Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Windows XP - SP2?

Last response: in Computer Brands
Share
June 12, 2005 12:23:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.

I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.

I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
browser, but occasinally use IE

I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
precautions because I've not installed SP2.

Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
removed?

TIA

Louise

More about : windows sp2

June 12, 2005 12:36:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

By all means do SP2. Lose the Sygate and use SP2's firewall. Enable
Automatic Updates and use a good spyware checker.

"Louise" <none@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d1514727ec2e4a7989897@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
> Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>
> I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
> system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
> am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>
> I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
> attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
> browser, but occasinally use IE
>
> I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
> precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>
> Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
> removed?
>
> TIA
>
> Louise
June 12, 2005 12:38:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Louise" <none@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d1514727ec2e4a7989897@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
> Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>
> I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
> system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
> am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>
> I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
> attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
> browser, but occasinally use IE
>
> I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
> precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>
> Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
> removed?
>
> TIA
>
> Louise

my M60 is still XP Pro SP1 and running fine interneting and all (Norton IS
Firewall is installed)...........it hates SP2 as I've tried loading it twice
always with problems. I'll install SP2 when I do a full reinstall sometime
in the future.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 2:29:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Louise;
You probably should install SP-2.
SP-2 will not prevent you from receiving attachments.
If you do lose access to attachments, it is an easy setting in
Tools/Options/Security to regain access.

You are less likely to have problems associated with SP-2 on a well
maintained computer.
If necessary, SP-2 can be uninstalled through Add/Remove Programs.

Also see:
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm

--
Jupiter Jones
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Louise" <none@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d1514727ec2e4a7989897@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
> Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>
> I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
> system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
> am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>
> I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
> attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
> browser, but occasinally use IE
>
> I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
> precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>
> Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
> removed?
>
> TIA
>
> Louise
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 3:01:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

> Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for paranoid
> techies and not the average user.

Oh please. An infected machine phoning home is more likely a problem of an
average user than a techie. You're wrong.
June 12, 2005 3:15:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:p 2Kqe.128523$w15.95775@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> > Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for
paranoid
> > techies and not the average user.
>
> Oh please. An infected machine phoning home is more likely a problem of
an
> average user than a techie. You're wrong.

WOW, haven't found yours yet I see. An infected machine phoning home
doesn't come to pass when a good incoming firewall, virus and spyware
checkers are in place. As I said outgoing firewall checking is for paranoid
techies and not the average user who wont take the time to configure it
properly anyway. Have you really ever dealt with these issues in the real
world.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 3:17:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

By all means, do not use windows firewall. It is a bandaid only, and does
not mask all ports. While it may be (arguably) better than no firewall, it
is not much better than no firewall at all. Stick with Sygate. With a NAT
Router and NAV, you will have very good protection. I would recommend going
to www.grc.com and running the ShieldsUp! link there...it will check your
ports. Quite often routers leave port 113 visible, so you would have to set
your router up to forward that port.

And to answer you original question, I would very highly recommend
installation of SP2.

Bobby

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:7XHqe.309119$cg1.268712@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> By all means do SP2. Lose the Sygate and use SP2's firewall. Enable
> Automatic Updates and use a good spyware checker.
>
> "Louise" <none@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d1514727ec2e4a7989897@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
>> Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>>
>> I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
>> system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
>> am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>>
>> I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
>> attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
>> browser, but occasinally use IE
>>
>> I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
>> precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>>
>> Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
>> removed?
>>
>> TIA
>>
>> Louise
>
>
June 12, 2005 3:20:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"NoNoBadDog!" <no_@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
news:p hKqe.3986$L65.2764@trnddc05...
> By all means, do not use windows firewall. It is a bandaid only, and does
> not mask all ports. While it may be (arguably) better than no firewall,
it
> is not much better than no firewall at all.

You're mistaken. Cite a reference.

> Stick with Sygate. With a NAT
> Router and NAV, you will have very good protection. I would recommend
going
> to www.grc.com and running the ShieldsUp! link there...it will check your
> ports. Quite often routers leave port 113 visible, so you would have to
set
> your router up to forward that port.
>
> And to answer you original question, I would very highly recommend
> installation of SP2.

Got that one right.

>
> Bobby
>
> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
> news:7XHqe.309119$cg1.268712@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > By all means do SP2. Lose the Sygate and use SP2's firewall. Enable
> > Automatic Updates and use a good spyware checker.
> >
> > "Louise" <none@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.1d1514727ec2e4a7989897@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
> >> Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
> >>
> >> I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
> >> system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook
and
> >> am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
> >>
> >> I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
> >> attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
> >> browser, but occasinally use IE
> >>
> >> I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
> >> precautions because I've not installed SP2.
> >>
> >> Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
> >> removed?
> >>
> >> TIA
> >>
> >> Louise
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 3:23:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:MVJqe.936344$w62.389531@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Pen" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:ZtKdnWeY_8oYzTbfRVn-sA@adelphia.com...
>> I've got 3 machines running sp2 with never a problem.
>
> That represent 99% of the user experience.
>
>> I think you should do it. The firewall is fine, but it
>> only works on incoming.
>
> Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for paranoid
> techies and not the average user.
>


So now we see the true level of expertise that "fred" has to offer. This
single quote from him should earn him the disrespect he deserves. Anyone
who believes that inbound protection is sufficient should not be allowed to
give advice about computer security. If he were more of a nuisance, he
would be a danger.

For the benefit of those who are reading this post...outbound monitoring is
as important as inbound monitoring. There is a significant amount of
malware out there will do all kinds of things on your computer that you
would never know about without a good program that will alert you when a
program or a process tries to access the Internet.

Fred seems to think he knows a lot, yet has been giving quite a bit of
inaccurate advice lately.

Please take anything this man posts with a grain of slat, and be sure to
read the follow on posts to get a better and more accurate view.

Bobby
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 3:38:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:KgKqe.936456$w62.86966@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
> news:p 2Kqe.128523$w15.95775@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> > Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for
> paranoid
>> > techies and not the average user.
>>
>> Oh please. An infected machine phoning home is more likely a problem of
> an
>> average user than a techie. You're wrong.
>
> WOW, haven't found yours yet I see. An infected machine phoning home
> doesn't come to pass when a good incoming firewall, virus and spyware
> checkers are in place. As I said outgoing firewall checking is for
> paranoid
> techies and not the average user who wont take the time to configure it
> properly anyway. Have you really ever dealt with these issues in the real
> world.
>
>

Hmm, 24 years IT experience
CIO (and COO) of a billion dollar company

Nah, never have.

You're as bad as the people that claim Macs can't get infected. You're
giving bad advice to novices. You CAN get infected with the XP firewall.

You think a novice is never going to use a floppy? A burned CD? A burned
DVD? A USB key?
June 12, 2005 3:56:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"NoNoBadDog!" <no_@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
news:wnKqe.4320$2K4.2317@trnddc08...
>
> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
> news:MVJqe.936344$w62.389531@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > "Pen" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> > news:ZtKdnWeY_8oYzTbfRVn-sA@adelphia.com...
> >> I've got 3 machines running sp2 with never a problem.
> >
> > That represent 99% of the user experience.
> >
> >> I think you should do it. The firewall is fine, but it
> >> only works on incoming.
> >
> > Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for
paranoid
> > techies and not the average user.
> >
>
>
> So now we see the true level of expertise that "fred" has to offer. This
> single quote from him should earn him the disrespect he deserves. Anyone
> who believes that inbound protection is sufficient should not be allowed
to
> give advice about computer security. If he were more of a nuisance, he
> would be a danger.

Why don't you address your weirdo trash to the designers of MS's firewall
who adroitly recognized that outgoing is unneeded for the ordinary user with
a good virus and spyware checker.

> For the benefit of those who are reading this post...outbound monitoring
is
> as important as inbound monitoring. There is a significant amount of
> malware out there will do all kinds of things on your computer that you
> would never know about without a good program that will alert you when a
> program or a process tries to access the Internet.

And such spyware/malware doesn't exist on a PC with a good virus and spyware
checkers. The usual incompetent NG trolls with broken killfiles such be
ignored.

> Fred seems to think he knows a lot, yet has been giving quite a bit of
> inaccurate advice lately.

The astute NG reader who does good research will be able to see where good
advice comes from. Cream rises just like the truth.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 4:40:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:GSKqe.936645$w62.807983@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "NoNoBadDog!" <no_@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:wnKqe.4320$2K4.2317@trnddc08...
>>
>> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
>> news:MVJqe.936344$w62.389531@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> >
>> > "Pen" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> > news:ZtKdnWeY_8oYzTbfRVn-sA@adelphia.com...
>> >> I've got 3 machines running sp2 with never a problem.
>> >
>> > That represent 99% of the user experience.
>> >
>> >> I think you should do it. The firewall is fine, but it
>> >> only works on incoming.
>> >
>> > Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for
> paranoid
>> > techies and not the average user.
>> >
>>
>>
>> So now we see the true level of expertise that "fred" has to offer. This
>> single quote from him should earn him the disrespect he deserves. Anyone
>> who believes that inbound protection is sufficient should not be allowed
> to
>> give advice about computer security. If he were more of a nuisance, he
>> would be a danger.
>
> Why don't you address your weirdo trash to the designers of MS's firewall
> who adroitly recognized that outgoing is unneeded for the ordinary user
> with
> a good virus and spyware checker.
>
>> For the benefit of those who are reading this post...outbound monitoring
> is
>> as important as inbound monitoring. There is a significant amount of
>> malware out there will do all kinds of things on your computer that you
>> would never know about without a good program that will alert you when a
>> program or a process tries to access the Internet.
>
> And such spyware/malware doesn't exist on a PC with a good virus and
> spyware
> checkers. The usual incompetent NG trolls with broken killfiles such be
> ignored.
>
>> Fred seems to think he knows a lot, yet has been giving quite a bit of
>> inaccurate advice lately.
>
> The astute NG reader who does good research will be able to see where good
> advice comes from. Cream rises just like the truth.
>
>

Ah, yes, we should trust MS with our security. They've NEVER released
anything with security holes.

Best laug I've had all night.

Tom
June 12, 2005 5:10:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:QvLqe.78156$VH2.25822@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
> news:GSKqe.936645$w62.807983@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > "NoNoBadDog!" <no_@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
> > news:wnKqe.4320$2K4.2317@trnddc08...
> >>
> >> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
> >> news:MVJqe.936344$w62.389531@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >> >
> >> > "Pen" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:ZtKdnWeY_8oYzTbfRVn-sA@adelphia.com...
> >> >> I've got 3 machines running sp2 with never a problem.
> >> >
> >> > That represent 99% of the user experience.
> >> >
> >> >> I think you should do it. The firewall is fine, but it
> >> >> only works on incoming.
> >> >
> >> > Incoming is all that's needed for good security. Outgoing is for
> > paranoid
> >> > techies and not the average user.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> So now we see the true level of expertise that "fred" has to offer.
This
> >> single quote from him should earn him the disrespect he deserves.
Anyone
> >> who believes that inbound protection is sufficient should not be
allowed
> > to
> >> give advice about computer security. If he were more of a nuisance, he
> >> would be a danger.
> >
> > Why don't you address your weirdo trash to the designers of MS's
firewall
> > who adroitly recognized that outgoing is unneeded for the ordinary user
> > with
> > a good virus and spyware checker.
> >
> >> For the benefit of those who are reading this post...outbound
monitoring
> > is
> >> as important as inbound monitoring. There is a significant amount of
> >> malware out there will do all kinds of things on your computer that you
> >> would never know about without a good program that will alert you when
a
> >> program or a process tries to access the Internet.
> >
> > And such spyware/malware doesn't exist on a PC with a good virus and
> > spyware
> > checkers. The usual incompetent NG trolls with broken killfiles such be
> > ignored.
> >
> >> Fred seems to think he knows a lot, yet has been giving quite a bit of
> >> inaccurate advice lately.
> >
> > The astute NG reader who does good research will be able to see where
good
> > advice comes from. Cream rises just like the truth.
> >
> >
>
> Ah, yes, we should trust MS with our security. They've NEVER released
> anything with security holes.
>
> Best laug I've had all night.

They always expose themselves.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 5:23:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:rYLqe.309738$cg1.81349@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

> They always expose themselves.
>
>
You like to expose yourself? I think you're in the wrong newsgroup.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 6:48:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:23:03 GMT, Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:

>Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>
>I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
>system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
>am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>
>I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
>attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
>browser, but occasinally use IE
>
>I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
>precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>
>Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
>removed?
>
>TIA
>
>Louise


I am into flight simming and when I installed SP2 it screwed my system
up big time. I had to uninstall it and use system restore to get
everything back to normal. Microsoft claims that about 15% of people
installing SP2 will have issues with it. That is much to big a risk
to take for me. If you have good firewall and anti virus, you
shouldn't have to worry. Best thing is to stay away from attachments
from people you don't know.

Bob
June 12, 2005 7:17:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vf8na1dp9pspq9a0bv0g05ro423kp3lgvt@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:23:03 GMT, Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
> >
> >I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
> >system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
> >am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
> >
> >I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
> >attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
> >browser, but occasinally use IE
> >
> >I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
> >precautions because I've not installed SP2.
> >
> >Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
> >removed?
> >
> >TIA
> >
> >Louise
>
>
> I am into flight simming and when I installed SP2 it screwed my system
> up big time. I had to uninstall it and use system restore to get
> everything back to normal. Microsoft claims that about 15% of people
> installing SP2 will have issues with it.

Nonsense. Cite a reference.

> That is much to big a risk
> to take for me.

The only risk is not staying current.

> If you have good firewall and anti virus, you
> shouldn't have to worry. Best thing is to stay away from attachments
> from people you don't know.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 7:31:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Bob;
"Microsoft claims that about 15% of people installing SP2 will have issues
with it."
"issues" is ANYTHING from the smallest undesired change such as the change
in color on the boot screen to major problems.
Do not make the mistake that "issues" means major problems...very rare.
Most of those are simple settings adjustments such as disabling the Windows
Firewall when it is not needed.
Other issues are easily fixed by software or hardware updates from the
manufacturer.
Most of those would not have even been issues if the owner had researched
those items.

Other issues are caused by computers already damaged with spyware and other
problems, known or unknown.
Preparation, research and a well maintained computer is less likely to have
any problems.

What do other flight simmers do?
I see few problems with SP-2 in the sim newsgroups I watch.

If you choose not to install SP-2, be sure it is for the correct reason.

--
Jupiter Jones
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vf8na1dp9pspq9a0bv0g05ro423kp3lgvt@4ax.com...
> I am into flight simming and when I installed SP2 it screwed my system
> up big time. I had to uninstall it and use system restore to get
> everything back to normal. Microsoft claims that about 15% of people
> installing SP2 will have issues with it. That is much to big a risk
> to take for me. If you have good firewall and anti virus, you
> shouldn't have to worry. Best thing is to stay away from attachments
> from people you don't know.
>
> Bob
June 12, 2005 11:44:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:23:03 GMT, Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:

>Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>
>I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
>system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook and
>am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>
>I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
>attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
>browser, but occasinally use IE
>
>I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
>precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>
>Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
>removed?
>
>TIA
>
>Louise


From what I 've read you're not alone. Most large companies (75% of
them surveyed) did NOT upgrade to sp2, just stayed at sp1. I upgraded
to SP2 at home and it caused no less problems for me than SP1. I'm no
security expert and altho you can read about the differences of the
two versions on Microsoft's web site, I really don't think you will
notice any difference in security. I think good habits, using good
software (aside from your OS) will do more to protect you than the
version of OS you use. The only thing I might do different than what
you are doing is to avoid Outlook for my email and use a 3rd party
email software because it seems most viri target MS products.
Personally I don't like Norton products (in my past experience, they
use too much resources and at times caused my system to crash) but if
it works for you and you are happy, leave it alone.

Further, I wouldn't worry whether you use SP1 or 2 because I find
Microsoft vulnerable regardless and would hardly count on them for
security. As I said earlier, count on your good habits and other
software to protect you. Should you decide to go to SP2, make sure
your existing software (version number as well) will behave well under
SP2. Considering the time and difference in security (if any for SP1
to 2) and incompatibilities possible on your system, I might just stay
with SP1 since it works fine on your system with your existing
software.
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 3:39:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:
>I've avoided installing SP2

IMHO, you should do a good backup, perform all applicable Windows
Updates except SP2, plus BIOS and driver updates from device
manufacturers and/or Dell applicable to your machine (see the other
thread), ensure you are virus and spyware free, do another backup, and
then apply SP2. [And then, of course, apply all the Windows Updates
for SP2, rinse, lather, repeat.]
Anonymous
June 12, 2005 11:29:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 03:31:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:

>Bob;
>"Microsoft claims that about 15% of people installing SP2 will have issues
>with it."
>"issues" is ANYTHING from the smallest undesired change such as the change
>in color on the boot screen to major problems.
>Do not make the mistake that "issues" means major problems...very rare.
>Most of those are simple settings adjustments such as disabling the Windows
>Firewall when it is not needed.
>Other issues are easily fixed by software or hardware updates from the
>manufacturer.
>Most of those would not have even been issues if the owner had researched
>those items.
>
>Other issues are caused by computers already damaged with spyware and other
>problems, known or unknown.
>Preparation, research and a well maintained computer is less likely to have
>any problems.
>
>What do other flight simmers do?
>I see few problems with SP-2 in the sim newsgroups I watch.
>
>If you choose not to install SP-2, be sure it is for the correct reason.

Issues are having a frame rate in the mid 20's or more , with no
jerkiness in the graphics suddenly switch to more of a slide show
presentation, with the Flight Simulator. If your firewall and
antivirus are so in effectual that you need SP2 to protect you, it is
time to seek out a new Antivirus and firewall program


Many flight simmers ( remember the 15% ), have had to resort to
sometimes having to reinstall the Microsoft Flight Sim program ,
which if you have alot off add-ons like I do, is a nightmare, in order
to get everything back to square one. If you are the lucky type and
don't mind a gamble, go for SP2.........


Bob
Bob
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 3:29:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Bob;
No gamble at all for me, my computers and FS 2004.
But I keep my computer clean and verify many things just before installing
Service Packs.

If you think SP-2 is about anti virus and firewall, you are very mistaken.
There is no anti virus protection at all in SP-2.
There are also a lot more than firewall updates:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=811113
Additionally as time goes on, more and more will require installation of
SP-2.
If you ever need to perform a Clean Installation, that is a good time to
install SP-2 via a Windows XP CD with SP-2 slipstreamed.

I have known of several SP-2 installation issues related to various versions
of FS to work correctly after a Clean Installation.
This indicates a pre-existing problem.

--
Jupiter Jones
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> Issues are having a frame rate in the mid 20's or more , with no
> jerkiness in the graphics suddenly switch to more of a slide show
> presentation, with the Flight Simulator. If your firewall and
> antivirus are so in effectual that you need SP2 to protect you, it is
> time to seek out a new Antivirus and firewall program
>
>
> Many flight simmers ( remember the 15% ), have had to resort to
> sometimes having to reinstall the Microsoft Flight Sim program ,
> which if you have alot off add-ons like I do, is a nightmare, in order
> to get everything back to square one. If you are the lucky type and
> don't mind a gamble, go for SP2.........
>
>
> Bob
> Bob
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 6:32:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"You're mistaken. Cite a reference." Okay. Brain Livingston, Editor and
Publisher of the excellent Windows Secrets newsletter (ex-columnist for
InfoWorld), recommends just about any firewall other than Microsoft's band-aid
incoming-only firewall distributed with SP2. His preference (and mine) is Zone
Alarm, but there are others which work well. I suppose I could dig out other
references from other largely independent publications like NYT, WSJ, PC World,
and PC Magazine. But the industy at large, except Microsoft, is almost
unanimous that a non-Microsoft firewall is better. Microsoft seems to be in
denial of the reality. You seem to be too. Are you a Microsoft troll, a
Microsoft shill, or a Microsoft employee hired to spread disinformation in free
and open newsgroups?

.... Ben Myers

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 23:20:08 GMT, "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote:

>
>"NoNoBadDog!" <no_@spam_verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:p hKqe.3986$L65.2764@trnddc05...
>> By all means, do not use windows firewall. It is a bandaid only, and does
>> not mask all ports. While it may be (arguably) better than no firewall,
>it
>> is not much better than no firewall at all.
>
>You're mistaken. Cite a reference.
>
>> Stick with Sygate. With a NAT
>> Router and NAV, you will have very good protection. I would recommend
>going
>> to www.grc.com and running the ShieldsUp! link there...it will check your
>> ports. Quite often routers leave port 113 visible, so you would have to
>set
>> your router up to forward that port.
>>
>> And to answer you original question, I would very highly recommend
>> installation of SP2.
>
>Got that one right.
>
>>
>> Bobby
>>
>> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
>> news:7XHqe.309119$cg1.268712@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> > By all means do SP2. Lose the Sygate and use SP2's firewall. Enable
>> > Automatic Updates and use a good spyware checker.
>> >
>> > "Louise" <none@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> > news:MPG.1d1514727ec2e4a7989897@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
>> >> Win XP, sp1 and Office XP.
>> >>
>> >> I've avoided installing SP2 because I've been so happy with the way my
>> >> system is functioning that I have steered clear. I also use Outlook
>and
>> >> am still able to receive attachments and I don't want to mess that up.
>> >>
>> >> I run NAV and Sygate firewall plus an NAT router. And I never open
>> >> attachments without scanning them first. I generally use Firefox as my
>> >> browser, but occasinally use IE
>> >>
>> >> I'm becoming nervous about security vulnerabilities even with all my
>> >> precautions because I've not installed SP2.
>> >>
>> >> Has everyone but me installed SP2? Has it created problems? Can it be
>> >> removed?
>> >>
>> >> TIA
>> >>
>> >> Louise
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
June 13, 2005 10:36:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Capt Bob" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:mu2pa15je533e02q4bghj30ghe8jk9n6j1@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 03:31:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
> <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:
>
> >Bob;
> >"Microsoft claims that about 15% of people installing SP2 will have
issues
> >with it."
> >"issues" is ANYTHING from the smallest undesired change such as the
change
> >in color on the boot screen to major problems.
> >Do not make the mistake that "issues" means major problems...very rare.
> >Most of those are simple settings adjustments such as disabling the
Windows
> >Firewall when it is not needed.
> >Other issues are easily fixed by software or hardware updates from the
> >manufacturer.
> >Most of those would not have even been issues if the owner had researched
> >those items.
> >
> >Other issues are caused by computers already damaged with spyware and
other
> >problems, known or unknown.
> >Preparation, research and a well maintained computer is less likely to
have
> >any problems.
> >
> >What do other flight simmers do?
> >I see few problems with SP-2 in the sim newsgroups I watch.
> >
> >If you choose not to install SP-2, be sure it is for the correct reason.
>
> Issues are having a frame rate in the mid 20's or more , with no
> jerkiness in the graphics suddenly switch to more of a slide show
> presentation, with the Flight Simulator. If your firewall and
> antivirus are so in effectual that you need SP2 to protect you, it is
> time to seek out a new Antivirus and firewall program

Clueless.

> Many flight simmers ( remember the 15% ), have had to resort to

There's is NO 15%.

> sometimes having to reinstall the Microsoft Flight Sim program ,
> which if you have alot off add-ons like I do, is a nightmare, in order
> to get everything back to square one. If you are the lucky type and
> don't mind a gamble, go for SP2.........

FUD!
June 13, 2005 10:36:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Jupiter Jones" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
news:h0Oqe.49782$HI.13211@edtnps84...
> Bob;
> "Microsoft claims that about 15% of people installing SP2 will have issues
> with it."
> "issues" is ANYTHING from the smallest undesired change such as the change
> in color on the boot screen to major problems.
> Do not make the mistake that "issues" means major problems...very rare.

VERY RARE. MS never claimed 15% in any case.

> Most of those are simple settings adjustments such as disabling the
Windows
> Firewall when it is not needed.
> Other issues are easily fixed by software or hardware updates from the
> manufacturer.
> Most of those would not have even been issues if the owner had researched
> those items.
>
> Other issues are caused by computers already damaged with spyware and
other
> problems, known or unknown.
> Preparation, research and a well maintained computer is less likely to
have
> any problems.
>
> What do other flight simmers do?
> I see few problems with SP-2 in the sim newsgroups I watch.
>
> If you choose not to install SP-2, be sure it is for the correct reason.

Right, there's always folks passin around FUD.
June 13, 2005 10:36:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

<William P. N. Smith> wrote in message
news:ciloa1hd7en1u5f95aqta19b848dicuqml@4ax.com...
> Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:
> >I've avoided installing SP2
>
> IMHO, you should do a good backup, perform all applicable Windows
> Updates except SP2, plus BIOS and driver updates from device
> manufacturers and/or Dell applicable to your machine (see the other
> thread), ensure you are virus and spyware free, do another backup, and
> then apply SP2. [And then, of course, apply all the Windows Updates
> for SP2, rinse, lather, repeat.]

Overkill but good advice.
June 13, 2005 10:42:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:42acee89.49079302@nntp.charter.net...
> "You're mistaken. Cite a reference." Okay. Brain Livingston, Editor and
> Publisher of the excellent Windows Secrets newsletter (ex-columnist for
> InfoWorld), recommends just about any firewall other than Microsoft's
band-aid
> incoming-only firewall distributed with SP2. His preference (and mine) is
Zone
> Alarm,

Too complicated for the average user. The first thing they'll end up doin
is disabling automatic virus signature updates. Do you have any real world
experience. How many of you zealots derive income from selling 3rd party
firewalls?

> but there are others which work well. I suppose I could dig out other
> references from other largely independent publications like NYT, WSJ, PC
World,
> and PC Magazine. But the industy at large, except Microsoft, is almost
> unanimous that a non-Microsoft firewall is better.

NONSENSE!

Microsoft seems to be in
> denial of the reality. You seem to be too. Are you a Microsoft troll, a
> Microsoft shill, or a Microsoft employee hired to spread disinformation in
free
> and open newsgroups?

None of the above but I'm someone who actually has real world experience in
these matters.

Can anyone cite a case with references where a PC protected with MS's SP2
firewall, along with a good & current virus+spyware checker has been
penetrated/infected due to a weakness in SP2's firewall? I don't think so.
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 11:50:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:8Q9re.944758$w62.778026@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>SNIP
>
> Right, there's always folks passin around FUD.
>
>
At least "fred" now admits that he is passing around FUD.

I think we may coin a new acronym...FFUD "freds" FUD!
It is special FUD as can only be created in the miniscule mind of "fred"

Bobby
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 1:30:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Fred,

after reading several of your ridiculous posts on this newsgroup I
have decided to add you to my kill filter so ...Ploink...Plonk.....
whatever, your are gone.... :) 



Bob





On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 06:36:52 GMT, "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote:

>
>"Jupiter Jones" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
>news:h0Oqe.49782$HI.13211@edtnps84...
>> Bob;
>> "Microsoft claims that about 15% of people installing SP2 will have issues
>> with it."
>> "issues" is ANYTHING from the smallest undesired change such as the change
>> in color on the boot screen to major problems.
>> Do not make the mistake that "issues" means major problems...very rare.
>
>VERY RARE. MS never claimed 15% in any case.
>
>> Most of those are simple settings adjustments such as disabling the
>Windows
>> Firewall when it is not needed.
>> Other issues are easily fixed by software or hardware updates from the
>> manufacturer.
>> Most of those would not have even been issues if the owner had researched
>> those items.
>>
>> Other issues are caused by computers already damaged with spyware and
>other
>> problems, known or unknown.
>> Preparation, research and a well maintained computer is less likely to
>have
>> any problems.
>>
>> What do other flight simmers do?
>> I see few problems with SP-2 in the sim newsgroups I watch.
>>
>> If you choose not to install SP-2, be sure it is for the correct reason.
>
>Right, there's always folks passin around FUD.
>
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 1:48:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:uV9re.944790$w62.565472@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

> Can anyone cite a case with references where a PC protected with MS's SP2
> firewall, along with a good & current virus+spyware checker has been
> penetrated/infected due to a weakness in SP2's firewall? I don't think
> so.
>
>

Interesting that you never replied how the firewall protects from Floppies,
CDs and USB Keys. Viruses propigate daily -- faster than updates. All it
takes is one Trojon on one floppy.

Then you'll understand.

Hmm, maybe you won't. You have shown much in the way of smarts.
June 13, 2005 2:49:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:9Ecre.128308$IO.17121@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
> news:uV9re.944790$w62.565472@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> > Can anyone cite a case with references where a PC protected with MS's
SP2
> > firewall, along with a good & current virus+spyware checker has been
> > penetrated/infected due to a weakness in SP2's firewall? I don't think
> > so.
> >
> >
>
> Interesting that you never replied how the firewall protects from
Floppies,
> CDs and USB Keys. Viruses propigate daily -- faster than updates. All it
> takes is one Trojon on one floppy.

Clueless, "a good virus checker" is what I said and they DO protect from
floppies but floppy propagation is archaic...EMAIL idiot and a good current
virus checker protects against email born virus also.

> Then you'll understand.
>
> Hmm, maybe you won't. You have shown much in the way of smarts.

The regulars here are systematically un-informed.
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 3:33:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:exdre.946082$w62.382670@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
> news:9Ecre.128308$IO.17121@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>
>> "fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
>> news:uV9re.944790$w62.565472@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>> > Can anyone cite a case with references where a PC protected with MS's
> SP2
>> > firewall, along with a good & current virus+spyware checker has been
>> > penetrated/infected due to a weakness in SP2's firewall? I don't think
>> > so.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Interesting that you never replied how the firewall protects from
> Floppies,
>> CDs and USB Keys. Viruses propigate daily -- faster than updates. All it
>> takes is one Trojon on one floppy.
>
> Clueless, "a good virus checker" is what I said and they DO protect from
> floppies but floppy propagation is archaic...EMAIL idiot and a good
> current
> virus checker protects against email born virus also.
>
>> Then you'll understand.
>>
>> Hmm, maybe you won't. You have shown much in the way of smarts.
>
> The regulars here are systematically un-informed.
>
>
The only one uninformed here is you. Trouble is, you are just too stupid to
know it.

Bobby
Anonymous
June 13, 2005 3:39:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"fred" <fred@hotmaim.con> wrote in message
news:exdre.946082$w62.382670@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

> Clueless, "a good virus checker" is what I said and they DO protect from
> floppies but floppy propagation is archaic...EMAIL idiot and a good
> current
> virus checker protects against email born virus also.
>
>> Then you'll understand.
>>
>> Hmm, maybe you won't. You have shown much in the way of smarts.
>
> The regulars here are systematically un-informed.
>
>

You think virus updates are magic? New viruses never come out?

You don't use a USB key. Do you even know what one is?

Tom
June 14, 2005 1:57:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Can anyone cite a case with references where a PC protected with MS's
SP2 firewall, along with a good & current virus+spyware checker has been
penetrated/infected due to a weakness in SP2's firewall? I don't think so.

"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:Yfere.128893$IO.485@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
!