:treVc.33065$X12.30118@edtnps84...
    > As I understood the size thing ...if you are up to date on your updates it
    > will not be as large an update as the 270mb that you download
    > which has all the updates in it since SP1
    > ?????
    > peter
    > "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
    > news:4125635C.6040705@neo.rr.com...
    >> Re: "The version that will be on the XP update site will not be as large"
    >>
    >> That's not exactly right.
    >>
    >> The windows update version will download a 1.6 MB program that will
    >> examine your system and then further download only and exactly what your
    >> system needs.
    >>
    >> The 270 MB version has everything in it that ANY system might need. All
    >> files that the 1.6 MB program might possibly download and install.
    >>
    >> BUT, what actually ends up getting installed on any given system under
    >> these two installation schemes is EXACTLY the same, in the end. There is
    >> no difference.
    >>
    >
    >
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <_YnVc.161173$J06.147867@pd7tw2no>, callanca@shaw.ca says...
    > There have been less than 20 *nix viruses, and Windows/DOS account for
    > more than 60,000

    But there are new holes found in applications that run on Nix boxes
    every month, many of which give the attacker root access - just look at
    all the postings from HP about HPUX and the apps that run on it.

    There is no such thing as a secure platform.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <_YnVc.161173$J06.147867@pd7tw2no>, callanca@shaw.ca says...
    >
    >>There have been less than 20 *nix viruses, and Windows/DOS account for
    >>more than 60,000
    >
    >
    > But there are new holes found in applications that run on Nix boxes
    > every month, many of which give the attacker root access - just look at
    > all the postings from HP about HPUX and the apps that run on it.
    >

    Yes, but unlike in Windows, its not a security advisory for a whole
    FAMILY of products, like 9x/ME or 2K/XP kernel, then an exploit hits 95,
    98, 98se, me etc, where in *nix a virus is too dependant on require very
    specific versions of programs to exploit.

    /Most/ of the security advisories for *nix machines that are local root
    exploits, assume that a person has an account already, and is within
    your firewall, /AND/ runs that precise version of a service.

    So a vulnerability in sendmail version 1.5.1 cannot be hit on 1.5.0 or
    1.5.2 normally, it is this diversity and not a monoculture that has
    stopped *nix viruses from becoming larger than they are, there is not as
    many vulnerable machines to exploit, and even if you hit every box
    running said version of a service, it's still a dead end, as you have no
    more to infect, the rest aren't able to be infected.

    If you can't trust people on the internal net, no OS will save you.

    Infecting *nix from the outside is a lot harder than Windows where
    everything is executable.

    > There is no such thing as a secure platform.
    >

    Agreed, but *nix and its model is inherently a better security model for
    a NETWORKED os, which is pretty much a requirement for most devices
    nowadays.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <yNsVc.162645$J06.51901@pd7tw2no>, callanca@shaw.ca says...
    > If you can't trust people on the internal net, no OS will save you.
    >
    > Infecting *nix from the outside is a lot harder than Windows where
    > everything is executable.
    >
    > > There is no such thing as a secure platform.
    > >
    >
    > Agreed, but *nix and its model is inherently a better security model for
    > a NETWORKED os, which is pretty much a requirement for most devices
    > nowadays.

    The point to all of this is that a single system, on any OS, is
    susceptible to being compromised before you patch and secure it. Most
    default installs by non-IT types have way more than needed - most Nix
    distro's provide MANY things that are not the OS code, as does Windows.
    If you start from a somewhat protected environment you can save a lot of
    pain.

    SP2, while fixing a lot of things, is only a placebo. The people that
    install it are the ones that are already doing their updates. It's the
    people that don't have a clue, don't do updates, and can't even
    understand the difference between the Internet and the web (or email),
    that we need to get help for.

    If ISP's where to implement NAT on their devices as the default install,
    and most can easily do it, it would save a lot of people from a lot of
    problems, and it would not cost the ISP anything.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    That's true, because you will already have much of the upgrade.

    But my view of things is that I WANT the whole 270 meg file, for burning
    to a CD where I can then use it on other systems of unknown windows XP
    version (home, Pro, media Center, tablet PC) and "windows update" status.

    So say the windows update version only ends up downloading 90MB of the
    total 270 MB. I don't want to have to do that ???? times. Give the the
    CD, once, and I'm set.

    Also, with the full 270 MB version, you can make a "slipstream" Windows
    XP install CD that has SP2 integrated. You cant do that via windows update.


    peter wrote:

    > As I understood the size thing ...if you are up to date on your updates it will
    > not be as large an update as the 270mb that you download
    > which has all the updates in it since SP1
    > ?????
    > peter
    > "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
    > news:4125635C.6040705@neo.rr.com...
    >
    >>Re: "The version that will be on the XP update site will not be as large"
    >>
    >>That's not exactly right.
    >>
    >>The windows update version will download a 1.6 MB program that will examine
    >>your system and then further download only and exactly what your system needs.
    >>
    >>The 270 MB version has everything in it that ANY system might need. All files
    >>that the 1.6 MB program might possibly download and install.
    >>
    >>BUT, what actually ends up getting installed on any given system under these
    >>two installation schemes is EXACTLY the same, in the end. There is no
    >>difference.
    >>
    >
    >
    >
  27. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Barry,

    Thank you for your advice and the information.

    I download the full 278MB file and have installed it on two of my three PCs
    with no problems.

    Since I have a hardware firewall (SonicWALL/10), I disabled the Windows
    Firewall. It's my understanding that with the SonicWALL, I don't need the
    Windows Firewall. Right?

    I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also that OE
    now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has embedded
    images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice safeguard that
    OE now has this feature.

    John


    "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:kraVc.27340$cT6.508@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
    > Yes, it's been out for over a week (came out last Tuesday). You can get
    > it here:
    >
    >
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en
    >
    > In my opinion, the update itself is near perfect and bug free.
    > Basically all of the issues fall into one of two categories:
    >
    > 1. The firewall blocks ports needed by some applications. However it's
    > easy to unblock them, and they are unblocked only for that application.
    >
    > 2. A few -- very few -- programs truly have issues, but from what I've
    > seen, the bugs are in those programs, not the service pack, and updates
    > for those programs are being released very, very quickly (most are
    > already out).
    >
    > The link above is to the FULL SP2 update. It's bigger than most people
    > will need, but it is the final "gold" release. What's not out yet are
    > both various distribution channels (e.g. you can't get the update
    > "delivered" via Windows Update -- yet), and the "breakdown" smaller
    > versions of the service pack for only specific versions of Windows (only
    > Home, only Pro, only Tablet PC, only Media PC, etc.). However the link
    > above has EVERYTHING, and will update an original Windows XP (without
    > even SP1) to SP2 with every security patch and update (including
    > DirectX, Windows Media Player and IE) as of last week. It also works
    > for any version of Windows that had been fully or partially updated. In
    > short, it's the one you want when you want the very best [all of the
    > scary "network and system administrator only" warnings at the microsoft
    > downloage page above not withstanding].
  28. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <r8idnSRk2uElTLrcRVn-tA@lmi.net>, nomail@nomail.com says...
    > I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also that OE
    > now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has embedded
    > images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice safeguard that
    > OE now has this feature.

    If you like the pop-up blocker in IE, try FireFox from Mozilla, it will
    also block images not from the root web site, pop-ups, etc.... I've been
    running it on customers systems and my own for over a month and have yet
    to find a site that doesn't work with it.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  29. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    The IE popup blobker is nice, because it is part of IE.

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1b9262fe68de2e5298972c@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <r8idnSRk2uElTLrcRVn-tA@lmi.net>, nomail@nomail.com says...
    >> I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also that
    >> OE
    >> now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has embedded
    >> images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice safeguard
    >> that
    >> OE now has this feature.
    >
    > If you like the pop-up blocker in IE, try FireFox from Mozilla, it will
    > also block images not from the root web site, pop-ups, etc.... I've been
    > running it on customers systems and my own for over a month and have yet
    > to find a site that doesn't work with it.
    >
    > --
    > --
    > spamfree999@rrohio.com
    > (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  30. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <10ihjdloh0pqn29@corp.supernews.com>, sept1967@highstream
    says...
    > The IE popup blobker is nice, because it is part of IE.

    But FireFox is nice because it doesn't expose you to the know and
    unknown things that IE does on most users system. Don't get me wrong, I
    make a lot of money installing Win based servers and workstations, but
    FireFox has become the new standard for our clients - the only catch is
    for ones that need active-x controls on custom web apps.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  31. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Sept1967" <sept1967@highstream(remove).net> wrote in message
    news:10ihjdloh0pqn29@corp.supernews.com...
    > The IE popup blobker is nice, because it is part of IE.
    >
    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    > news:MPG.1b9262fe68de2e5298972c@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > > In article <r8idnSRk2uElTLrcRVn-tA@lmi.net>, nomail@nomail.com says...
    > >> I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also
    that
    > >> OE
    > >> now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has
    embedded
    > >> images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice
    safeguard
    > >> that
    > >> OE now has this feature.
    > >
    > > If you like the pop-up blocker in IE, try FireFox from Mozilla, it
    will
    > > also block images not from the root web site, pop-ups, etc.... I've
    been
    > > running it on customers systems and my own for over a month and have
    yet
    > > to find a site that doesn't work with it.
    The blocking features of FireFox, are part of it as well. The big
    advantage it has, is that you get rid of IE completely...

    Best Wishes
  32. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:58:57 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:

    >In article <r8idnSRk2uElTLrcRVn-tA@lmi.net>, nomail@nomail.com says...
    >> I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also that OE
    >> now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has embedded
    >> images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice safeguard that
    >> OE now has this feature.
    >
    >If you like the pop-up blocker in IE, try FireFox from Mozilla,

    I am using it but it's full of bugs. When I need reliable browsing, I
    must go back to Internet explorer.
  33. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <n2iii0hhpf34v6vug7pgnvvpkmd8ahmal1@4ax.com>,
    nospam@nowhere.net says...
    > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:58:57 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <r8idnSRk2uElTLrcRVn-tA@lmi.net>, nomail@nomail.com says...
    > >> I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also that OE
    > >> now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has embedded
    > >> images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice safeguard that
    > >> OE now has this feature.
    > >
    > >If you like the pop-up blocker in IE, try FireFox from Mozilla,
    >
    > I am using it but it's full of bugs. When I need reliable browsing, I
    > must go back to Internet explorer.

    If you are using 0.9.3 I would like to know "what bugs" you've seen,
    I've got it installed on a BUNCH of workstation in offices and have yet
    to find a user that even knows about the switch - meaning that
    everything is working and they are not complaining.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  34. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:

    >Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    >Rick
    >


    It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    address.

    SP2 has also screwed up my Panasonic laser printer. Gives constant
    "Paper jam" errors in Micros**t Word. Fine with everything else!

    MK


    _______________________________________________________________________
    Michael Kenward Words for sale
  35. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:41:20 +0100, "Nero" <nero@rome.it> wrote:

    >What has XP SP2 got to do with this group??
    >


    Er, because people who use Asus motherboards use Windows and want to
    know if there are any specific issues they should consider? Like why
    has SP2 killed on onboard LAN? That is onboard as in a part of the
    Asus Motherboard.

    I certainly come here first when wanting to troubleshoot problems with
    my Asus PCs. You get a better class of nerd here.


    _______________________________________________________________________
    Michael Kenward Words for sale
  36. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On 23-Aug-2004, kenward@ukgateway.net wrote:

    > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    > Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    > Rick

    I installed sp2 on 3 computers in my house. One with
    a K8V, 1 with a A7N8X rev 1.04, and a Dell (P4 but dont know
    what motherboard) and so far, no problems on any of the
    three. Been running sp2 on these for about 2 weeks now.
  37. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    nospam@nowhere.net wrote:
    > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:58:57 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>In article <r8idnSRk2uElTLrcRVn-tA@lmi.net>, nomail@nomail.com says...
    >>
    >>>I like the IE popup blocker (which I didn't have before), and also that OE
    >>>now refuses to display images. So much of the spam I get has embedded
    >>>images. While most get deleted right away, it's still a nice safeguard that
    >>>OE now has this feature.
    >>
    >>If you like the pop-up blocker in IE, try FireFox from Mozilla,
    >
    >
    > I am using it but it's full of bugs. When I need reliable browsing, I
    > must go back to Internet explorer.

    Your backwards.

    I am using /IE/ but it's full of bugs, When I need reliable browsing, I
    must go back to FireFox.

    Unless you consider running a buggy, insecure POS that will help hackers
    0wn your machine 'reliable'

    Windows is reliable! It auto-updates with the latest virus in 20 minutes
    or less (when unpatched) !
  38. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Ditto.
    Downloaded the full SP2 (266mb),
    Installed on P4P800-VM , and a P4R800-VM , about 2 weeks now, no problems.


    "Mark Timerding" <mtimerding@fuse.net> wrote in message
    news:SZlWc.49641$n7.37849@fe37.usenetserver.com...
    >
    > On 23-Aug-2004, kenward@ukgateway.net wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    >> Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    >>
    >> Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >> Rick
    >
    > I installed sp2 on 3 computers in my house. One with
    > a K8V, 1 with a A7N8X rev 1.04, and a Dell (P4 but dont know
    > what motherboard) and so far, no problems on any of the
    > three. Been running sp2 on these for about 2 weeks now.
    >
  39. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <dfkji0p9ic5iddam8n3av9tbaf1b3abjdk@4ax.com>,
    kenward@ukgateway.net says...
    > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    > <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    > >Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    > >
    > >Rick
    > >
    >
    >
    > It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    > card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    > problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    > address.
    >
    > SP2 has also screwed up my Panasonic laser printer. Gives constant
    > "Paper jam" errors in Micros**t Word. Fine with everything else!

    What you describe is completely impossible - a driver can not hard the
    hardware of your network card or cause your printer to JAM.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  40. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <MPG.1b942151e9ef50ed989739@news-server.columbus.rr.com>,
    void@nowhere.com says...
    > In article <dfkji0p9ic5iddam8n3av9tbaf1b3abjdk@4ax.com>,
    > kenward@ukgateway.net says...
    > > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    > > <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    > > >
    > > >Rick
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > > It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    > > card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    > > problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    > > address.
    > >
    > > SP2 has also screwed up my Panasonic laser printer. Gives constant
    > > "Paper jam" errors in Micros**t Word. Fine with everything else!
    >
    > What you describe is completely impossible - a driver can not hard the
    > hardware of your network card or cause your printer to JAM.
    >
    >
    While it is possible that the drivers for the network card might need to
    be reinstalled after sp2 the paper jam is comical. Did the weather
    change after you installed SP2? Is it raining now and it wasn't raining
    before? Blame that on Microsoft too.
  41. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Here's a good site for info on SP2 written by Jim Fisher MS-MVP, who has
    put this together following the end of the beta test ... it's still a
    'work in progress' but it should answer a lot of your questions.
    http://jmfmvps.mvps.org/SP2.htm
    --
    Good Luck ... Fred

    Rick & Darlene wrote:
    > Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >
    > Rick
  42. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    I've installed it about a dozen machines, with no problems.

    I believe that your experience is unusual in the extreme.

    I think it's a wonderful update, nearly bug free. Relatively few
    programs have problems with it, and in my view the problem is in those
    programs, not SP2. Port adjustments to the firewall, when required, are
    generally "single-click" permissions to unblock (you don't even have to
    know the port numbers).

    kenward@ukgateway.net wrote:

    > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    > <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >>
    >>Rick
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    > It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    > card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    > problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    > address.
    >
    > SP2 has also screwed up my Panasonic laser printer. Gives constant
    > "Paper jam" errors in Micros**t Word. Fine with everything else!
    >
    > MK
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________________________________
    > Michael Kenward Words for sale
  43. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:58:39 GMT, John <john@nospam.com> wrote:

    >In article <MPG.1b942151e9ef50ed989739@news-server.columbus.rr.com>,
    >void@nowhere.com says...
    >> In article <dfkji0p9ic5iddam8n3av9tbaf1b3abjdk@4ax.com>,
    >> kenward@ukgateway.net says...
    >> > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:40:46 -0400, "Rick & Darlene"
    >> > <Bluemagic@comcast.net> wrote:
    >> >
    >> > >Anyone get the SP-2 update for XP? "Is it safe yet"?
    >> > >
    >> > >Rick
    >> > >
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    >> > card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    >> > problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    >> > address.
    >> >
    >> > SP2 has also screwed up my Panasonic laser printer. Gives constant
    >> > "Paper jam" errors in Micros**t Word. Fine with everything else!
    >>
    >> What you describe is completely impossible - a driver can not hard the
    >> hardware of your network card or cause your printer to JAM.
    >>
    >>
    >While it is possible that the drivers for the network card might need to
    >be reinstalled after sp2 the paper jam is comical. Did the weather
    >change after you installed SP2? Is it raining now and it wasn't raining
    >before? Blame that on Microsoft too.


    One suggestion is that the new USB drivers installed by SP2 have
    screwed up more than one bit of hardware.

    Before you dismiss such suggestions, you might care to do a bit of
    research. Were you, for example, the owner of a Psion Wavefinder, you
    would certainly know that SP2 can screw up hardware. As to my printer,
    I can only say that between not having problems and having them the
    only change I made was to apply SP2.


    _______________________________________________________________________
    Michael Kenward Words for sale
  44. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:36:24 GMT, in
    <MPG.1b942151e9ef50ed989739@news-server.columbus.rr.com>
    (alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus) Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:

    > What you describe is completely impossible - a driver can not hard the
    > hardware of your network card or cause your printer to JAM.

    Since I installed SP2, TWO planes have crashed in Russia - surely that
    can't be coincidence?


    --
    Charlie
  45. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:46:28 +0100, in
    <jjvmi0l8i8ij1quumql3m4nm81ja7pihuj@4ax.com>
    (alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus) kenward@ukgateway.net wrote:

    > Before you dismiss such suggestions, you might care to do a bit of
    > research. Were you, for example, the owner of a Psion Wavefinder, you
    > would certainly know that SP2 can screw up hardware. As to my printer,
    > I can only say that between not having problems and having them the
    > only change I made was to apply SP2.

    A bit of research has suggested to me that the Psion Wavefinder's
    problems predate SP2

    http://www.spidersweb.freeserve.co.uk/dab/wffaq/#WhataretherecommndedsolutionstoknownWaveFinderproblems
    http://mobileopera.com/wavefinder
    http://www.wavefinder.co.uk/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000186.html

    Wheras googling for

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=psion+wavefinder+XP+SP2+problem
    or
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=psion+wavefinder+XP+service+pack+2+problem&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N

    Returns no actual reports specific to psion wavefinder Windows XP
    Service pack 2 problems. Where can I find information about SP2
    screwing up hardware?

    As for your printer, have you tried rolling back (de-installing SP2)
    to see if that cures the paper jams? Or have you tried the printer on
    another non-SP2 machine?

    If neither of those are possible, or conclusive, try turning the
    computer off altogether, or unplugging the connection between the
    computer and the printer, and using the printer's self-test function.
    That will enable you to rule out any problems with the paper path that
    may have occured.

    HTH

    --
    Charlie
  46. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:18:10 +0100, in
    <dfkji0p9ic5iddam8n3av9tbaf1b3abjdk@4ax.com>
    (alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus) kenward@ukgateway.net wrote:

    > It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    > card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    > problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    > address.

    My motherboard is a K8V SE Deluxe which uses Marvell onboard
    10/100/1000 LAN. XP SP2 caused me no problems with that hardware.

    XP SP2 does close a number of ports by default which will surprise you
    if you've not read the documentation: assorted network shares may
    dissapear, software that uses ports that have been closed will b0rk,
    etc. These symptoms can look a little like NW Hardware issues.

    It's difficult to see how the software could fry your LAN. I can see
    that the vendor's drivers may have have issues that cause them to stop
    working. If you can find a DOS driver for it, you could try booting
    from a DOS bootdisk and seeing if you can ping across the interface,
    otherwise KNOPPIX might be able to load it (unfortunately it doesn't
    see my Marvell), so you can test the issue away from XPSP2

    You say the device is being given an inappropriate IP address, which
    would imply that the hardware is still working enough to query a DHCP
    server, get an address and confgure it. In what way is the address
    inappropriate? Where is the DHCP server - is it yours, or your ISP's?


    --
    Charlie
  47. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    How do you get into the XP firewall system to make manual settings?
    I am new to Windows XP (Home Edition)
    Thanks
    DW
  48. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:55:27 +0200, Charlie King
    <charlie@removethisitsaspamtrap.stopthatitssilly.com> wrote:

    >On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:18:10 +0100, in
    ><dfkji0p9ic5iddam8n3av9tbaf1b3abjdk@4ax.com>
    >(alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus) kenward@ukgateway.net wrote:
    >
    >> It has wrecked the onboard LAN in my A7V8X. I had to put in a PCI LAN
    >> card. Others, not all of them Asus users, have reported similar
    >> problems. In my case, the Broadcom LAN gets given an inappropriate IP
    >> address.
    >
    >My motherboard is a K8V SE Deluxe which uses Marvell onboard
    >10/100/1000 LAN. XP SP2 caused me no problems with that hardware.
    >


    -----End Quoted (and cut) Message-----


    Thanks. I should also have added that SP2 did not mess up the LAN on
    my A78NX-VM motherboard. That came pre-messed, and how I sorted it is
    another story.


    _______________________________________________________________________
    Michael Kenward Words for sale
  49. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:29:30 +0200, Charlie King
    <charlie@removethisitsaspamtrap.stopthatitssilly.com> wrote:

    >On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:36:24 GMT, in
    ><MPG.1b942151e9ef50ed989739@news-server.columbus.rr.com>
    >(alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus) Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote:
    >
    >> What you describe is completely impossible - a driver can not hard the
    >> hardware of your network card or cause your printer to JAM.
    >
    >Since I installed SP2, TWO planes have crashed in Russia - surely that
    >can't be coincidence?


    If there is a link between your PC and the software on board those
    planes, then if I were you I would go into hiding.

    In my case, the printer comes with a software interface that talks to
    the PC. The printer hardware works just fine. It is just MS Word and
    the machine that don't like one another. All other software is working
    as it did pre SP2.


    _______________________________________________________________________
    Michael Kenward Words for sale
Ask a new question

Read More

Asus Windows XP Motherboards