Service Pack 2 Now Available

I need help, I started having problems before installing WP service pack 2 and now I can't get into Internet Explorer without being booted out. One way I have found to get into it is through JAVA SUN. When I try to get up on the Major Geek sight so I can download a spyware program it boots me out. I don't know what to do, please help. My computer is fairly new, bought it in May, I only play games on my computer and listen to music, Please help. Thanks Kim

 

Everybody is quick to blame MS.

If Sp2 worked initially, then something else caused the problem.

Its not like MS put a timer in there to go to crap after a certain time.

 

Well it appeared to work well untill I turned it off and restarted it the next day. Norton anti virus refuses to work. I uninstalled and reinstalled Norton System Works 3 times now and several features in the program won't work including anti virus. I am still getting the firewall messages popping up. I keep clicking that I don't want to be reminded and that I also have my own firewall. Every time I reboot...same messages again.

I went to a Microsoft Support page and it appears as if about 15% of the people that installed SP2 have BIG problems with it...so I'm not alone. They reccommended I go in to "sfc / scannow", insert my XP CD and make sure that everything is cool with XP and there arene't any corrupted files. That helped a couple of issues I had, but not the others. They also recommended I go to www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm to make sure I get a clean re-installation. I still have the same grief.

Even Symantec now has a support page to help all the people with SP2 and are having trouble with their other programs.

Once again, MS is using the general population as their beta testers. MS wants a monopoly on every genre of software out there. My advice to anyone considering SP2....WAIT!!!!!! You just might be one of the 15% that deeply regrets it!

 

How come it works for me? How come it works for my wife?

How come it works for my friends?

How come it works on every computer here in this support center? Every computer in the Candian centers? Every computer in the India center?


Do I fall under a special category, that it works for me?

I don't feel like a beta tester, except for WIndows Media Player 10.

Everyone talks about percentages of failure.

Percentages, of what number?

10, 100, 1,000, 10,000?

Percentages are worthless without the rest of the data to back them up.

 

Another thing. Norton antivirus sucked before SP2. Did you think it would suck less after SP2?

 

Of course you aren't alone. There were people who had problems with SP1, in the same manner. Yet, Sp1 endured, and problems went away. So it must not have been the fault, of MS, right? I suspect SP2 will be no different.

Where exactly on the Support dite did you see the 15% failure rates?

I'm curious.

 

http://support.microsoft.com/newsgr...CLID=US&ICP=GSS3&sd=GN&id=fh;en-us;newsgroups

 

Thats a newsgroup.

Its for support problems. May I emphasize problems? Thats all you see in a place like that.

Did you expect to see happy people?

 

I'm not quite sure I understand your response. Are you implying that a 15% failure rate is acceptable? Or you you implying that it was like that with '98, with 2000, with SP1, so we should just learn to accept being used by MS to find their problems for them?
If this was a mechanic, a new color TV, new car, or new Boeing airliner, how tolerant do you think the public would be with a 15% failure rate?

I envy you and the 85% that have no problems, but for the rest of us this is a major nightmare ...again!

Here's the Microsoft Support page where I read that 15% of the people that downloaded SP2 have problems:
http://support.microsoft.com/newsgr...CLID=US&ICP=GSS3&sd=GN&id=fh;en-us;newsgroups

 

Ok, let me put it into perspective.


I'll be generous, and say you have the read the accounts of 200 people installing SP2, even though I know you haven't.

Out of those 200, 15% failed. Thats 30 people down. Not too good of stats, I agree.


Now lets take into consideration that millions of computers are installing Sp2.

Now lets apply what you know in this example. 30 peope bombed.

Millions of computers are installing Sp2.

How many have you heard from? --200

From 1 million users, how many is 200?

00.02%

You heard from .02% of computer users, of which, 15% of .02% of all users getting SP2 failed.



See how irrelevant percentages are now without all the data?

 

Tack onto that all the problems related to SP2 failing to install due to peoples pc's being riddled with spyware and viruses.

 

First of all, I don't mean to start anything with anyone from MajorGeeks. I've required assistance on several occasions in the past and I was gratiously (and successfully) assisted by very knowedgable and corteous members.

Right now I'm in a foul mood due to SP2. As far as you being "generous" with your figures...why are you assuming that Microdoft support thread is the sole place on the planet that has letters from disgruntled users? Just that one thread had hundreds of pages of requests for help. I don't mean to drag this out, but there were dozens of other threads just on that one page, how about the poblems people are posting on Symantec's site? How about all other software manufacturer's sites?

The point is; if only fifty thousand people on the planet have problems, that still shouldn't be construed as "acceptable". Whether it's SP2 that doesn't work or SP2s incompatability with 3rd party software...what's the difference.

Boy, I'll bet if your anti virus program or printer software stopped working after your SP2 download...you'd be singing a different tune

 

No...because I would be bitching at the 3rd party vendors to fix their crap.

 

No...that was using a more than generous number to grab your 15% figures from and to show how out of context it was.


Your figures. Remember, you said you figured 15%.

 

I apologize for not expressing myself more clearly. The MS technician that was assisting me is where the quote of 15% came from. He's the one that told me that 15% of the downloads have problems. I'm sorry if you misunderstood and thought I was only talking about the 15% on that thread. It was more like 100% on that thread. You were right in the first place, that's where people come to complain, And there are a ton of them!

Are you on Microsoft's payroll or something? Why defend a defective product so vehemently?

Now allow me put things in perspective: Let's say 15% of Ford Explorers rolled over or 15% of all Firestone tires would get bowouts, would you call that acceptable?

Let me clarify another thing...It's not just 3rd party software that stopped working due to SP2, I've got problems with SP2 itself. Why did MS tell me I had 3 days to reactivate my OS? It said I installed a lot of new hardware. Right...the last hardware I installed was a power supply last November. Why does the firewall warning keep popping up? Why does XP now take a couple of minutes to shut down when no other programs are running? Why does it now take almost a minute for all my icons to appear on my desktop after I boot up? These are all new problems happening in Microsoft's software...not 3rd party!

My computer is constantly cleaned, constantly updated, I have a firewall and (had) anti virus. As a matter of fact, I recently tried a couple of other virus and optimizer programs that were reccomended on this site just to see how they work. Therefore I am positive there was nothing wrong with my computer prior to downloading SP2!!!

You think it's OK for all 3rd party companies to run out and force everyone to download their patches (after experiencing hell) just to accomodate Microsoft? You think it's the 3rd parties responsibility? Why did Microsoft all of a sudden my other software incompatible. If that's Microsoft's arrogant stand on what they've done, I'm buying an Apple tomorrow!!!!!!! I also think that if that is really Microsoft's attitude, they'd better get ready for a slew of lawsuits!

 

Adrynalyne:

Look I don't want to lock horns with you. I posted on this thread because I have a problem and was looking for some help / advice. If you want to defend how great SP2 is, that's fine, I got your point.

Now, is there anyone else out there that can offer some assistance?

 

Make a list of all the problems you have, SPECIFICALLY. I will try to help you.

As for an MS technician telling you that 15% fails, most MS techs are complete, utter morons. He/She/It got the same percentages everyone else did, from their arse.

I'm not defending SP2, but when I work with it, day in, and day out, use it without issues, and know it like the back of my hand, I tend to defend what I know to be right.

MS made their position and message clear well before SP2 came out. Vendors make sure their programs are compliant, or they won't work right.

This is a comment, not really a challenge. If you did a clean install of XP, installed SP2, things would work fine. So, how can it not be 3rd party?

--No need to answer, but thats the point I am taking.

 

Funny. I figured you would be logical enough to know that it is not the responsibility of MS to test every application in EXISTENCE, nor their ABILITY. Noboy can test everything. Yet, MS is listing what they find not work, and are telling people about it, only to be crucified. Is MS patching these apps known to have problems? No. Is the vendor patching them? Most are. Yes, it must be the fault of MS that they hired programmers who take shortcuts.

Whatever. I'm tired of talking about something that people simply fail to even listen.

Bitch all you want about SP2. I have a 100% success rate on every computer I've installed it on, and so has everyone I know at work.

There is a 100% success rate in all MS 2K and XP support centers across the world. Not the country, the world (as in, installed on the machines at work). Yes, even Windows 2000 support runs XP on their workstations and backup computers (we use them for testing fixes and apps). Lets keep in mind that these are machines we use and abuse on a regular basis. We install apps of all sorts, to reproduce issues.


Until I can hear satisfactory evidence why these machines work and nobody else does then the bashing is nothing but a bunch of noise to me.

SP2 is not perfect, nor is any other software. As MS finds flaws with it (like any other software), they will patch it. This takes time. Of course, you guys will bash them for providing a fix as well.

 

Funny, I thought that was a statement.

 

Can you explain why all of our computers, in all of our call centers, which use Norton Corporate, do not have problems?

Here is something you don't know, but have to consider. How many of these people (vendors) tested their applications under beta SP2, and never fixed the problems that cropped up, assuming RTM would be different?

 

At any rate, I'm done arguing. I've seen many, many flawless SP2 installations.

I've seen them fail, too.

A perfect example is the guy who called us today that coudln't get SP2 installed, because he was infected with viruses.

Or another person who called because SP2 messed up her machine, and we pulled HUGE amounts of spyware off of it.

The list goes on and on.

You guys are stuck on your experiences, I am stuck on mine. The people who have issues that I've dealt with, or heard from, had system issues beforehand.

Go figure that SP2 magnified them.

This argument was here when SP1 was new.

Its back again now that SP2 is here.

It will return when SP3 comes out.

/yawn

 

Can a Diagnostic program hurt my computer? i put the ( Hot Cpu tester Pro )
on my computer , and it said my computer was great working order. i have had no prolbem since i put it on . but do you think i hurt it ?
thank you
Chad

 

Reading comprehension isn't a strong point for you, is it? Did you not see where I posted that all of WIndows 2000 and XP support centers worldwide use XP, with SP2 on the computers?

Include what? Text that some vendors may have been too lazy to provide patches for their software in a timely manner?

 

That article was writeen by an idiot. It was already picked apart here.

Of course, most things The Register writes is to create hype, and is usually fiction, or half truths.

 

I would just like to add a little more to this.

We received an email from the net admin a month or two back. Some computers had the ICF turned on (Pre SP2 firewall), and the NAV Corporate clients were unable to get updates.

We were asked to check our machines and turn it off as needed.

So, SP2 had not a damn thing to do with NAV Corp not communicating, other than it enables the Windows Firewall, by default.

Which, if NAV Corporate is used in the manner for which it was designed, over a domain, it becomes a non issue, because the Windows Security Center and firewall are all disabled when you join a domain.

So, unless you go in and manually enable the firewall, it is not an issue. The issue Symantec mentions was there before SP2, so how that becomes a valid SP2 argument, I will never understand.

I'll post a screenshot later, if you so desire.

 

http://forums.majorgeeks.com/showthread.php?t=41558

Oh, we spent plenty of time.

Its a complete joke.

 

If you use NAV Corp on a domain, for which it was designed (hence the name, corporate edition), the problem doesn't occur with SP2, because the Windows Firewall is not enabled.

 

Is it necessary to install SP1 first before SP2 or is sp2 all inclusive?

Bo Bo Bolinski

 

All inclusive.

 

Not listening still, I see. It stops updating because of the firewall being enabled automatically. That is it. It doesn't work that way on a domain. If you are using NAV Corporate in a home environment, one would hope that using an advanced program as such, you would have the common sense to realize firewalls will block its updating.

DUH!

Oh I see...a few good points, and the article is no longer a joke? How about the inaccuracies they published? Those are excusable? LMAO!

Read the comment MA made. That damn near sums it up completely.

Anyone who can read should know that SP2 doesn't block outgoing traffic. MS has stated that over and over. Its not like they mislead you. They don't include antivirus as well. Lets bash them for that too!

 

Any company that runs out and gets the latest OS and patches when they are released is made of fools.

That goes for any OS, any patch.

Did you think SP2 would be an exception?

Hell, there are still a lot of businesses using NT4.

This is not a valid point to bring up.

Funny, a little research would show that nearly all MS support is not even run by Microsoft, it is outsourced.
So how did MS find work arounds on machins they don't control again?

 

Heck, there are still alotta people who come to this site using WIN98!

 

Exactly.

Busineeses upgrade when they need to, or have a good reason to.

Not because its the latest and greatest thing out.

Businesses usually have the network locked down so that OS vulnerabilities aren't near the issue like they are at home.

If the Net Admin is competent, of course.

So it only makes sense that SP2 isn't automatically being snatched up by businesses.

Same as SP1 was.

Same as SP3 will be.

Gah!!!

 

I love the edit timer, I'd like to clarify what I said.

In regards to business, test first, if all goes well, and it is needed, deploy it.

That is why you see some companies still using NT 4, instead of 2K. Thats why you see some companies using 2K instead of XP Pro. Thats why you will see some companies use XP Pro, instead of whatever OS Longhorn ends up being named.

That is also why you won't see businesses getting SP2 immeditaley, as well.

Like I said before:

It was the same for SP1.

It is the same for SP2.

It will be the same for SP3+

 

Yeah, right.

Didn't look very hard, did you.

http://forums.majorgeeks.com/showthread.php?t=41558

Nope.

Its not the responsibility of MS to make someone read or comprehend. Reading is a skill you learned in grade school!

 

Adrynalyne, what is MSKB or MG? And don't you like cats?

Bo Bo Bolinski

 

Adrynalyne, I'm finding it hard to determine from these almost 200 posts whether to install SP2 or not?

What is the prognosis? I didn't install SP1 on my PC and have no issues. What to gain from SP2? You seem to have major issues with the auto update disable of virus updates due to a firewall supplied with SP2?

It's obvious you are a saavy PC guy.

Bo Bo Bolinski

 

Thanks chaslang!! DUH!! just a neophyte, not as sophisticated as the kitten killer.

Bo Bo Bolinski

 

Too bad the latest posts don't go to the top rather than the bottom??

Bo Bo

 

I don't quite understand what you mean.

I do reccomend installing SP2, yes. It contains quite a few bug fixes, as well as security updates. It includes WMP 9, and DirectX 9.0c. It also contains a popup blocker for IE that works quite well.

It is true that some people are experiencing problems. I HIGHLY reccomend that you disable your antivirus and firewall during installation. I would also make sure you have the most up to date drivers, and software updates. Make certain your machine is free of spyware and viruses.


Even though some people are having problems, many are not:

http://forums.majorgeeks.com/showthread.php?t=40910&page=4

Take a look at the post by Genman. Installed on 5 computers, without issue.

Take a look at this link as well.

http://editorsdesktop.com/SP2inst.html

 

Take a look at this article too, if you are concerned for compatibility.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=842242

 

what benefit to disabling my Norton anti-virus during install? Don't have a firewall.

Bo Bo

 

Anti-virus can interfere with a major update of this sort. Anything that majorly changes the OS, sometiems the antivirus will step in, or prevent certain things from installing.

 

If you mean the order of how you can read the posts in a thread, I sent you a private message explaining how you can change that for yourself.

 

Pegg,thanks, but didn't see that after my remark. where would that be? page??

If you mean the order of how you can read the posts in a thread, I sent you a private message explaining how you can change that for yourself

Bo Bo

 

whoops! private, sorry bout that! I'll ck it out. Thanks Pegg!

 

I agree to that. Disabling all the services he mentioned would make the computer very secure. Security goes up 99% when you can no longer get onto the internet.



I really wish you would stop pointing to Leaktest. I still haven't forgotten that SP2 doesn't block outgoing traffic...

Go to Help and Support, a feature designed for the average user. Search on the topic Firewall. Go to the Windows Firewall overview. It not once leads someone to think it blocks anything outgoing, anywhere. If someone assumes it does, then it is their fault! Nowhere is it written it does! If you have a car that you believe can fly, and others do too because they listen to rumors, yet its not documented anywhere, and you drive it off a cliff and die, is it the fault of the maufacturer? NO! Ignorance is not bliss! Just because someone doesn't actively look for information, or assumes, doesn't make it OK. It is your responsibility to learn, and if you don't, well then you should take responsibility for what ensues. Why should MS, or any other company be responsible for the average user learning about how to use a computer? When does responsibility fall on the shoulders the person behind the keyboard?

SP2 doesn't include antivirus. There are some rumors it does. We've had people not installing antivirus that call us, it is not uncommon. Is it still the fault of MS? MS did not publicize anything of the sort.

Now lets look at it from another point of view.

Netscape sued Microsoft because they bundled IE into the browser, for free, causing an incredibly unfair advantage.

Now lets say Microsoft features a full featured ingress/egress firewall that does the job great!

The vendors of Kerio, Zonelabs, Symantec, Mcafee, and other big firewall names will take MS to court and sue the living crap out of them.

Same thing with an antivirus.

Don't think these decisions didn't come into play.

Lets take another pespective on this.

For windows to be useable by the masses, it has to be a compromise of easy to use and secure. A compromise, you can't have something that excels in both.

Lets say Grandma installs Zone Alarm. Installation goes fine, and then she gets online. All of a sudden she gets a popup that asks her if she wants to allow outgoing traffic to "insert application, or service.

She panics! OMG, I don't know that that is! Block, block, block.

Grandma can no longer get browse, or get email.

Grandma calls us.

By the way, is it Grandma's fault for not reading up on thee things before blocking? Or can she plead ignorance because, she is an "average user".

Sound unlikely? The number 1 call into Microsoft for no browse issues are firewall settings that are too strict, every damn thing under the sun has been locked down.

Now if the WIndows firewall was just like that--we would have even MORE problems, because then the user didn't actively install the fireall, it was already there.

There is nothing wrong at all with thrid party firewalls, but when the average user breaks their system with them, it becomes a problem.

The more secure Windows becomes, the less user friendly it ends up.

There has to be a compromise. If MS includes an OS that encomapsses everything (that would be nice), they get sued. Past experience has taught them that.



If you want a good secure system, install a reliable antivirus, and firewall. Period. Thats true of any OS. Linux usually ships with a firewall, and antivirus, if you so choose, but they are third party to Linux! Why should MS be any different?

Would you complain more if MS didn't include a firewall at all?

Windows Firewall is an upgrade of the Internet Connection Firewall. When the ICF was around, nobody assumed it blocked egress traffic (or at least, nobody bitched about it like now). So why would it be the different for Windows firewall? Just because its an upgrade, its safe to assume?

 

I installed SP2 over my Norton AV w/o a hitch. Both my system which has 2003 and a family members who had 2004.

I have not tried updating with Norton Internet Security installed, however.