SP1 with Critical Updates vs. SP2

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

What are the differences of SP1 with the critical updates versus SP2 with
critical updates?

Is it just the interface as the 'security settings' in the control panel &
other bells & whistles with everything under the hood, sort to speak, being
the same?

TIA!

--
Regards,

Greg Strong
23 answers Last reply
More about critical updates
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    SP2 is considered a comprehensive "Critical Update" and updates over
    5 million lines of code in Windows XP. You'll experience stronger
    security and a bit more performance by installing SP2.

    Why Service Packs are Better Than Patches
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/community/columns/security/essays/srvpatch.mspx

    Introduction to Windows XP Service Pack 2
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/security/expert/bowman_introtosp2.mspx

    List of fixes included in Windows XP Service Pack 2
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;811113&Product=windowsxpsp2

    Learn About Windows XP Service Pack 2
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/preinstall.mspx

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

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

    "Greg Strong" wrote:

    | What are the differences of SP1 with the critical updates versus SP2 with
    | critical updates?
    |
    | Is it just the interface as the 'security settings' in the control panel &
    | other bells & whistles with everything under the hood, sort to speak, being
    | the same?
    |
    | TIA!
    |
    | --
    | Regards,
    |
    | Greg Strong
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Hi Greg,

    Changes to Functionality in Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2: Part 1: Introduction
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/sp2chngs.mspx

    Release notes for Windows XP Service Pack 2
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;835935

    List of fixes included in Windows XP Service Pack 2
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;811113

    List of fixes in Windows XP Service Pack 1 and Windows XP Service Pack 1a
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324720/

    --
    Regards,
    Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
    http://bertk.mvps.org


    Greg Strong wrote:
    > What are the differences of SP1 with the critical updates
    > versus SP2 with critical updates?
    >
    > Is it just the interface as the 'security settings' in
    > the control panel & other bells & whistles with
    > everything under the hood, sort to speak, being the same?
    >
    > TIA!
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Greg

    SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within XP.. a fully updated SP2 is
    worth way more than a fully updated SP1.. SP2 is not about bells and
    whistles, although it does add one or two..


    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User


    "Greg Strong" <NoJunk@NoJunk4U².com> wrote in message
    news:5oi1g1hdicsdm0vadv9g11qo2j5l6tn7a6@4ax.com...
    > What are the differences of SP1 with the critical updates versus SP2 with
    > critical updates?
    >
    > Is it just the interface as the 'security settings' in the control panel &
    > other bells & whistles with everything under the hood, sort to speak,
    > being
    > the same?
    >
    > TIA!
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Greg Strong
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 17:06:46 GMT, Greg Strong <NoJunk@NoJunk4U².com> wrote:

    >What are the differences of SP1 with the critical updates versus SP2 with
    >critical updates?

    Per http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/default.mspx states:

    "The latest Service Pack for Windows XP—Service Pack 2 (SP2)—is all about
    security, and it’s one of the most important service packs ever released. It
    provides better protection against viruses, hackers, and worms, and includes
    Windows Firewall, Pop-up Blocker for Internet Explorer, and the new Windows
    Security Center."

    Also I believe I used the wrong term "critical updates" and should have used
    "High-priority updates".

    TIA!

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:19:08 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"
    <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

    >SP2 is considered a comprehensive "Critical Update" and updates over
    >5 million lines of code in Windows XP. You'll experience stronger
    >security and a bit more performance by installing SP2.

    I am sure SP2 is more 'comprehensive', but the problem I have is that some
    on-line web sites for jobs will not accept WinXP Pro SP2. In my specific
    experience the Employer is a very highly respected company. BTW they do not
    manufacture/produce computer software. I don't want to provide the company's
    name because I feel this would be somewhat degrading, but do understand their
    budget issues on upgrades with regard to their fiscal policy.

    Thanks for the quick response!

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:31:38 -0400, "Bert Kinney" <bert@NSmvps.org> wrote:

    >Hi Greg,
    >
    >Changes to Functionality in Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2: Part 1: Introduction
    >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/sp2chngs.mspx
    >
    >Release notes for Windows XP Service Pack 2
    >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;835935
    >
    >List of fixes included in Windows XP Service Pack 2
    >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;811113
    >
    >List of fixes in Windows XP Service Pack 1 and Windows XP Service Pack 1a
    >http://support.microsoft.com/kb/324720/

    Thanks for all the links. I'm going to stay with SP1 for now. See Message-ID:
    <m4k1g15clfqldd8mb9th394n98fuhl2a52@4ax.com> for why.

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:42:52 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >Greg
    >
    >SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within XP.. a fully updated SP2 is
    >worth way more than a fully updated SP1..

    In which way? Is an updated SP2 with all high priority updates more secure
    than SP1 updated with all the high priorities? I'll probably read the links
    provided by others. May they will tell me why.

    >SP2 is not about bells and
    >whistles, although it does add one or two..

    Well for now I'm going to stay with SP1 fully updated with high priority
    links. See Message-ID: <m4k1g15clfqldd8mb9th394n98fuhl2a52@4ax.com> for why.

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Greg

    Did you miss this part?.. SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within
    XP..

    Your call

    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User


    "Greg Strong" <NoJunk@NoJunk4U².com> wrote in message
    news:aq92g154fgsf3mh42mmvndau9gnvldka8i@4ax.com...
    > On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 13:42:52 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    > <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >
    >>Greg
    >>
    >>SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within XP.. a fully updated SP2
    >>is
    >>worth way more than a fully updated SP1..
    >
    > In which way? Is an updated SP2 with all high priority updates more secure
    > than SP1 updated with all the high priorities? I'll probably read the
    > links
    > provided by others. May they will tell me why.
    >
    >>SP2 is not about bells and
    >>whistles, although it does add one or two..
    >
    > Well for now I'm going to stay with SP1 fully updated with high priority
    > links. See Message-ID: <m4k1g15clfqldd8mb9th394n98fuhl2a52@4ax.com> for
    > why.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Greg Strong
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    If the quality of the code isn't better than what was done, the
    quantity of code is meaningless, especially it is still contain
    bugs that microsoft feels is "not important" enough to fix but
    claim it is the user's ineptness.

    And if most of the 5 million lines of code is for the firewall,
    ie, outlook, remote access services & messenger services, &
    "windows auto-update", only people using them may want to go
    to sp2.


    On 2005-08-15, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    > Greg
    >
    > Did you miss this part?.. SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within
    > XP..
    >
    > Your call
    >
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    You will both believe what you want to believe, and that is your
    prerogative..

    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User


    <plew@csus_abcdefg.edu> wrote in message
    news:rbydnaDlQ8Hb2ZzeRVn-jA@comcast.com...
    > If the quality of the code isn't better than what was done, the
    > quantity of code is meaningless, especially it is still contain
    > bugs that microsoft feels is "not important" enough to fix but
    > claim it is the user's ineptness.
    >
    > And if most of the 5 million lines of code is for the firewall,
    > ie, outlook, remote access services & messenger services, &
    > "windows auto-update", only people using them may want to go
    > to sp2.
    >
    >
    > On 2005-08-15, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >> Greg
    >>
    >> Did you miss this part?.. SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code
    >> within
    >> XP..
    >>
    >> Your call
    >>
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:55:17 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >Did you miss this part?.. SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within
    >XP..

    No!

    >Your call

    Sure. Did you miss this part? ... "See Message-ID:
    <m4k1g15clfqldd8mb9th394n98fuhl2a52@4ax.com> for why."

    I'd rather be able to apply to a prospective employer AND pass GRC's ShieldsUp
    test at http://www.grc.com/default.htm. The results of the ShieldsUp test are
    "Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating." From what I
    understand security is relative. Security is the perspective that I asked the
    question between SP1 vs SP2. I should have been more clear. This may be a
    difficult question to answer. Those who know the answer, may not what the
    answer known. :)

    SP2 may be the way to go, but not for now. Thanks for your response.

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 23:26:20 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >You will both believe what you want to believe, and that is your
    >prerogative..

    You obviously haven't read what I've posted. It isn't a matter of belief, but
    a matter of capability. I simply can NOT apply to a desired prospective
    employer's on-line application system with WinXP Pro SP2.

    It really is just that simple.

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    With SP2 installed on XP, this is the message I get back from shields up.
    So your suggestion that it won't work with SP2 is obviously wrong.

    Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating. Not a single
    packet - solicited or otherwise - was received from your system as a result
    of our security probing tests. Your system ignored and refused to reply to
    repeated Pings (ICMP Echo Requests). From the standpoint of the passing
    probes of any hacker, this machine does not exist on the Internet. Some
    questionable personal security systems expose their users by attempting to
    "counter-probe the prober", thus revealing themselves. But your system
    wisely remained silent in every way. Very nice.

    "Greg Strong" <NoJunk@NoJunk4U².com> wrote in message
    news:8de2g1lnvndrgdr1fpidsl0dqp9g94buhe@4ax.com...
    > On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 19:55:17 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    > <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >
    >>Did you miss this part?.. SP2 rewrites some 5 million lines of code within
    >>XP..
    >
    > No!
    >
    >>Your call
    >
    > Sure. Did you miss this part? ... "See Message-ID:
    > <m4k1g15clfqldd8mb9th394n98fuhl2a52@4ax.com> for why."
    >
    > I'd rather be able to apply to a prospective employer AND pass GRC's
    > ShieldsUp
    > test at http://www.grc.com/default.htm. The results of the ShieldsUp test
    > are
    > "Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating." From what I
    > understand security is relative. Security is the perspective that I asked
    > the
    > question between SP1 vs SP2. I should have been more clear. This may be a
    > difficult question to answer. Those who know the answer, may not what the
    > answer known. :)
    >
    > SP2 may be the way to go, but not for now. Thanks for your response.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Greg Strong
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:24:45 -0500, "Jone Doe" <fake@nowhere.org>
    wrote:

    >With SP2 installed on XP, this is the message I get back from shields up.
    >So your suggestion that it won't work with SP2 is obviously wrong.

    So you passed GRC's ShieldsUp test with SP2. Unless I'm reading you
    wrong I never said that this would NOT be the case. What I said is I
    could NOT apply for a job with an on-line job application (i.e. web
    based) with a prospective employer. In the documentation and in phone
    conversation with their help desk this is was what I was told.

    So I simply re-installed WinXP Pro with SP1 and all the high priority
    updates. Why? So I can apply for the job. I'm not bashing MS nor
    the prospective employer. I am simply looking for CAPABILITY that is
    important to me in an ever changing personal computer market.

    Regards,


    Greg
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Greg

    Why would SP2 be responsible for you not being able to apply for a job
    online?.. I would love to see the documentation and speak to the person who
    told you this..


    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User


    <4GetIt@4GetIt4U².com> wrote in message
    news:l4v3g1drruok3jcsn87qvu2grqk466ce2f@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:24:45 -0500, "Jone Doe" <fake@nowhere.org>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>With SP2 installed on XP, this is the message I get back from shields up.
    >>So your suggestion that it won't work with SP2 is obviously wrong.
    >
    > So you passed GRC's ShieldsUp test with SP2. Unless I'm reading you
    > wrong I never said that this would NOT be the case. What I said is I
    > could NOT apply for a job with an on-line job application (i.e. web
    > based) with a prospective employer. In the documentation and in phone
    > conversation with their help desk this is was what I was told.
    >
    > So I simply re-installed WinXP Pro with SP1 and all the high priority
    > updates. Why? So I can apply for the job. I'm not bashing MS nor
    > the prospective employer. I am simply looking for CAPABILITY that is
    > important to me in an ever changing personal computer market.
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    >
    > Greg
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    You should read the thread on "Recent Recall of Windows Updates"
    & the associated problem. It does point out explicitly that not
    all ms updates are better than no updates.

    An open mind is needed as ms definitely cannot provide *perfect*
    code/software; if ms did perfect work, updates/service-packs
    wouldn't have been needed.

    On 2005-08-16, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    > You will both believe what you want to believe, and that is your
    > prerogative..
    >
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Yes.. I heard about the update that was pulled.. when I tried to get it, the
    download and install history recorded a fail.. but that is not part of the
    last bunch, and others have reported zero problems with the current
    updates..

    And yes, of course there will always be glitches.. no, not all MS software
    is perfect, and in some cases, MS seems unwilling (or maybe unable) to fix
    some issues.. but we do not live in a perfect world..

    Added to that, there are some who give all of their thinking time to
    bringing down whatever MS produces.. IT terrorists who never show
    themselves, because too many would throw stones at them..

    Re. open minds, they should be open to ALL things.. never, ever think that
    other software houses are any better, because they are not.. and they have
    the same issues.. how do they test their software on every conceivable
    configuration of PC?.. almost every computer is different, and operator
    ability is every bit as big of a variable..

    Instead of seeing the perfect computer as a birthright, I think we should be
    glad that PC's work as well as they do..

    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User


    <plew@csus_abcdefg.edu> wrote in message
    news:9_CdndFR7_lI1Z_eRVn-3g@comcast.com...
    > You should read the thread on "Recent Recall of Windows Updates"
    > & the associated problem. It does point out explicitly that not
    > all ms updates are better than no updates.
    >
    > An open mind is needed as ms definitely cannot provide *perfect*
    > code/software; if ms did perfect work, updates/service-packs
    > wouldn't have been needed.
    >
    > On 2005-08-16, Mike Hall (MS-MVP) <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >> You will both believe what you want to believe, and that is your
    >> prerogative..
    >>
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:17:35 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >Why would SP2 be responsible for you not being able to apply for a job
    >online?.. I would love to see the documentation and speak to the person who
    >told you this..

    Couple things here first. I think I want to try to apply for the job
    on-line with only SP1 installed. Previously I was provided an email
    address to send the application too. Hopefully it is still posted and
    available. If I'm able to apply for the job with an updated version of
    SP1, then this would support their IT help desk's support position.

    Secondly, I will admit when I spoke to the individual at the help desk
    they did not sound well versed, sort to speak, with regard to the
    specifics of the situation. Because I was applying for a job I didn't
    want to push it.

    Third, are you an employee of Microsoft? Maybe this is to much to
    ask. Since this is a professional situation I would only expect this
    situation to be handled in a professional manner. What do I mean?
    Well I would only provide contact information where the individual
    contacting the prospective employer was acting in behalf of Microsoft.
    In order to do so I believe that the person would have to be a
    Microsoft employee.

    REMEMBER, the response from the prospective employer was that they
    were aware of the problem with WinXP. IIRC I believe they referred to
    it as "version 2" which meant no sense to me unless they meant SP2.
    This is why I want to try SP1 in the application process. Their
    response was something to the effect that the upgrade was not in their
    current fiscal budget, and that hopefully this would be corrected in
    the future.

    So in summary:
    1) I'm going to try to apply through the on-line web based solution
    with SP1 installed with high priority updates installed.

    2) Are you a Microsoft employee?

    3) Would you be contact them as a Microsoft employee?

    I only want to insure a professional situation if the information was
    provided.

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Greg

    No, I am not a Microsoft employee.. I am a Microsoft MVP, it being an award
    given by Microsoft to people who they consider to provide a high level of
    volunteer help in public online communities such as this..

    I have no intention of contacting the people that told you to apply for a
    job with only SP1 and updates applied.. even as I type that statement, it
    amuses me.. the kind of thing that one might here in Best Buy or Staples
    (and a whole bunch of other places, unfortunately)..

    A guy in a computer store told me recently that the lower end Toshiba
    laptops can't handle MS Office, that they crash out if you try to type too
    fast in MS Word.. thank god for people like that, or I might never smile..
    the trouble is that some will believe him because they know no better..

    You must do what you feel is right, Greg.. and believe what you want to
    believe.. your prerogative, your call..


    --
    Mike Hall
    MVP - Windows Shell/User


    "Greg Strong" <4GetIt@4GetIt4U².com> wrote in message
    news:s4a4g1149h95275kvaqa9uk9s5ciaqmgsj@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:17:35 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    > <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >
    >>Why would SP2 be responsible for you not being able to apply for a job
    >>online?.. I would love to see the documentation and speak to the person
    >>who
    >>told you this..
    >
    > Couple things here first. I think I want to try to apply for the job
    > on-line with only SP1 installed. Previously I was provided an email
    > address to send the application too. Hopefully it is still posted and
    > available. If I'm able to apply for the job with an updated version of
    > SP1, then this would support their IT help desk's support position.
    >
    > Secondly, I will admit when I spoke to the individual at the help desk
    > they did not sound well versed, sort to speak, with regard to the
    > specifics of the situation. Because I was applying for a job I didn't
    > want to push it.
    >
    > Third, are you an employee of Microsoft? Maybe this is to much to
    > ask. Since this is a professional situation I would only expect this
    > situation to be handled in a professional manner. What do I mean?
    > Well I would only provide contact information where the individual
    > contacting the prospective employer was acting in behalf of Microsoft.
    > In order to do so I believe that the person would have to be a
    > Microsoft employee.
    >
    > REMEMBER, the response from the prospective employer was that they
    > were aware of the problem with WinXP. IIRC I believe they referred to
    > it as "version 2" which meant no sense to me unless they meant SP2.
    > This is why I want to try SP1 in the application process. Their
    > response was something to the effect that the upgrade was not in their
    > current fiscal budget, and that hopefully this would be corrected in
    > the future.
    >
    > So in summary:
    > 1) I'm going to try to apply through the on-line web based solution
    > with SP1 installed with high priority updates installed.
    >
    > 2) Are you a Microsoft employee?
    >
    > 3) Would you be contact them as a Microsoft employee?
    >
    > I only want to insure a professional situation if the information was
    > provided.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Greg Strong
  20. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Computer salesmen have supplanted car salesmen as the biggest
    purveyors of BS. It's like I told a HR person at my last corporate
    job "We don't need Picture badges - we need one with IQ's on it"


    "Mike Hall (MS-MVP)" <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    news:OCH$rOpoFHA.3316@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > Greg
    >
    > No, I am not a Microsoft employee.. I am a Microsoft MVP, it being an
    > award given by Microsoft to people who they consider to provide a high
    > level of volunteer help in public online communities such as this..
    >
    > I have no intention of contacting the people that told you to apply for a
    > job with only SP1 and updates applied.. even as I type that statement, it
    > amuses me.. the kind of thing that one might here in Best Buy or Staples
    > (and a whole bunch of other places, unfortunately)..
    >
    > A guy in a computer store told me recently that the lower end Toshiba
    > laptops can't handle MS Office, that they crash out if you try to type too
    > fast in MS Word.. thank god for people like that, or I might never smile..
    > the trouble is that some will believe him because they know no better..
    >
    > You must do what you feel is right, Greg.. and believe what you want to
    > believe.. your prerogative, your call..
    >
    >
    > --
    > Mike Hall
    > MVP - Windows Shell/User
    >
    >
    > "Greg Strong" <4GetIt@4GetIt4U².com> wrote in message
    > news:s4a4g1149h95275kvaqa9uk9s5ciaqmgsj@4ax.com...
    >> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 12:17:35 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    >> <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Why would SP2 be responsible for you not being able to apply for a job
    >>>online?.. I would love to see the documentation and speak to the person
    >>>who
    >>>told you this..
    >>
    >> Couple things here first. I think I want to try to apply for the job
    >> on-line with only SP1 installed. Previously I was provided an email
    >> address to send the application too. Hopefully it is still posted and
    >> available. If I'm able to apply for the job with an updated version of
    >> SP1, then this would support their IT help desk's support position.
    >>
    >> Secondly, I will admit when I spoke to the individual at the help desk
    >> they did not sound well versed, sort to speak, with regard to the
    >> specifics of the situation. Because I was applying for a job I didn't
    >> want to push it.
    >>
    >> Third, are you an employee of Microsoft? Maybe this is to much to
    >> ask. Since this is a professional situation I would only expect this
    >> situation to be handled in a professional manner. What do I mean?
    >> Well I would only provide contact information where the individual
    >> contacting the prospective employer was acting in behalf of Microsoft.
    >> In order to do so I believe that the person would have to be a
    >> Microsoft employee.
    >>
    >> REMEMBER, the response from the prospective employer was that they
    >> were aware of the problem with WinXP. IIRC I believe they referred to
    >> it as "version 2" which meant no sense to me unless they meant SP2.
    >> This is why I want to try SP1 in the application process. Their
    >> response was something to the effect that the upgrade was not in their
    >> current fiscal budget, and that hopefully this would be corrected in
    >> the future.
    >>
    >> So in summary:
    >> 1) I'm going to try to apply through the on-line web based solution
    >> with SP1 installed with high priority updates installed.
    >>
    >> 2) Are you a Microsoft employee?
    >>
    >> 3) Would you be contact them as a Microsoft employee?
    >>
    >> I only want to insure a professional situation if the information was
    >> provided.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Regards,
    >>
    >> Greg Strong
    >
    >
  21. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:19:41 GMT, Greg Strong <4GetIt@4GetIt4U².com>
    wrote:

    >I only want to insure a professional situation if the information was
    >provided.

    In retrospect I don't think this would be a good ideal under any
    circumstances. Sorry!

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  22. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 14:53:08 -0400, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
    <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:

    >I have no intention of contacting the people that told you to apply for a
    >job with only SP1 and updates applied.. even as I type that statement, it
    >amuses me..


    Well than why did you say the quote below?

    per Message-ID: <eoo4w3noFHA.2484@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>

    "I would love to see the documentation and speak to the person who
    told you this.."

    --
    Regards,

    Greg Strong
  23. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 04:53:13 GMT, Greg Strong <NoJunk@NoJunk4U².com>
    wrote:

    >>You will both believe what you want to believe, and that is your
    >>prerogative..
    >
    >You obviously haven't read what I've posted. It isn't a matter of belief, but
    >a matter of capability. I simply can NOT apply to a desired prospective
    >employer's on-line application system with WinXP Pro SP2.

    Greg Strong,

    That has nothing to do with xp sp1 or xp sp2.
    It is a web-based form? Is it at an acrobat fill-in form?
    Did you try a different browser like firefox?

    Note if it an acrobat fill in form.
    You need to remove acrobat reader then reinstall it,

    Another possibility is that you had a yellow bar pop up in Internet
    explorer and say the activex content has been disabled. You can
    change this action.


    Greg Ro
Ask a new question

Read More

Control Panel Security Microsoft Windows XP