What is SP2 doing - apart from trashing everybody's PC??

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
removable drives

Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
completely???

Hugh
33 answers Last reply
More about what trashing everybody
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Yes, you are indeed paranoid. A well-maintained PC will
    install SP2 without any adverse installation issues.

    Windows XP Service Pack 2 Checklist
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm

    [Courtesy of MS-MVP Jupiter Jones]

    --
    Carey Frisch
    Microsoft MVP
    Windows XP - Shell/User

    Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Hugh" wrote:

    | Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    | updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    | soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    | removable drives
    |
    | Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    | completely???
    |
    | Hugh
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Hugh;
    These newsgroups are for computer issues and thus a majority of posts
    deal with problems.
    SP-2 is a major recent update and because of that gets a lot of
    coverage here.

    Microsoft has nor screwed up unless you say not testing SP-2 on all
    possible combinations is a screw up.
    Consider the total number of Windows XP computers in the world.
    No two are identical.
    No one, not even Microsoft could possibly test anything on all
    possible combinations.
    Even so SP-2 is possibly the most tested piece of software ever
    released.

    Check for possible hardware and software issues before starting:
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
    Follow the Service Pack Installation Checklist to install SP-2:
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm

    --
    Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


    "Hugh" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:338f01c49e88$f8a2dba0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
    > Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    > updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    > soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    > removable drives
    >
    > Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    > completely???
    >
    > Hugh
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Not necessarily--ever try upgrading a Prescott processor with too low of a
    microcode update??
    Luckily, Mat highlights the issue on your cited link.

    Such broad statements are dangerous and can cause users to lose valuable
    data. Laptop users especially should ALWAYS check with the manufacturer
    before performing service pack upgrades.


    --
    Larry Samuels MS-MVP (Windows-Shell/User)
    Associate Expert
    Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
    Unofficial FAQ for Windows Server 2003 at
    http://pelos.us/SERVER.htm
    "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
    news:uv0M0yonEHA.2140@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
    > Yes, you are indeed paranoid. A well-maintained PC will
    > install SP2 without any adverse installation issues.
    >
    > Windows XP Service Pack 2 Checklist
    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
    >
    > [Courtesy of MS-MVP Jupiter Jones]
    >
    > --
    > Carey Frisch
    > Microsoft MVP
    > Windows XP - Shell/User
    >
    > Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
    > http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx
    >
    > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > "Hugh" wrote:
    >
    > | Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    > | updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    > | soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    > | removable drives
    > |
    > | Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    > | completely???
    > |
    > | Hugh
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    It's you!

    --

    Regards:

    Richard Urban

    aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-)

    "Hugh" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:338f01c49e88$f8a2dba0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
    > Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    > updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    > soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    > removable drives
    >
    > Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    > completely???
    >
    > Hugh
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Hugh wrote:
    > Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    > updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    > soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    > removable drives
    >
    > Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    > completely???

    I don't believe Microsoft "screwed it up completely" as you put it.

    What I see is a minority of users having trouble because their system
    already had trouble, possibly unseen, before installing SP2. Loads of
    adware/spyware/malware.. Incompatable applications, possibly even key
    loggers and other trojan-like apps. A little cleanup before SP2 is
    installed will help.

    An even smaller minority of users actually have hardware/software that has
    not been upgraded to work with the improved security or other changes SP2
    entailed. For example, "EndNote 8" does not work with SP2, but did work on
    XP prior to that. They even admit on their web page that users of EndNote 6
    and 7 will not have trouble, only their latest and greatest (8) has problems
    and THEY are working on the patch to remedy the situation. Their product,
    their problem. Other similar situations have come up with hardware drivers
    and the likes... The sad part is that these companies all had access to the
    SP2 Betas like everyone else - very few tested beforehand.

    My bet is 10% - maybe 20% of Windows XP SP1 users will have trouble.. of
    that 10-20%, 75% will probably fall into the former - meaning they should
    have better checked their hardware/software patches, scanned for malware in
    various ways, defragmented and check their hard drives for errors, updated
    their BIOS where appropriate before installing a Windows patch that is
    almost as large as the original install! A little planning, preperation and
    knowledge would go a long way.. Don't have that type of time - everyone has
    a geek friend, 16 year old son/daughter or something - and for the rest -
    research, plan or get someone to help if it makes you nervous.

    I have had my share of trouble with it in the workplace - none at home. A
    few popups were blocked at work that shouldn't have been or a few security
    settings were too high - a little GPO manipulation and everything is
    better - better than before, not just better since I fixed the SP2
    problems - overall. After all, the control of the Windows Firewall from a
    GPO is fantastic - External and internal firewalls...

    Anyway - although I am not saying anything is wrong with your statement, I
    hope I have at least contributed to your thought process.. With a little
    pre-planning, Windows XP SP2 will work for MOST people without a hitch. And
    if they did that same pre-planning, for those that it wouldn't work for -
    they already know.

    --
    <- Shenan ->
    --
    The information is provided "as is", it is suggested you research for
    yourself before you take any advice - you are the one ultimately
    responsible for your actions/problems/solutions. Know what you are
    getting into before you jump in with both feet.
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

    > Yes, you are indeed paranoid. A well-maintained PC will
    > install SP2 without any adverse installation issues.
    >
    > Windows XP Service Pack 2 Checklist
    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
    >
    > [Courtesy of MS-MVP Jupiter Jones]
    >

    Bull$hit. My well-maintained PC didn't. And I'm tired of people like you
    having the gall to suggest otherwise. You have no basis in knowledge
    other than your personal experience to suggest otherwise.
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:

    > Hugh;
    > These newsgroups are for computer issues and thus a majority of posts
    > deal with problems.
    > SP-2 is a major recent update and because of that gets a lot of
    > coverage here.
    >
    > Microsoft has nor screwed up unless you say not testing SP-2 on all
    > possible combinations is a screw up.
    > Consider the total number of Windows XP computers in the world.
    > No two are identical.
    > No one, not even Microsoft could possibly test anything on all
    > possible combinations.
    > Even so SP-2 is possibly the most tested piece of software ever
    > released.
    >
    > Check for possible hardware and software issues before starting:
    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
    > Follow the Service Pack Installation Checklist to install SP-2:
    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm

    Which the original XP release should have been.
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Shenan Stanley wrote:

    > Hugh wrote:
    >
    >>Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >>updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >>soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >>removable drives
    >>
    >>Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >>completely???
    >
    >
    > I don't believe Microsoft "screwed it up completely" as you put it.
    >
    > What I see is a minority of users having trouble because their system
    > already had trouble, possibly unseen, before installing SP2. Loads of
    > adware/spyware/malware.. Incompatable applications, possibly even key
    > loggers and other trojan-like apps. A little cleanup before SP2 is
    > installed will help.
    >
    > An even smaller minority of users actually have hardware/software that has
    > not been upgraded to work with the improved security or other changes SP2
    > entailed. For example, "EndNote 8" does not work with SP2, but did work on
    > XP prior to that. They even admit on their web page that users of EndNote 6
    > and 7 will not have trouble, only their latest and greatest (8) has problems
    > and THEY are working on the patch to remedy the situation. Their product,
    > their problem. Other similar situations have come up with hardware drivers
    > and the likes... The sad part is that these companies all had access to the
    > SP2 Betas like everyone else - very few tested beforehand.
    >
    > My bet is 10% - maybe 20% of Windows XP SP1 users will have trouble.. of
    > that 10-20%, 75% will probably fall into the former - meaning they should
    > have better checked their hardware/software patches, scanned for malware in
    > various ways, defragmented and check their hard drives for errors, updated
    > their BIOS where appropriate before installing a Windows patch that is
    > almost as large as the original install! A little planning, preperation and
    > knowledge would go a long way.. Don't have that type of time - everyone has
    > a geek friend, 16 year old son/daughter or something - and for the rest -
    > research, plan or get someone to help if it makes you nervous.
    >
    > I have had my share of trouble with it in the workplace - none at home. A
    > few popups were blocked at work that shouldn't have been or a few security
    > settings were too high - a little GPO manipulation and everything is
    > better - better than before, not just better since I fixed the SP2
    > problems - overall. After all, the control of the Windows Firewall from a
    > GPO is fantastic - External and internal firewalls...
    >
    > Anyway - although I am not saying anything is wrong with your statement, I
    > hope I have at least contributed to your thought process.. With a little
    > pre-planning, Windows XP SP2 will work for MOST people without a hitch. And
    > if they did that same pre-planning, for those that it wouldn't work for -
    > they already know.
    >

    Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    *known* to create installation problems? Now granted, common sense
    tells us, or should tell us, that those are undesireable things, but you
    are being nothing more than a parrot, and not a very bright one, when
    you repeat the problems-are-caused-by-spyware mantra. I find it very
    amusing that SP2 apologists like Carey and Jupiter are fond of saying
    that MS couldn't possibly have tested SP2 on all possible
    configurations, which is certainly true, but out of the other sides of
    their mouths they tell us, as Carey does in this very thread, "A
    well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse installation
    issues." But if MS didn't test all possible configurations, how does he
    know that to be true? He doesn't.
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Paranoid? Not necessarily. It's important to realize that most people
    posting on newsgroups do so because they have a problem. You don't get the
    others that installed just fine (like myself) posting saying that everything
    is okay. The best advice is to do all you can to research the upgrade for
    your particular system, backup your data and configuration (or your entire
    system), then do the upgrade with the option to uninstall it if it doesn't
    work out.

    Remember, things can go wrong even with the best maintained system. Making
    sure you can recover from problems is an important part of any major
    upgrade.

    "Hugh" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:338f01c49e88$f8a2dba0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
    > Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    > updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    > soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    > removable drives
    >
    > Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    > completely???
    >
    > Hugh
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    You failed to specify any specific issue you had attempting
    to install SP2. How in the world do you expect any help
    if you cannot provide even a smidgeon of issues you had?

    Please review the following:

    How to Make a Good Newsgroup Post
    http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

    --
    Carey Frisch
    Microsoft MVP
    Windows XP - Shell/User

    Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Herb Fritatta" wrote:

    Basically, nothing.
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Herb Fritatta wrote:
    > Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    > piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    > *known* to create installation problems? Now granted, common sense
    > tells us, or should tell us, that those are undesireable things, but
    > you are being nothing more than a parrot, and not a very bright one,
    > when you repeat the problems-are-caused-by-spyware mantra. I find it
    > very amusing that SP2 apologists like Carey and Jupiter are fond of
    > saying that MS couldn't possibly have tested SP2 on all possible
    > configurations, which is certainly true, but out of the other sides of
    > their mouths they tell us, as Carey does in this very thread, "A
    > well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse installation
    > issues." But if MS didn't test all possible configurations, how does
    > he know that to be true? He doesn't.

    First off, I do not appreciate the implication that I am not intelligent. I
    presented you with an intelligent argument and essentially received the
    response of "Bawk Bawk".

    I have personally removed adware that was installed on the machines prior to
    SP2's installation and SP2 had, in its ignorance of what the application
    did, opened the appropriate holes in the firewall. I have also been to
    machines where users installed applications known to contain spyware/malware
    and because they wanted their Bonzi Buddy/Weatherbug/iWon/P2P crud to work,
    they just answered "Yes, allow it" to whatever they saw - thus opening the
    necessary ports to allow more spying/ads, etc - then wonder why they are
    getting them.

    I never stated that ALL well maintained PCs would install SP2 without
    adverse effects - I did quite the obvious. I did state that the ratio is
    far from 50/50 and closer to 80% good/20% bad with 75% of that 20% bad
    being user controllable and 25% being either Microsoft's or some third party
    application/hardware manufacturer's fault. (Just like when people started
    going from Windows 98 to Windows XP and the Printer/Scanner manufacturers
    did not put out drivers so that people would be (in essence) forced to buy
    new compatible scanners/printers.)

    I have seen SP2's firewall mess with HP printers, whose full drivers for
    some reason want HP to send them data - what's up with that?!

    Random find..
    http://chris-cohen.blogspot.com/2004/09/old-spyware-causes-new-service-pack-2.html

    As for what Carey or Jupiter or anyone else says - *shrug*, again - I
    beleive someone should do their own research before doing anything,
    especially something that is as large as a service pack where their computer
    and all the information on it is concerned. Essentially, although I may
    respect what you, Jupiter and/or Carey have to say - I will not blindly
    follow the advice.

    If you are going to quote me on the next post, quote this next paragraph:

    I never said that all the problems were caused merely by spyware.. I said
    that of the 20% bad that seem to be common, 75% of those could be fixed by a
    user putting forth the effort to make sure their PC is ready for SP2 - it's
    not a small upgrade, it's not a minor change - common sense says you don't
    go buy a new couch for your home before you measure the door to make sure it
    will fit. (Or make sure it goes with the decor, won't clash with your other
    furniture, etc.) Spyware is ONE part, hardware drivers another, software
    patches and looking to see if your current software has had problems with
    SP2 (visit their web page - they usually have messages in their support
    section if they have had issues), defragmenting your hard drive, backing up
    important files and folders (again - MAJOR change here - don't be a moron
    about it), checking to make sure even your system BIOS is compatible.

    As with any system-wide upgrade; go in with a plan, don't go in blind.

    --
    <- Shenan ->
    --
    The information is provided "as is", it is suggested you research for
    yourself before you take any advice - you are the one ultimately
    responsible for your actions/problems/solutions. Know what you are
    getting into before you jump in with both feet.
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:40:59 -0700, "Hugh"
    <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

    >Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >removable drives
    >
    >Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >completely???
    >
    >Hugh

    All you are seeing is a very vocal minority who report problems when
    they apply the service pack. What you don't read are the vast
    majority who applied the service pack and had no problems. They don't
    post "It went great love it" messages. unlike the negative nellies who
    have had problems. Those problems are usually due to unsupported
    hardware more often than not...and that's not Microsoft's fault.
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
    > You failed to specify any specific issue you had attempting
    > to install SP2. How in the world do you expect any help
    > if you cannot provide even a smidgeon of issues you had?
    >
    > Please review the following:
    >
    > How to Make a Good Newsgroup Post
    > http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
    >

    I wasn't *asking* for help, but you can bet that if I ever do, I won't
    be asking you. And you want to tell *me* how to make a good post? Why
    don't you follow your own advice, and try reading before cutting and
    pating your droning responses?
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    This is a Microsoft "help"newsgroup.
    Why bother posting here if you cannot
    ask an intelligent question that could
    possibly lead to a solution to a problem
    you have with the Windows XP operating
    system or installing SP2?

    --
    Carey Frisch
    Microsoft MVP
    Windows XP - Shell/User

    Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx

    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    "Herb Fritatta" wrote:

    | I wasn't *asking* for help, but you can bet that if I ever do, I won't
    | be asking you. And you want to tell *me* how to make a good post? Why
    | don't you follow your own advice, and try reading before cutting and
    | pating your droning responses?
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Shenan Stanley wrote:

    > Herb Fritatta wrote:
    >
    >>Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    >>piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    >>*known* to create installation problems? Now granted, common sense
    >>tells us, or should tell us, that those are undesireable things, but
    >>you are being nothing more than a parrot, and not a very bright one,
    >>when you repeat the problems-are-caused-by-spyware mantra. I find it
    >>very amusing that SP2 apologists like Carey and Jupiter are fond of
    >>saying that MS couldn't possibly have tested SP2 on all possible
    >>configurations, which is certainly true, but out of the other sides of
    >>their mouths they tell us, as Carey does in this very thread, "A
    >>well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse installation
    >>issues." But if MS didn't test all possible configurations, how does
    >>he know that to be true? He doesn't.
    >
    >
    > First off, I do not appreciate the implication that I am not intelligent. I
    > presented you with an intelligent argument and essentially received the
    > response of "Bawk Bawk".
    >
    > I have personally removed adware that was installed on the machines prior to
    > SP2's installation and SP2 had, in its ignorance of what the application
    > did, opened the appropriate holes in the firewall. I have also been to
    > machines where users installed applications known to contain spyware/malware
    > and because they wanted their Bonzi Buddy/Weatherbug/iWon/P2P crud to work,
    > they just answered "Yes, allow it" to whatever they saw - thus opening the
    > necessary ports to allow more spying/ads, etc - then wonder why they are
    > getting them.
    >
    > I never stated that ALL well maintained PCs would install SP2 without
    > adverse effects - I did quite the obvious. I did state that the ratio is
    > far from 50/50 and closer to 80% good/20% bad with 75% of that 20% bad
    > being user controllable and 25% being either Microsoft's or some third party
    > application/hardware manufacturer's fault. (Just like when people started
    > going from Windows 98 to Windows XP and the Printer/Scanner manufacturers
    > did not put out drivers so that people would be (in essence) forced to buy
    > new compatible scanners/printers.)
    >
    > I have seen SP2's firewall mess with HP printers, whose full drivers for
    > some reason want HP to send them data - what's up with that?!
    >
    > Random find..
    > http://chris-cohen.blogspot.com/2004/09/old-spyware-causes-new-service-pack-2.html
    >
    > As for what Carey or Jupiter or anyone else says - *shrug*, again - I
    > beleive someone should do their own research before doing anything,
    > especially something that is as large as a service pack where their computer
    > and all the information on it is concerned. Essentially, although I may
    > respect what you, Jupiter and/or Carey have to say - I will not blindly
    > follow the advice.
    >
    > If you are going to quote me on the next post, quote this next paragraph:
    >
    > I never said that all the problems were caused merely by spyware.. I said
    > that of the 20% bad that seem to be common, 75% of those could be fixed by a
    > user putting forth the effort to make sure their PC is ready for SP2 - it's
    > not a small upgrade, it's not a minor change - common sense says you don't
    > go buy a new couch for your home before you measure the door to make sure it
    > will fit. (Or make sure it goes with the decor, won't clash with your other
    > furniture, etc.) Spyware is ONE part, hardware drivers another, software
    > patches and looking to see if your current software has had problems with
    > SP2 (visit their web page - they usually have messages in their support
    > section if they have had issues), defragmenting your hard drive, backing up
    > important files and folders (again - MAJOR change here - don't be a moron
    > about it), checking to make sure even your system BIOS is compatible.
    >
    > As with any system-wide upgrade; go in with a plan, don't go in blind.
    >

    The advice to be prepared is good and I have no argument with it. I
    think I owe you at least a partial apology because I went off on you
    (i.e., I responded directly to your post) when my indignation should
    have been more diffusely aimed. That said, I still maintain that there's
    far too much assumption that individual users must have done something
    wrong when an SP2 install goes awry.
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Where did I say something that means this:
    "A well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse
    installation
    issues."
    You need to read my posts again if you think I said that.

    I avoid such all encompassing statements for many reasons not the
    least of which I have no control over your computer.
    Preparation will reduce the chance of problems but the only thing
    capable of promising no problems for you with your computer is boxing
    it up and sending it away.

    You say:
    "Can you point me to a reference..."
    Then you say:
    "Now granted, common sense tells us, or should tell us"
    You really answered your own question.
    If you read all the posts in the forums, you will see some where
    spyware viruses etc were the cause, they were removed, SP-2 now
    installs properly.
    There are not many but they are there.
    I have seen it many times, so it is first hand and not a parrot as you
    seem to think.
    But then again as you said "common sense tells us"

    --
    Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


    "Herb Fritatta" <Herb@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:10ks827k3vudr7c@corp.supernews.com...
    > Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    > piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    > *known* to create installation problems? Now granted, common sense
    > tells us, or should tell us, that those are undesireable things, but
    > you are being nothing more than a parrot, and not a very bright one,
    > when you repeat the problems-are-caused-by-spyware mantra. I find it
    > very amusing that SP2 apologists like Carey and Jupiter are fond of
    > saying that MS couldn't possibly have tested SP2 on all possible
    > configurations, which is certainly true, but out of the other sides
    > of their mouths they tell us, as Carey does in this very thread, "A
    > well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse installation
    > issues." But if MS didn't test all possible configurations, how
    > does he know that to be true? He doesn't.
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    >-----Original Message-----
    >This is a Microsoft "help"newsgroup.
    >Why bother posting here if you cannot
    >ask an intelligent question that could
    >possibly lead to a solution to a problem
    >you have with the Windows XP operating
    >system or installing SP2?
    >
    >--
    >Carey Frisch
    >Microsoft MVP
    >Windows XP - Shell/User
    >
    >Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
    >http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.a
    spx

    Please show us where in this thread you posted an
    intelligent *answer* "...that could possibly lead to a
    solution..."
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    I have installed SP2 on three systems without a single glitch, and I
    know of lots of others whose experiences have been similar. You hear
    about the problems, not the "no problem"s.

    On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:40:59 -0700, "Hugh"
    <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

    >Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >removable drives
    >
    >Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >completely???
    >
    >Hugh


    Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
    Peter R. Fletcher
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Carey the Parrot made that statement, and one from blind MS zealotry, not of one from any techincal experience.


    "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message news:%23aoDhnsnEHA.608@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > Where did I say something that means this:
    > "A well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse
    > installation
    > issues."
    > You need to read my posts again if you think I said that.
    >
    > I avoid such all encompassing statements for many reasons not the
    > least of which I have no control over your computer.
    > Preparation will reduce the chance of problems but the only thing
    > capable of promising no problems for you with your computer is boxing
    > it up and sending it away.
    >
    > You say:
    > "Can you point me to a reference..."
    > Then you say:
    > "Now granted, common sense tells us, or should tell us"
    > You really answered your own question.
    > If you read all the posts in the forums, you will see some where
    > spyware viruses etc were the cause, they were removed, SP-2 now
    > installs properly.
    > There are not many but they are there.
    > I have seen it many times, so it is first hand and not a parrot as you
    > seem to think.
    > But then again as you said "common sense tells us"
    >
    > --
    > Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    > http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
    >
    >
    > "Herb Fritatta" <Herb@nospam.com> wrote in message
    > news:10ks827k3vudr7c@corp.supernews.com...
    >> Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    >> piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    >> *known* to create installation problems? Now granted, common sense
    >> tells us, or should tell us, that those are undesireable things, but
    >> you are being nothing more than a parrot, and not a very bright one,
    >> when you repeat the problems-are-caused-by-spyware mantra. I find it
    >> very amusing that SP2 apologists like Carey and Jupiter are fond of
    >> saying that MS couldn't possibly have tested SP2 on all possible
    >> configurations, which is certainly true, but out of the other sides
    >> of their mouths they tell us, as Carey does in this very thread, "A
    >> well-maintained PC will install SP2 without any adverse installation
    >> issues." But if MS didn't test all possible configurations, how
    >> does he know that to be true? He doesn't.
    >
    >
  20. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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


    >-----Original Message-----
    >Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >removable drives
    >
    >Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >completely???
    >
    >Hugh
    >.
    >
  21. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Herb Fritatta wrote:
    > Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    > piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    > *known* to create installation problems?

    Interesting Article:
    http://www.onlinepcfix.com/spyware/cnn1.htm

    --
    <- Shenan ->
    --
    The information is provided "as is", it is suggested you research for
    yourself before you take any advice - you are the one ultimately
    responsible for your actions/problems/solutions. Know what you are
    getting into before you jump in with both feet.
  22. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Shenan Stanley wrote:
    > Herb Fritatta wrote:
    >
    >>Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any*
    >>piece of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or
    >>*known* to create installation problems?
    >
    >
    > Interesting Article:
    > http://www.onlinepcfix.com/spyware/cnn1.htm
    >

    A great source for tech info--the Associated Press. And it still doesn't
    answer the question.
  23. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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 :)


    --
    Business executive who believes technology but don't want to be messed
    around.
    "Peter R. Fletcher" <pfletch(at)fletchers(hyphen)uk.com>
    ???????:eq4tk0ta7sik6063pn6d576gi5tid4dosi@4ax.com...
    >I have installed SP2 on three systems without a single glitch, and I
    > know of lots of others whose experiences have been similar. You hear
    > about the problems, not the "no problem"s.
    >
    > On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:40:59 -0700, "Hugh"
    > <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >>updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >>soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >>removable drives
    >>
    >>Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >>completely???
    >>
    >>Hugh
    >
    >
    > Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the
    > exchange.
    > Peter R. Fletcher
  24. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    I think that you intended to reply to the root of this thread - I
    certainly don't disagree with you.

    On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:16:45 +0800, "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.msn.com>
    wrote:

    >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
  25. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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 :-)

    "Hugh" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:25f001c49f46$e0d46700$a501280a@phx.gbl...
    > 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
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>-----Original Message-----
    >>Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >>updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >>soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >>removable drives
    >>
    >>Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >>completely???
    >>
    >>Hugh
    >>.
    >>
  26. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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.

    --
    Business executive who believes technology but don't want to be messed
    around.
    "Hugh" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com>
    ???????:25f001c49f46$e0d46700$a501280a@phx.gbl...
    > 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
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>-----Original Message-----
    >>Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    >>updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    >>soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    >>removable drives
    >>
    >>Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    >>completely???
    >>
    >>Hugh
    >>.
    >>
  27. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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.

    --
    Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


    "Herb Fritatta" <Herb@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:10l1lcol9ks3191@corp.supernews.com...
    > 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.
  28. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:30:04 -0500, Herb Fritatta <Herb@nospam.com>

    >No, you can't point me with any spyware or adware that's known to
    >conflict with SP2 because none has been identified.

    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?'
    >-------------- ---- --- -- - - - -
  29. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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.


    --
    Business executive who believes technology but don't want to be messed
    around.

    "Hugh" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com>
    ???????:338f01c49e88$f8a2dba0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
    > Do I detect a thread here, lotsa people seem to be
    > updating to XP SP2 and then start losing things like
    > soundcards, lan ports, printers, scanners, drives,
    > removable drives
    >
    > Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up
    > completely???
    >
    > Hugh
  30. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:

    > 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.
    >

    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.
  31. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    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.

    --
    Jupiter Jones [MVP]
    http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


    "Herb Fritatta" <Herb@nospam.com> wrote in message
    news:10l6kfe6v939ia4@corp.supernews.com...
    > 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.
  32. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Herb Fritatta wrote:
    > 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?


    If I am not mistaken, the original "question" (if you want to call it that)
    was from "Hugh" and is quoted below (in reference to SP2):

    "Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up completely???"

    And I believe that has been answered in various threads and by common sense.
    MS could not have screwed it up "completely" or there would be no argument.
    If they had screwed it up "completely", there would be no working machine,
    no one saying "it worked for me" at all.

    That doesn't mean the OP is paranoid, necessarily - but it does allow one to
    answer the question simply (on an overall basis) with "No - MS did not screw
    up completely - there are unique cases where SP2 does not work - period.
    The reasons are varied for this - so yes, it could be 'just you'."

    Now, perhaps you meant your original question - and I will preclude this
    with a "I am surprised to see a particular "adware" identified so bluntly" -
    presented in the quote below:

    "Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any* piece
    of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or *known* to
    create installation problems?"

    And I have to concede, this MS article does categorically identify a
    particular piece of adware which is known to conflict with SP2.

    Now hold on - I did agree with you at first - a lot of "wishy-washy
    language" is present in the given article:

    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=885523

    "This problem may occur.."
    "Microsoft is investigating reports of a compatibility issue.."
    "T.V. Media is a third-party advertising program that you may not want to
    continue running."

    Yep - wishy-washy, uncertain, inconclusive even. But it gave me something
    to hold on to and search with. Primarily "T.V. Media" as a specified adware
    application. So I searched. This is what I found.

    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=885627

    Now they still use the obligatory "The problem may occur if one or more of
    the following conditions are true:" statements. However, I cannot say I
    would not put that phrase in front of everything I said if I too had a large
    crew of legal advisors that had to approve what I posted every time. What a
    pain.

    However, it did seem more confident in their presentation of the "T.V.
    Media" adware than in the previous article.

    "A third-party advertising program that is named T.V. Media is installed on
    your computer. (T.V. Media is from Total Velocity Corporation.) To help you
    avoid a failed Windows XP SP2 installation from Windows Update or from
    Automatic Updates, we have temporarily blocked the download of Windows XP
    SP2 to computers that have T.V. Media installed."

    "Microsoft has recently discovered a compatibility issue between Windows XP
    SP2 installation and a third-party advertising program that is named T.V.
    Media."

    "If you want to install Windows XP SP2, you must completely remove T.V.
    Media from your system. The simplest way to remove T.V. Media is to use a
    third-party tool that removes unwanted software. After you remove T.V.
    Media, Windows XP SP2 will be available to install from Windows Update or
    from Automatic Updates."

    The article does go into some generalities on how to remove it and that they
    recommend using this software to clean up anyway, but they seem vehement
    about killing this "T.V. Media" adware in "Method 3" of this article.

    I still agree that *if* there is anyone saying that everyone who is having
    trouble installing SP2 wouldn't have this trouble if they cleaned their
    system of spyware - they are wrong. However, I also have decided that this
    article does, in fact, cover a particular piece of adware that causes so
    much trouble with the installation of SP2, Microsoft themselves have
    basically blocked people from getting SP2 unless it is cleaned from their
    system first.

    In my searches, I also found Microsoft has even created their own tool to
    help remove this particular piece of adware.

    Adware T.V. Media Program Removal Tool
    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=886590

    Download page for the above tool:
    http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=f94e8b27-b656-45cd-9668-73134a18231b&displaylang=en
    (Short link: http://snipurl.com/99jw )

    And again - no wishy-washy language here.

    "This adware interferes with successful installation of Windows XP Service
    Pack 2."


    Hope that settles this issue - which has gone on far too long for something
    so insignificant in my opinion. *If* someone is giving false advice (saying
    that the reason most cannot install SP2 is strictly spyware/adware) - they
    are wrong. *If* someone wants a specific example of adware that causes
    trouble when trying to install SP2 - this response gives it to them. *If*
    someone believes someone with a with a properly maintained system should not
    have trouble installing SP2 - I believe they may be incorrect - there will
    be systems out there that do not upgrade properly to SP2 for a variety of
    reasons unrelated to a properly maintained system. Can these problems be
    corrected as well without the end-user spending money - that remains to be
    seen.

    --
    <- Shenan ->
    --
    The information is provided "as is", it is suggested you research for
    yourself before you take any advice - you are the one ultimately
    responsible for your actions/problems/solutions. Know what you are
    getting into before you jump in with both feet.
  33. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Shenan Stanley wrote:
    > Herb Fritatta wrote:
    >
    >>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?
    >
    >
    >
    > If I am not mistaken, the original "question" (if you want to call it that)
    > was from "Hugh" and is quoted below (in reference to SP2):
    >
    > "Is it me - am I paranoid or has MS screwed it up completely???"
    >
    > And I believe that has been answered in various threads and by common sense.
    > MS could not have screwed it up "completely" or there would be no argument.
    > If they had screwed it up "completely", there would be no working machine,
    > no one saying "it worked for me" at all.
    >
    > That doesn't mean the OP is paranoid, necessarily - but it does allow one to
    > answer the question simply (on an overall basis) with "No - MS did not screw
    > up completely - there are unique cases where SP2 does not work - period.
    > The reasons are varied for this - so yes, it could be 'just you'."
    >
    > Now, perhaps you meant your original question - and I will preclude this
    > with a "I am surprised to see a particular "adware" identified so bluntly" -
    > presented in the quote below:
    >
    > "Can you point me to a reference that categorically identifies *any* piece
    > of adware or spyware which is known to conflict with SP2 or *known* to
    > create installation problems?"
    >
    > And I have to concede, this MS article does categorically identify a
    > particular piece of adware which is known to conflict with SP2.
    >
    > Now hold on - I did agree with you at first - a lot of "wishy-washy
    > language" is present in the given article:
    >
    > http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=885523
    >
    > "This problem may occur.."
    > "Microsoft is investigating reports of a compatibility issue.."
    > "T.V. Media is a third-party advertising program that you may not want to
    > continue running."
    >
    > Yep - wishy-washy, uncertain, inconclusive even. But it gave me something
    > to hold on to and search with. Primarily "T.V. Media" as a specified adware
    > application. So I searched. This is what I found.
    >
    > http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=885627
    >
    > Now they still use the obligatory "The problem may occur if one or more of
    > the following conditions are true:" statements. However, I cannot say I
    > would not put that phrase in front of everything I said if I too had a large
    > crew of legal advisors that had to approve what I posted every time. What a
    > pain.
    >
    > However, it did seem more confident in their presentation of the "T.V.
    > Media" adware than in the previous article.
    >
    > "A third-party advertising program that is named T.V. Media is installed on
    > your computer. (T.V. Media is from Total Velocity Corporation.) To help you
    > avoid a failed Windows XP SP2 installation from Windows Update or from
    > Automatic Updates, we have temporarily blocked the download of Windows XP
    > SP2 to computers that have T.V. Media installed."
    >
    > "Microsoft has recently discovered a compatibility issue between Windows XP
    > SP2 installation and a third-party advertising program that is named T.V.
    > Media."
    >
    > "If you want to install Windows XP SP2, you must completely remove T.V.
    > Media from your system. The simplest way to remove T.V. Media is to use a
    > third-party tool that removes unwanted software. After you remove T.V.
    > Media, Windows XP SP2 will be available to install from Windows Update or
    > from Automatic Updates."
    >
    > The article does go into some generalities on how to remove it and that they
    > recommend using this software to clean up anyway, but they seem vehement
    > about killing this "T.V. Media" adware in "Method 3" of this article.
    >
    > I still agree that *if* there is anyone saying that everyone who is having
    > trouble installing SP2 wouldn't have this trouble if they cleaned their
    > system of spyware - they are wrong. However, I also have decided that this
    > article does, in fact, cover a particular piece of adware that causes so
    > much trouble with the installation of SP2, Microsoft themselves have
    > basically blocked people from getting SP2 unless it is cleaned from their
    > system first.
    >
    > In my searches, I also found Microsoft has even created their own tool to
    > help remove this particular piece of adware.
    >
    > Adware T.V. Media Program Removal Tool
    > http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=886590
    >
    > Download page for the above tool:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=f94e8b27-b656-45cd-9668-73134a18231b&displaylang=en
    > (Short link: http://snipurl.com/99jw )
    >
    > And again - no wishy-washy language here.
    >
    > "This adware interferes with successful installation of Windows XP Service
    > Pack 2."
    >
    >
    > Hope that settles this issue - which has gone on far too long for something
    > so insignificant in my opinion. *If* someone is giving false advice (saying
    > that the reason most cannot install SP2 is strictly spyware/adware) - they
    > are wrong. *If* someone wants a specific example of adware that causes
    > trouble when trying to install SP2 - this response gives it to them. *If*
    > someone believes someone with a with a properly maintained system should not
    > have trouble installing SP2 - I believe they may be incorrect - there will
    > be systems out there that do not upgrade properly to SP2 for a variety of
    > reasons unrelated to a properly maintained system. Can these problems be
    > corrected as well without the end-user spending money - that remains to be
    > seen.
    >

    I agree completely. My whole point in extending this discussion was that
    there are far too many parrots in these newsgroups who have no idea what
    they're talking about but don't let that stop them from offering advice
    and criticism. A few of these do so with the MS imprimatur,
    unfortunately. The links you uncovered are very well buried, which
    seems to be a general flaw in the MS support site, but I salute you for
    unearthing them.
Ask a new question

Read More

Windows XP