Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SP2 related woes: list any you find here

Last response: in Systems
Share
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 6:15:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

I suppose it's inevitable that SP2 will cause problems. One I know of
is a pal of mine discovered he couldn't ghost drives anymore after
installing SP2.

FWIW, in his business he has a perfectly legitimate reason to ghost
drives. He's got a totally legal copy of the group license version of
XP, precisely for that reason. He called Microsoft tech support and
guess what? It's not a bug, it's a feature!

Another example of Microsoft punishing faithful customers who are honest
people.
August 19, 2004 6:15:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

A feature he asked for? AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes
fine,,,a link to the 'feature' list?
What's he using to ghost it? version number?

"ToolPackinMama" <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:4124456A.3A00C035@lauragoodwin.org...
> I suppose it's inevitable that SP2 will cause problems. One I know
of
> is a pal of mine discovered he couldn't ghost drives anymore after
> installing SP2.
>
> FWIW, in his business he has a perfectly legitimate reason to ghost
> drives. He's got a totally legal copy of the group license version
of
> XP, precisely for that reason. He called Microsoft tech support and
> guess what? It's not a bug, it's a feature!
>
> Another example of Microsoft punishing faithful customers who are
honest
> people.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 7:13:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

JAD wrote:
>
> AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes fine

You actually tried it? I only know what my pal told me.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 7:32:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

ToolPackinMama wrote:

> JAD wrote:
>
>>AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes fine
>
>
> You actually tried it? I only know what my pal told me.

That's why he also asked the particulars of what he was using and how he
was trying to do it.
August 19, 2004 8:02:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Just another item for one of those "urban legends" sites.
SP2 works like a charm on my 2 desktops - one being a PIII 550.

Bwahahahahahahaha !!!!





"ToolPackinMama" <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:4124456A.3A00C035@lauragoodwin.org...
>I suppose it's inevitable that SP2 will cause problems. One I know of
> is a pal of mine discovered he couldn't ghost drives anymore after
> installing SP2.
>
> FWIW, in his business he has a perfectly legitimate reason to ghost
> drives. He's got a totally legal copy of the group license version of
> XP, precisely for that reason. He called Microsoft tech support and
> guess what? It's not a bug, it's a feature!
>
> Another example of Microsoft punishing faithful customers who are honest
> people.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 1:53:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"ToolPackinMama" <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
news:4124456A.3A00C035@lauragoodwin.org...
>I suppose it's inevitable that SP2 will cause problems. One I know of
> is a pal of mine discovered he couldn't ghost drives anymore after
> installing SP2.
>
I've been using the release version of SP2 since last weekend. The only
problem I have found which is definitely caused by SP2 is the 'feature'
which tells you if your third party antivirus is out of date. When SP2 was
installed, it correctly identified that I was running Sophos AV and that it
is up to date. The following day, five minutes after updating the virus
signatures, SP2 told me that my antivirus was out of date. The official
Microsoft response is that they have made an api available to Antivirus
vendors, but that not all have implemented it yet. Sophos have said on their
website that they will implement it in future upgrades. In the meantime, it
is easy enough to turn the feature off.

Another problem which has surfaced is that Nero crashed twice on start-up
after installing SP2, however on my machine it has been doing that on and
off since I 'upgraded' to Nero 6. I suspect some more deep-rooted problem.
In any case Nero 6 has been updated now, and the latest version can be
downloaded from their web site - so presumably any SP2 issues with it have
now been resolved.

I use a few of the other programs mentioned in the infamous '200 programs
that may behave differently with SP2' article:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130&p...
e.g. Diskeeper, Office 2003, Real Player (free) and Zonealarm and have not
noticed any change in them at all. (I have turned off the Windows firewall
and use Zonealarm instead).

John.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 1:53:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Bioboffin wrote:

> "ToolPackinMama" <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote in message
> news:4124456A.3A00C035@lauragoodwin.org...
>
>>I suppose it's inevitable that SP2 will cause problems. One I know of
>>is a pal of mine discovered he couldn't ghost drives anymore after
>>installing SP2.
>>
>
> I've been using the release version of SP2 since last weekend. The only
> problem I have found which is definitely caused by SP2 is the 'feature'
> which tells you if your third party antivirus is out of date. When SP2 was
> installed, it correctly identified that I was running Sophos AV and that it
> is up to date. The following day, five minutes after updating the virus
> signatures, SP2 told me that my antivirus was out of date. The official
> Microsoft response is that they have made an api available to Antivirus
> vendors, but that not all have implemented it yet. Sophos have said on their
> website that they will implement it in future upgrades. In the meantime, it
> is easy enough to turn the feature off.
>
> Another problem which has surfaced is that Nero crashed twice on start-up
> after installing SP2, however on my machine it has been doing that on and
> off since I 'upgraded' to Nero 6. I suspect some more deep-rooted problem.
> In any case Nero 6 has been updated now, and the latest version can be
> downloaded from their web site - so presumably any SP2 issues with it have
> now been resolved.
>
> I use a few of the other programs mentioned in the infamous '200 programs
> that may behave differently with SP2' article:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130&p...
> e.g. Diskeeper, Office 2003, Real Player (free) and Zonealarm and have not
> noticed any change in them at all. (I have turned off the Windows firewall
> and use Zonealarm instead).
>
> John.
>
>

Yeah. I suspect there's going to be a lot of rumors about things 'broken'
when it's merely a firewall issue.

I did do a quick google to see if anything turned up about ghost and I did
find some people complaining about using the windows ghost wizard to
copy/move partitions around on drives with multiple partitions.

Trying to guess the situation from a few reads it looked to me like there
may be a new 'protection' feature that prevents you from ghosting over the
system (boot) partition and that it's also blocking writing a file image to
it as well. From the conversation it appeared that using the ghost boot
floppy works fine, though.

Frankly, I'm holding off on SP2 till the dust settles a bit.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 2:23:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in
news:10i8so1me0vus69@corp.supernews.com:

> Trying to guess the situation from a few reads it looked to me like
> there may be a new 'protection' feature that prevents you from
> ghosting over the system (boot) partition and that it's also blocking
> writing a file image to it as well. From the conversation it appeared
> that using the ghost boot floppy works fine, though.

Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I tried to
backup w/o a boot floppy.

Probably screws Diskeepers boot-time defrag though.

--
Lordy
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 2:23:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Lordy wrote:

> David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in
> news:10i8so1me0vus69@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
>>Trying to guess the situation from a few reads it looked to me like
>>there may be a new 'protection' feature that prevents you from
>>ghosting over the system (boot) partition and that it's also blocking
>>writing a file image to it as well. From the conversation it appeared
>>that using the ghost boot floppy works fine, though.
>
>
> Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
> concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I tried to
> backup w/o a boot floppy.

I can certainly see why the Microsoft rep could have said blocking
destruction of the system partition was a 'feature', though.

Has nothing to do with 'intentionally' breaking ghost.

>
> Probably screws Diskeepers boot-time defrag though.
>

Depends on how diskeeper works I would imagine.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 2:23:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Lordy" <spam_box@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:Xns954A73F3559C2lordybigfootcom@130.133.1.4...
> David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in
> news:10i8so1me0vus69@corp.supernews.com:
>
> > Trying to guess the situation from a few reads it looked to me like
> > there may be a new 'protection' feature that prevents you from
> > ghosting over the system (boot) partition and that it's also blocking
> > writing a file image to it as well. From the conversation it appeared
> > that using the ghost boot floppy works fine, though.
>
> Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
> concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I tried to
> backup w/o a boot floppy.
>
> Probably screws Diskeepers boot-time defrag though.
>
> --
> Lordy

I am constantly puzzled by the continuous negative comments such as the one
expressed by "Lordy" as well as frequent misinformation that I come across
on the various newsgroups that deprecate Symantec's Norton Ghost program. My
experience with that program has been, and continues to be, completely
counter to the negative views expressed by so many posters. I have often
remarked that I wish every software program I use was as simple,
straightforward, and effective as Symantec's Norton Ghost program. Let me
state at the outset that I use Ghost for one and only one purpose - to clone
the contents of one hard drive to another. By making a bit-for-bit copy (not
technically precise perhaps, but correct for all practical purposes) of one'
s working hard drive, you have, what seems to me, the ultimate backup
system. I have used various versions of Ghost over the years, including the
present 2003 version. During that time I estimate I've cloned various hard
drives more than a thousand times. And done so with nary a hiccup. Ghost's
ease of use together with reasonable speed make it a joy to use.



In virtually every case I've come across where the user had experienced
problems with Ghost's cloning operation, I've found the problem arose due to
one of the following factors:

1. User error.

2. Corrupted system files of one kind or another on the source disk.

3. Source or destination disk mechanically/electronically defective.

Rarely have I come across problems that I could attribute to deficiencies of
the Ghost program itself.



If you clone garbage, garbage is what you'll get. Before cloning a hard
drive you must ensure that the drive is free of physical/system defects and
virus-free.



BTW, I've had no difficulty cloning hard drives containing the XP SP2 OS
since installing SP2 a few days ago.



Art
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 4:40:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <41245331.70274D80@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...
> JAD wrote:
> >
> > AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes fine
>
> You actually tried it? I only know what my pal told me.
>
It works fine from a bootable CD/Floppy. The Windows version of it
doesn't work.

--
Conor

Its life Jim but not as we know it.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 5:26:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Lordy" <spam_box@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:Xns954A73F3559C2lordybigfootcom@130.133.1.4...
> David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in
> news:10i8so1me0vus69@corp.supernews.com:
>
>> Trying to guess the situation from a few reads it looked to me like
>> there may be a new 'protection' feature that prevents you from
>> ghosting over the system (boot) partition and that it's also blocking
>> writing a file image to it as well. From the conversation it appeared
>> that using the ghost boot floppy works fine, though.
>
> Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
> concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I tried to
> backup w/o a boot floppy.
>
> Probably screws Diskeepers boot-time defrag though.
>
> --
> Lordy

I just ran a boot-time defrag on two partitions with no problems.

However, to reiterate, I'm not using the Microsoft Firewall. (I want a
firewall that tells me if something is attempting to 'dial out').

John.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 19, 2004 5:26:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Bioboffin wrote:

> "Lordy" <spam_box@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns954A73F3559C2lordybigfootcom@130.133.1.4...
>
>>David Maynard <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in
>>news:10i8so1me0vus69@corp.supernews.com:
>>
>>
>>>Trying to guess the situation from a few reads it looked to me like
>>>there may be a new 'protection' feature that prevents you from
>>>ghosting over the system (boot) partition and that it's also blocking
>>>writing a file image to it as well. From the conversation it appeared
>>>that using the ghost boot floppy works fine, though.
>>
>>Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
>>concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I tried to
>>backup w/o a boot floppy.
>>
>>Probably screws Diskeepers boot-time defrag though.
>>
>>--
>>Lordy
>
>
> I just ran a boot-time defrag on two partitions with no problems.
>
> However, to reiterate, I'm not using the Microsoft Firewall. (I want a
> firewall that tells me if something is attempting to 'dial out').
>
> John.
>

I think the windows ghost version not writing to the system partition is a
wholly different deal than the firewall issue. A firewall blocking ports is
just about the most common firewall 'problem' one can have since that is,
after all, it's intended purpose.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:41:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Bioboffin wrote:

> I've been using the release version of SP2 since last weekend. The only
> problem I have found which is definitely caused by SP2 is the 'feature'
> which tells you if your third party antivirus is out of date. When SP2 was
> installed, it correctly identified that I was running Sophos AV and that it
> is up to date. The following day, five minutes after updating the virus
> signatures, SP2 told me that my antivirus was out of date.

Thank you for your testimony.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:42:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in
news:KMudnRqS9osiN7ncRVn-vg@adelphia.com:

>> Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
>> concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I
>> tried to backup w/o a boot floppy.
>>
>
> I am constantly puzzled by the continuous negative comments such as
> the one expressed by "Lordy" as well as frequent misinformation that I
> come across on the various newsgroups that deprecate Symantec's Norton
> Ghost program. My experience with that program has been, and continues
> to be, completely counter to the negative views expressed by so many
> posters.

I've used ghost happily for years from boot floppies. When it was easy
to find a W98 boot floppy lying around! Prior to my latest incident I
would be in your camp..
The irony is when backup softare trashes your brand new baseline build
(that you was trying to ..er ..backup like the good IT Professional you
are), the memory tends to stick.
Prior to that no problems with simpler, MS-DOS based ghost boots.





Working from BOOT floppies (or better still boot CDS) has always been
good but for BACKUP software to first alter the MBR and create virtual
partitions - thats just asking for trouble if the OS its trying to load
(PC-DOS) doesnt work well in the machine,

IMO due to things like USB2,Firewire drives etc they should move to a
mini Linux Kernel on a boot floppy/cdrom ..

Right now I backup home machines partitions using a Knoppix cd and
partimage. (NTFS partitions need to be defragged first) - Although I
have never tested them (Ouch!), but I do normal file (tar) based backups
too.




My particular nightmare was due to one horrible sequence of events ...

1. No W98 MS-DOS Boot Floppy to hand.
2. PC-DOS boot floppy didnt work on Dell machine.

3. Me Thinking that the backup "via Windows" option would somehow work
differently not realising it simply modifies the boot record and creates
Weird Virtual Partitions at the end of a real partition.

(At this point my Spider senses did start a tingling but I was tired and
I trusted Ghost not to cause me any pain)

4. PC Subsequently fails to boot
5. All rescue options fail (ghrecover (or something like that),
FIXMBR etc nothing worked.
6. Booting with a Knoppix CD and using fdisk showed some of the horrible
stuff ghost did.


--
Lordy
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:42:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Lordy" <spam_box@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:Xns954B769AD15Dlordybigfootcom@130.133.1.4...
> "Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in
> news:KMudnRqS9osiN7ncRVn-vg@adelphia.com:
>
> >> Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as Ghost is
> >> concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when I
> >> tried to backup w/o a boot floppy.
> >>
> >
> > I am constantly puzzled by the continuous negative comments such as
> > the one expressed by "Lordy" as well as frequent misinformation that I
> > come across on the various newsgroups that deprecate Symantec's Norton
> > Ghost program. My experience with that program has been, and continues
> > to be, completely counter to the negative views expressed by so many
> > posters.
>
> I've used ghost happily for years from boot floppies. When it was easy
> to find a W98 boot floppy lying around! Prior to my latest incident I
> would be in your camp..
> The irony is when backup softare trashes your brand new baseline build
> (that you was trying to ..er ..backup like the good IT Professional you
> are), the memory tends to stick.
> Prior to that no problems with simpler, MS-DOS based ghost boots.

Lordy:
I'm totally mystified by your statement that "When it was easy to find a W98
boot floppy lying around..." then (I take it) Ghost was a program you could
live with. What in the world does a Win9x/Me Startup Disk have to do with
Ghost? To use the Ghost cloning program from a floppy (as I do), you simply
create the Ghost boot floppy from the Ghost program. That takes all of three
minutes or so. With your source and destination disks connected, you simply
boot with the Ghost floppy and a half a dozen or so keyclicks later the
cloning process begins. It's that simple, is it not? You can just as easily
create a Ghost bootable CD and undertake your cloning operation through that
means. All this talk about altering the MBR, creating virtual partitions,
Linux Kernels, Knoppix CDs, partimage, "defragging" NTFS partitions, etc.
are beyond my comprehension.

Let me reiterate what I stated in my previous posting -- I have often
remarked that I wish every software program I use was as simple,
straightforward, and effective as Symantec's Norton Ghost program. Let me
state at the outset that I use Ghost for one and only one purpose - to clone
the contents of one hard drive to another. By making a bit-for-bit copy (not
technically precise perhaps, but correct for all practical purposes) of one'
s working hard drive, you have, what seems to me, the ultimate backup
system. I have used various versions of Ghost over the years, including the
present 2003 version. During that time I estimate I've cloned various hard
drives more than a thousand times. And done so with nary a hiccup. Ghost's
ease of use together with reasonable speed make it a joy to use.

Art


> Working from BOOT floppies (or better still boot CDS) has always been
> good but for BACKUP software to first alter the MBR and create virtual
> partitions - thats just asking for trouble if the OS its trying to load
> (PC-DOS) doesnt work well in the machine,
>
> IMO due to things like USB2,Firewire drives etc they should move to a
> mini Linux Kernel on a boot floppy/cdrom ..
>
> Right now I backup home machines partitions using a Knoppix cd and
> partimage. (NTFS partitions need to be defragged first) - Although I
> have never tested them (Ouch!), but I do normal file (tar) based backups
> too.
>
>
>
>
> My particular nightmare was due to one horrible sequence of events ...
>
> 1. No W98 MS-DOS Boot Floppy to hand.
> 2. PC-DOS boot floppy didnt work on Dell machine.
>
> 3. Me Thinking that the backup "via Windows" option would somehow work
> differently not realising it simply modifies the boot record and creates
> Weird Virtual Partitions at the end of a real partition.
>
> (At this point my Spider senses did start a tingling but I was tired and
> I trusted Ghost not to cause me any pain)
>
> 4. PC Subsequently fails to boot
> 5. All rescue options fail (ghrecover (or something like that),
> FIXMBR etc nothing worked.
> 6. Booting with a Knoppix CD and using fdisk showed some of the horrible
> stuff ghost did.
>
>
> --
> Lordy
August 20, 2004 3:42:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

how IS that stock in Symantec doing these days?


"Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in message
news:aYCdnVP4O4pQ9bjcRVn-oQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Lordy" <spam_box@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns954B769AD15Dlordybigfootcom@130.133.1.4...
> > "Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in
> > news:KMudnRqS9osiN7ncRVn-vg@adelphia.com:
> >
> > >> Thats what I was thinking. Probably a good thing as far as
Ghost is
> > >> concerned. It totally hosed a Dell system I was working on when
I
> > >> tried to backup w/o a boot floppy.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I am constantly puzzled by the continuous negative comments such
as
> > > the one expressed by "Lordy" as well as frequent misinformation
that I
> > > come across on the various newsgroups that deprecate Symantec's
Norton
> > > Ghost program. My experience with that program has been, and
continues
> > > to be, completely counter to the negative views expressed by so
many
> > > posters.
> >
> > I've used ghost happily for years from boot floppies. When it was
easy
> > to find a W98 boot floppy lying around! Prior to my latest
incident I
> > would be in your camp..
> > The irony is when backup softare trashes your brand new baseline
build
> > (that you was trying to ..er ..backup like the good IT
Professional you
> > are), the memory tends to stick.
> > Prior to that no problems with simpler, MS-DOS based ghost boots.
>
> Lordy:
> I'm totally mystified by your statement that "When it was easy to
find a W98
> boot floppy lying around..." then (I take it) Ghost was a program
you could
> live with. What in the world does a Win9x/Me Startup Disk have to do
with
> Ghost? To use the Ghost cloning program from a floppy (as I do), you
simply
> create the Ghost boot floppy from the Ghost program. That takes all
of three
> minutes or so. With your source and destination disks connected, you
simply
> boot with the Ghost floppy and a half a dozen or so keyclicks later
the
> cloning process begins. It's that simple, is it not? You can just as
easily
> create a Ghost bootable CD and undertake your cloning operation
through that
> means. All this talk about altering the MBR, creating virtual
partitions,
> Linux Kernels, Knoppix CDs, partimage, "defragging" NTFS partitions,
etc.
> are beyond my comprehension.
>
> Let me reiterate what I stated in my previous posting -- I have
often
> remarked that I wish every software program I use was as simple,
> straightforward, and effective as Symantec's Norton Ghost program.
Let me
> state at the outset that I use Ghost for one and only one purpose -
to clone
> the contents of one hard drive to another. By making a bit-for-bit
copy (not
> technically precise perhaps, but correct for all practical purposes)
of one'
> s working hard drive, you have, what seems to me, the ultimate
backup
> system. I have used various versions of Ghost over the years,
including the
> present 2003 version. During that time I estimate I've cloned
various hard
> drives more than a thousand times. And done so with nary a hiccup.
Ghost's
> ease of use together with reasonable speed make it a joy to use.
>
> Art
>
>
> > Working from BOOT floppies (or better still boot CDS) has always
been
> > good but for BACKUP software to first alter the MBR and create
virtual
> > partitions - thats just asking for trouble if the OS its trying to
load
> > (PC-DOS) doesnt work well in the machine,
> >
> > IMO due to things like USB2,Firewire drives etc they should move
to a
> > mini Linux Kernel on a boot floppy/cdrom ..
> >
> > Right now I backup home machines partitions using a Knoppix cd and
> > partimage. (NTFS partitions need to be defragged first) - Although
I
> > have never tested them (Ouch!), but I do normal file (tar) based
backups
> > too.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > My particular nightmare was due to one horrible sequence of events
....
> >
> > 1. No W98 MS-DOS Boot Floppy to hand.
> > 2. PC-DOS boot floppy didnt work on Dell machine.
> >
> > 3. Me Thinking that the backup "via Windows" option would somehow
work
> > differently not realising it simply modifies the boot record and
creates
> > Weird Virtual Partitions at the end of a real partition.
> >
> > (At this point my Spider senses did start a tingling but I was
tired and
> > I trusted Ghost not to cause me any pain)
> >
> > 4. PC Subsequently fails to boot
> > 5. All rescue options fail (ghrecover (or something like that),
> > FIXMBR etc nothing worked.
> > 6. Booting with a Knoppix CD and using fdisk showed some of the
horrible
> > stuff ghost did.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lordy
>
>
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:43:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

David Maynard wrote:

> Yeah. I suspect there's going to be a lot of rumors about things 'broken'
> when it's merely a firewall issue.

I have no anti-Microsoft agenda, actually. I'm just a humble PC tech
who wants info about the problems my people might run into.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:43:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

ToolPackinMama wrote:

> David Maynard wrote:
>
>
>>Yeah. I suspect there's going to be a lot of rumors about things 'broken'
>>when it's merely a firewall issue.
>
>
> I have no anti-Microsoft agenda, actually. I'm just a humble PC tech
> who wants info about the problems my people might run into.

I didn't mean you, or anyone else who hears a 'rumor' for that matter. It's
just the nature of the beast, as well as general human nature, that rumors
circulate due to insufficient knowledge of what the actual problem is.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:45:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Conor wrote:
>
> In article <41245331.70274D80@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...
> > JAD wrote:
> > >
> > > AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes fine
> >
> > You actually tried it? I only know what my pal told me.
> >
> It works fine from a bootable CD/Floppy. The Windows version of it
> doesn't work.

I am a little confused about what you mean by that. Please clarify?
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:45:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

ToolPackinMama wrote:

> Conor wrote:
>
>>In article <41245331.70274D80@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...
>>
>>>JAD wrote:
>>>
>>>>AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes fine
>>>
>>>You actually tried it? I only know what my pal told me.
>>>
>>
>>It works fine from a bootable CD/Floppy. The Windows version of it
>>doesn't work.
>
>
> I am a little confused about what you mean by that. Please clarify?

There are two ways to run ghost: From a boot floppy or from within windows
while windows is running.

Apparently something in XP's new 'security' features interferes with some
of the things ghost wants to do.

When booted and run from the floppy there is no windows running to
interfere with it.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:47:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Art wrote:

> I am constantly puzzled by the continuous negative comments such as the one
> expressed by "Lordy" as well as frequent misinformation that I come across
> on the various newsgroups that deprecate Symantec's Norton Ghost program. My
> experience with that program has been, and continues to be, completely
> counter to the negative views expressed by so many posters. I have often
> remarked that I wish every software program I use was as simple,
> straightforward, and effective as Symantec's Norton Ghost program. Let me
> state at the outset that I use Ghost for one and only one purpose - to clone
> the contents of one hard drive to another. By making a bit-for-bit copy (not
> technically precise perhaps, but correct for all practical purposes) of one'
> s working hard drive, you have, what seems to me, the ultimate backup
> system.

Well, that's the idea, yes?

> I have used various versions of Ghost over the years, including the
> present 2003 version. During that time I estimate I've cloned various hard
> drives more than a thousand times. And done so with nary a hiccup. Ghost's
> ease of use together with reasonable speed make it a joy to use.

> BTW, I've had no difficulty cloning hard drives containing the XP SP2 OS
> since installing SP2 a few days ago.

Hmm. Very interesting.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:49:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Lordy wrote:

> My particular nightmare was due to one horrible sequence of events ...
>
> 1. No W98 MS-DOS Boot Floppy to hand.
> 2. PC-DOS boot floppy didnt work on Dell machine.
>
> 3. Me Thinking that the backup "via Windows" option would somehow work
> differently not realising it simply modifies the boot record and creates
> Weird Virtual Partitions at the end of a real partition.
>
> (At this point my Spider senses did start a tingling but I was tired and
> I trusted Ghost not to cause me any pain)
>
> 4. PC Subsequently fails to boot
> 5. All rescue options fail (ghrecover (or something like that),
> FIXMBR etc nothing worked.
> 6. Booting with a Knoppix CD and using fdisk showed some of the horrible
> stuff ghost did.

Thank you for your testimony.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:51:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Can we try to stay on-topic? I'm curious to know if you had post-SP2
problems, and if so, what they were - especially if you have a solution.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:53:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out tonight,
and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his pals
about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them MICROSOFT
programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 3:53:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

ToolPackinMama wrote:

> Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out tonight,
> and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his pals
> about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them MICROSOFT
> programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?

That one is a classic case of the 'rumors' syndrome. It's 'true' but the
'impression' of the story I imagine most people would draw from it isn't.

It's the firewall issue. Some applications want internet access from time
to time or else they complain, or "don't work (fully)," and SP2 defaults
the firewall to on, rather than off, and if it doesn't have the 'necessary'
port enabled by default then apps trying to use the closed ports will be
unable to access the internet.

Btw, the "Best Practice" standard for firewalls *is* to install them with
nothing enabled and then manually enable only those things known to be
needed. This, of course, requires some knowledge of what's needed and is
inherently in conflict with the typical 'consumers' expectation for things
to be 'automatic'.

The 'fix' is to enable the appropriate ports in the firewall (or turn it
off, which defeats the point of having it), a perfectly normal process in
'professional' systems. Consumers, as mentioned, are not used to that
('consumer' firewalls try to detect used ports 'automatically') so things
appear to not work and the colloquial description of it being 'broken'
circulates.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 4:44:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

David Maynard wrote:
>
> ToolPackinMama wrote:
>
> > David Maynard wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Yeah. I suspect there's going to be a lot of rumors about things 'broken'
> >>when it's merely a firewall issue.
> >
> >
> > I have no anti-Microsoft agenda, actually. I'm just a humble PC tech
> > who wants info about the problems my people might run into.
>
> I didn't mean you, or anyone else who hears a 'rumor' for that matter. It's
> just the nature of the beast, as well as general human nature, that rumors
> circulate due to insufficient knowledge of what the actual problem is.

I agree, which is why I ask you guys.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 4:45:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

David Maynard wrote:
>
> ToolPackinMama wrote:
>
> > Conor wrote:
> >
> >>In article <41245331.70274D80@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...
> >>
> >>>JAD wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>AFAIHS ghosting a drive with Sp2 XP goes fine
> >>>
> >>>You actually tried it? I only know what my pal told me.
> >>>
> >>
> >>It works fine from a bootable CD/Floppy. The Windows version of it
> >>doesn't work.
> >
> >
> > I am a little confused about what you mean by that. Please clarify?
>
> There are two ways to run ghost: From a boot floppy or from within windows
> while windows is running.
>
> Apparently something in XP's new 'security' features interferes with some
> of the things ghost wants to do.
>
> When booted and run from the floppy there is no windows running to
> interfere with it.

Oh.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 4:58:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

David Maynard wrote:
>
> ToolPackinMama wrote:
>
> > Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out tonight,
> > and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his pals
> > about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them MICROSOFT
> > programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?
>
> That one is a classic case of the 'rumors' syndrome. It's 'true'

So, it's true.

> It's the firewall issue. Some applications want internet access from time
> to time or else they complain, or "don't work (fully)," and SP2 defaults
> the firewall to on, rather than off, and if it doesn't have the 'necessary'
> port enabled by default then apps trying to use the closed ports will be
> unable to access the internet.

Hmm.

> Btw, the "Best Practice" standard for firewalls *is* to install them with
> nothing enabled and then manually enable only those things known to be
> needed. This, of course, requires some knowledge of what's needed and is
> inherently in conflict with the typical 'consumers' expectation for things
> to be 'automatic'.
>
> The 'fix' is to enable the appropriate ports in the firewall (or turn it
> off, which defeats the point of having it), a perfectly normal process in
> 'professional' systems.

I see. So, how does a person do that, step-by-step, precisely?

> Consumers, as mentioned, are not used to that
> ('consumer' firewalls try to detect used ports 'automatically') so things
> appear to not work and the colloquial description of it being 'broken'
> circulates.

Uh, yeah. Not that I mind. I mean, it's money in the bank to me... but
only if I can FIX IT.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 4:59:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

ToolPackinMama wrote:

> David Maynard wrote:
>
>>ToolPackinMama wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out tonight,
>>>and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his pals
>>>about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them MICROSOFT
>>>programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?
>>
>>That one is a classic case of the 'rumors' syndrome. It's 'true'
>
>
> So, it's true.

Uh, snipping the rest of my sentence, where I explain why it can also be
said to be 'not' true, isn't exactly cricket.


>>It's the firewall issue. Some applications want internet access from time
>>to time or else they complain, or "don't work (fully)," and SP2 defaults
>>the firewall to on, rather than off, and if it doesn't have the 'necessary'
>>port enabled by default then apps trying to use the closed ports will be
>>unable to access the internet.
>
>
> Hmm.
>
>
>>Btw, the "Best Practice" standard for firewalls *is* to install them with
>>nothing enabled and then manually enable only those things known to be
>>needed. This, of course, requires some knowledge of what's needed and is
>>inherently in conflict with the typical 'consumers' expectation for things
>>to be 'automatic'.
>>
>>The 'fix' is to enable the appropriate ports in the firewall (or turn it
>>off, which defeats the point of having it), a perfectly normal process in
>>'professional' systems.
>
>
> I see. So, how does a person do that, step-by-step, precisely?

Well, you go into network connections, pick the device (local NIC, dial-up
connection, etc.) of interest and bring up it's properties. Then, under the
advanced tab you see the internet connection firewall is enabled (box
checked). Unchecking the box removes the firewall function and they all
work, since nothing is blocked, as well as opening the system up to any and
all security threats. With the box checked you see the settings button down
below. Push that and you can add/edit/delete the various port settings on
that particular device.


>>Consumers, as mentioned, are not used to that
>>('consumer' firewalls try to detect used ports 'automatically') so things
>>appear to not work and the colloquial description of it being 'broken'
>>circulates.
>
>
> Uh, yeah. Not that I mind. I mean, it's money in the bank to me... but
> only if I can FIX IT.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:14:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in news:aYCdnVP4O4pQ9bjcRVn-
oQ@adelphia.com:

> To use the Ghost cloning program from a floppy (as I do), you simply
> create the Ghost boot floppy from the Ghost program.

As I said towards the end of my prior post :

> 1. No W98 MS-DOS Boot Floppy to hand.
> 2. PC-DOS boot floppy didnt work on Dell machine.

Ghost uses PC-DOS if you dont have a W98 MS-DOS boot image to hand. It was
this that the Dell box didnt like (or vice versa) when loading the mouse
drivers IIRC. PC-DOS is a MS-DOS clone (or rival cant remember which). PC-
DOS was hanging and there was no simple way to get back the MBR (I tried
the ways recommened at Norton site when this problem happens - and on the
forums there it still didnt fix things. neither did FIXMBR etc)

On other boards PC-DOS has been no problems.

--
Lordy
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:19:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in news:aYCdnVP4O4pQ9bjcRVn-
oQ@adelphia.com:

> All this talk about altering the MBR, creating virtual partitions,

Ghost 2003 has an option to backup without using a boot floppy,
its nice and point'n'clicky - but if it goes wrong your system (or at least
your partition table and MBR) get hosed. This is a bad strategy for backup
software. Because you use boot floppys you have avoided this user friendly
feature.

I use boot floppies too - except in this case PC-DOS (the DOS used by
GHOST) didnt work on the Dell bespoke mobo (for reasons I havent looked
into) - thats when I tried the (backup without boot floppy option)

> Linux Kernels, Knoppix CDs, partimage, "defragging" NTFS partitions, etc.
> are beyond my comprehension.

OK

--
Lordy
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:19:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Lordy wrote:
>
> "Art" <Anonymous@notanisp.com> wrote in news:aYCdnVP4O4pQ9bjcRVn-
> oQ@adelphia.com:
>
> > All this talk about altering the MBR, creating virtual partitions,
>
> Ghost 2003 has an option to backup without using a boot floppy,
> its nice and point'n'clicky - but if it goes wrong your system (or at least
> your partition table and MBR) get hosed. This is a bad strategy for backup
> software.

I totally agree.

> Because you use boot floppys you have avoided this user friendly
> feature.

I still think that every PC should have a floppy drive. Am I wrong?
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:28:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

ToolPackinMama <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote in
news:412574C0.5D3A588C@lauragoodwin.org:

> Thank you for your testimony.

FWIW this was before SP2!

--
Lordy
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:28:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Lordy wrote:
>
> ToolPackinMama <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote in
> news:412574C0.5D3A588C@lauragoodwin.org:
>
> > Thank you for your testimony.
>
> FWIW this was before SP2!

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

And since then?
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:41:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <aYCdnVP4O4pQ9bjcRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Art says...

> Lordy:

<snip advert for Ghost>

Personally I prefer BootIT. Far better than Ghost, nice GUI, fits on a
floppy, does partitioning including nix partitions and clones drives
too. Best part is it costs shitloads less than Ghost.

--
Conor

Its life Jim but not as we know it.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 8:41:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Conor wrote:
>
> In article <aYCdnVP4O4pQ9bjcRVn-oQ@adelphia.com>, Art says...
>
> > Lordy:
>
> <snip advert for Ghost>
>
> Personally I prefer BootIT. Far better than Ghost, nice GUI, fits on a
> floppy, does partitioning including nix partitions and clones drives
> too. Best part is it costs shitloads less than Ghost.

Hmm...!
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 2:31:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <412575D2.B65E7D0D@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...
> Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out tonight,
> and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his pals
> about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them MICROSOFT
> programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?
>

False:

1) Some outdated versions of non MS programs don't work. These are
mainly ones that come across the DEP problem over accessing memory. It
can be worked around by disabling DEP for that particular program or
updating it to one that does work.

2) Some "features" of MS programs don't work. By features I mean doing
things the wrong way. Do it as you should and they work.

Baically programs should run. Nero6 prior to the latest release
apparently isn't SP2 compatible but I was using a 6.0.x release since
the first SP2 release candidate.


--
Conor

Its life Jim but not as we know it.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 2:32:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <41258513.946FE6FB@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...

> I see. So, how does a person do that, step-by-step, precisely?
>
Go to Start, Control Panel, Windows Firewall. Click on Exceptions tab
and eithe Add program or Add port.



--
Conor

Its life Jim but not as we know it.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 2:33:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <41258189.3AB4A471@lauragoodwin.org>, ToolPackinMama says...

> I still think that every PC should have a floppy drive. Am I wrong?
>
Yes. Floppies die very easily. Head alignment can differ between two
drives. A bootable CDR is far preferable.

--
Conor

Its life Jim but not as we know it.
August 20, 2004 9:41:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:15:06 -0400, ToolPackinMama
<laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote:

>I suppose it's inevitable that SP2 will cause problems. One I know of
>is a pal of mine discovered he couldn't ghost drives anymore after
>installing SP2.
>
>FWIW, in his business he has a perfectly legitimate reason to ghost
>drives. He's got a totally legal copy of the group license version of
>XP, precisely for that reason. He called Microsoft tech support and
>guess what? It's not a bug, it's a feature!
>
>Another example of Microsoft punishing faithful customers who are honest
>people.
The only problem I has was with DivX... Right clicking a folder
caused explorer to crash... once I removed DivX the computer was
fine...
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 11:11:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:53:54 -0400, ToolPackinMama
<laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote:

>Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out tonight,
>and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his pals
>about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them MICROSOFT
>programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?

Mamma where you interested in the geek boy or what they were
saying?...lol

MS own words...Programs that are known to experience a loss of
functionality when they run on a Windows XP Service Pack 2-based
computer....NOTE: "experience a loss of functionality" that doesn't
mean it wont work.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130&p...

List of fixes included in Windows XP Service Pack 2
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=811113

IMHO most of the problems are with the firewall and the user settings.
As a previous poster remark, the auto settings for consumers is the
cause of most problems. MS get shot if they leave them open and get
shot if they close them....lol

For me the simplest way is disable the XP firewall and use a third
party one which blocks outgoing too....So far I haven't had any
problems with the systems I have installed it.
On a customers system I just open what they ask me too, if they don't
have a third party firewall.
No one has come back to me complaining YET!...only time will
tell...lol

RedBack
August 20, 2004 11:11:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"RedBack" <redback@spider.net> wrote in message
news:fehbi05acuge3enl7m5f3r4cklheavb981@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:53:54 -0400, ToolPackinMama
> <laura@lauragoodwin.org> wrote:
>
> >Look, I'll be blunt: I was picking up some Chinese take-out
tonight,
> >and I overheard a nice-looking tattooed geek boy complaining to his
pals
> >about all the progams that are broken by SP2... many of them
MICROSOFT
> >programs, he emphasized. Is it true, or false? Comments?
>
> Mamma where you interested in the geek boy or what they were
> saying?...lol
>
> MS own words...Programs that are known to experience a loss of
> functionality when they run on a Windows XP Service Pack 2-based
> computer....NOTE: "experience a loss of functionality" that doesn't
> mean it wont work.
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130&p...
>
> List of fixes included in Windows XP Service Pack 2
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=811113
>
> IMHO most of the problems are with the firewall and the user
settings.
> As a previous poster remark, the auto settings for consumers is the
> cause of most problems. MS get shot if they leave them open and get
> shot if they close them....lol
>
> For me the simplest way is disable the XP firewall and use a third
> party one which blocks outgoing too....So far I haven't had any
> problems with the systems I have installed it.
> On a customers system I just open what they ask me too, if they
don't
> have a third party firewall.
> No one has come back to me complaining YET!...only time will
> tell...lol
>
> RedBack

ok, all well and good, but tell me this , doesn't ms run these patches
on at least 5 machines before releasing a patch, fix, service pack
....or dis-service pac...as it may be.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 20, 2004 11:11:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

In article <10ibi7bd9j9h602@corp.supernews.com>, JAD says...

>
> ok, all well and good, but tell me this , doesn't ms run these patches
> on at least 5 machines before releasing a patch, fix, service pack
> ...or dis-service pac...as it may be.

If this was Linux, you wouldn't be complaining but instead shouting
about how all ports are closed and only the ones you need are open.
You'd be shouting how security in Linux was far better than Windows
because of extra steps taken to open files/do things properly.

MS is altering the way things are done. Things now have to be done more
correctly and security orientated which means that the things which
allowed all the haphazard way users do stuff has come to an end and
they're going to have to do things properly. Programmers are no longer
going to be able to rely on using the way Windows behaves when accessed
incorrectly to mask bad programming.



--
Conor

Its life Jim but not as we know it.
August 20, 2004 11:11:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Conor" <conor.turton@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b8fe630989d05a09896bc@news.claranews.com...
> In article <10ibi7bd9j9h602@corp.supernews.com>, JAD says...
>
> >
> > ok, all well and good, but tell me this , doesn't ms run these
patches
> > on at least 5 machines before releasing a patch, fix, service
pack
> > ...or dis-service pac...as it may be.
>
> If this was Linux, you wouldn't be complaining but instead shouting
> about how all ports are closed and only the ones you need are open.
> You'd be shouting how security in Linux was far better than Windows
> because of extra steps taken to open files/do things properly.
>
> MS is altering the way things are done. Things now have to be done
more
> correctly and security orientated which means that the things which
> allowed all the haphazard way users do stuff has come to an end and
> they're going to have to do things properly. Programmers are no
longer
> going to be able to rely on using the way Windows behaves when
accessed
> incorrectly to mask bad programming.
>
>
>
good point and very true the longer sloppyness is allowed to
progress, the more it seems it becomes the normal way to do
things -human nature .......i wouldn't complain about linux as i was
on the 12 step program to rid myself of the desire to use it.


Joe

Damn it Jim, I'm a doctor, not a visual basic programmer.


> --
> Conor
>
> Its life Jim but not as we know it.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
August 23, 2004 2:11:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

RedBack wrote:

> MS own words...Programs that are known to experience a loss of
> functionality when they run on a Windows XP Service Pack 2-based
> computer....

> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130&p...

> NOTE: "experience a loss of functionality" that doesn't
> mean it wont work.

NOTE: programs are not sentient, so IMHO they don't experience
anything.

> For me the simplest way is disable the XP firewall and use a third
> party one which blocks outgoing too....So far I haven't had any
> problems with the systems I have installed it.
> On a customers system I just open what they ask me too, if they don't
> have a third party firewall.
> No one has come back to me complaining YET!...only time will
> tell...lol

I see. Thank you.
!