Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (
More info?)
Unknown wrote:
> If not careless or stupid, how do you explain your problem?
> "Herb Fritatta" <Herb@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:10lb450nddghi1b@corp.supernews.com...
>
>> Chuck Davis wrote:
>>
>>> Your computer will remain more secure if you simply put the program
>>> that you want to have access to the internet in the Exceptions list
>>> rather than opening a port after SP2 install.
>>>
>>> Colin, "SP2 is not so much buggy as picky. " With the problems and
>>> symptoms reported here, I am convinced that it is only 'picky' when
>>> installed on heavily tweaked and underprotected systems. "Colin
>>> Barnhorst" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> The network should work, but review:
>>>>
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.aspx
>>>> and
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/sp2_whattoknow.mspx
>>>> and especially
>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;ln;xpsp2swhw.
>>>>
>>>> The point is that some programs that communicate across the network
>>>> may require you to open specific ports in the firewall before
>>>> operating as they did before. For example, if you are doing backups
>>>> over your network then navigate to the manufacturer's website and
>>>> look for SP2 info to see if you will be taking a few extra steps.
>>>> SP2 is not so much buggy as picky.
>>>>
>>>> "DD" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:34b701c4a282$a4fb7e50$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> Will the fire wall work with my home network, or will I
>>>>> not be able to use the network. Also can Service pack 2
>>>>> be uninstalled if need be.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> "Heavily tweaked" sounds suspiciously tautological. When you apply
>> such exclusivity by saying SP2 is "...only 'picky' when installed on
>> heavily tweaked and underprotected systems," you're forming a
>> self-fulfilling prophecy. My own experience suggests otherwise. I've
>> installed it on two systems, a laptop and a desktop. It caused no end
>> of grief on the desktop system, ultimately requiring a complete
>> reinstallation, but presented no immediate problems on the laptop. The
>> laptop is in the custody of my 18-year-old college student son, and
>> has been, as you put it, "heavily tweaked" *and* "underprotected" in
>> that he's not always real careful about downloads and keeping his
>> virus definitions up to date. The desktop, on the other hand, has
>> been kept scrupulously clean and there has been *no* "tweaking" done
>> on it to speak of. In both cases, prior to installation, all of the
>> recommended precautionary measures were taken. Part of my own problem
>> with the desktop was that I didn't have a disk image (*highly*
>> recommended) but at least I did have a recent comprehensive data
>> backup, so nothing important was lost. My hackles get raised when
>> people here suggest that SP2 is safe unless the user has been careless
>> or stupid. I am neither, I assure you.
>
>
Well, let's see. If I have Windows XP, SP1, a firewall, antivirus
software with definitions religiously kept up to date, regular runs of
anti-adware/spyware programs which are always updated before running
them, I follow all of the recommended pre-installation precautions for
SP2, my hardware has no known conflicts and I have done everything
humanly possible to insure a clean install and SP2 still blows up in my
face, how do YOU explain my problem, a#$hole?
Rg5d.10614$Qv5.5082@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram