Xp Sp2
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Geriatrica, UK
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Xp Sp2
I've applied my Beta version of this SP to a low risk laptop. With this version you must back up your existing set-up. In fact, Microsoft don't even give you the option of not backing up! There's confidence for you.
First impressions are that the new security measures are going to cause some grief at first until we get used to the changes.
Read about it HERE
Oh, and it didn't do the most important job I wanted from it. That is, fix the problem described in this bulletin .
First impressions are that the new security measures are going to cause some grief at first until we get used to the changes.
Read about it HERE
Oh, and it didn't do the most important job I wanted from it. That is, fix the problem described in this bulletin .
'nough said
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Raynes Park
Age: 58
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, I've made a mental note to take some leave when it goes into production - I particularly do not like the fact that it switches the firewall on by default - do you know if it warns you first? And does it check if you have an existing firewall such as NIS?
amowf
amowf
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Geriatrica, UK
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutley Right!
ICF was enabled by default without any prompt.
This showed up in:
Start>Settings>Network Connections>Internet Connection etc...
As I work behind a hardware firewall in the router and ZoneAlam Pro it is hardly necessary to use the Windows XP Firewall as well!
Microsoft does come up with some funny ideas.
ICF was enabled by default without any prompt.
This showed up in:
Start>Settings>Network Connections>Internet Connection etc...
As I work behind a hardware firewall in the router and ZoneAlam Pro it is hardly necessary to use the Windows XP Firewall as well!
Microsoft does come up with some funny ideas.
Plastic PPRuNer
Wassamatta wit' you guys?
Enabling ICF by default is an excellent idea. The average punter has no idea what a firewall is and couldn't turn it on to save his/her life! Smartarses like us can always turn it off!
Enabling ICF by default is an excellent idea. The average punter has no idea what a firewall is and couldn't turn it on to save his/her life! Smartarses like us can always turn it off!
'nough said
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Raynes Park
Age: 58
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mac,
'cause the average punter is going to call me like crazy when the windoze firewall is activated through a windows update and starts having arguments with their install of Norton Internet Security or whatever s/w firewall they already have.
Or starts denying access to/from other computers on their home network without any apparent reason (to them).
I just think Microsoft should have a warning of the possible consequences if it is switched on - it isn't always the right choice.
Something along the lines of "Windows has detected blah blah blah and if you say yes you might grow an extra nose etc etc." - add a "recommended" choice for the average punter, and you're done.
Just my opinion anyway,
amofw
ps. hope the sun's still shining down there - I'm off soon!
'cause the average punter is going to call me like crazy when the windoze firewall is activated through a windows update and starts having arguments with their install of Norton Internet Security or whatever s/w firewall they already have.
Or starts denying access to/from other computers on their home network without any apparent reason (to them).
I just think Microsoft should have a warning of the possible consequences if it is switched on - it isn't always the right choice.
Something along the lines of "Windows has detected blah blah blah and if you say yes you might grow an extra nose etc etc." - add a "recommended" choice for the average punter, and you're done.
Just my opinion anyway,
amofw
ps. hope the sun's still shining down there - I'm off soon!
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry folks - I have to agree with Mac.
Nearly 90 percent of XP pressings whether retail or oem for the trade have never been updated or patched - not even once. You all know with absolute certainty that XP contains the code to establish this with total accuracy don't you?
Now use your skill and judgement to estimate what percentage of that 80+% will have installed third party software firewalls and the nano percentage going for a hardware firewall
I've said it before and I promise it is without any sneering you are entirely unrepresentative of computer users.
Regards
Rob
Nearly 90 percent of XP pressings whether retail or oem for the trade have never been updated or patched - not even once. You all know with absolute certainty that XP contains the code to establish this with total accuracy don't you?
Now use your skill and judgement to estimate what percentage of that 80+% will have installed third party software firewalls and the nano percentage going for a hardware firewall
I've said it before and I promise it is without any sneering you are entirely unrepresentative of computer users.
Regards
Rob
'nough said
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Raynes Park
Age: 58
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If 90% of Windows users are ignoring the updates, despite the warnings, so be it - if you own a computer you need to take responsibility for it - same with motorbikes as I was reminded by a copper once - just because I don't know how it works it doesn't mean I'm not responsible for the maintenance.
Ditto in the aviation world, ignore NOTAMS at your risk and peril.
So, who care cares about the risk takers, the rest of us "responsible" (even if we are unrepresentative) users would surely like to know when a critical service is activated - after all Microsoft warns you of the consequences of de-activating the firewall, so why not a warn us when IT decides to switch it on "for your own good"?
amofw
Ditto in the aviation world, ignore NOTAMS at your risk and peril.
So, who care cares about the risk takers, the rest of us "responsible" (even if we are unrepresentative) users would surely like to know when a critical service is activated - after all Microsoft warns you of the consequences of de-activating the firewall, so why not a warn us when IT decides to switch it on "for your own good"?
amofw
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: CYYC
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People haven't figured out that you need treat a computer more like a motorbike than a TV. The average user just expects the computer to work and has no idea about updates, viruses or security in general. Many of the recent virus outbreaks wouldn't have been half as serious if most Windows users had a proper firewall installed and activated, and had applied the monthly patches put out by Microsoft. You are right in that Microsoft should have provided a warning, but it should still default to on. The average user will probably just click okay and forget about it. As Towers pointed out, most users haven't installed any patches or updates, and only use the software that comes on their computer, thus no firewall and possibly a virus scanner that will stop updating itself after 90 days.
goates
goates
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: CYYC
Posts: 410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Existing users may not, but all new computers will come with it, and there will be a few that do get the patch. This still isn't going to help all the users still using Win98 anyways. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft really pushes this update with an advertising campaign of some kind.
goates
goates
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Geriatrica, UK
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, Ive taken it off - at least for the moment. It had to go and I'll now wait for the next mailing.
Nothing too serious, you understand, but I got fed up with the start-up error message telling me that the VirusScan Console hadn't started.
But it also knackered my e-mail procedure across the LAN.
With a minimum of three workstations in a P2P LAN, BoxA is the sender/receiver of e-mails. On BoxB and BoxC, to send e-mails they are composed as normal and placed in the Outbox. The Outbox is then "moved" to overwrite the Outbox in BoxA using a batch file.
BoxA sends the e-mail using the same Account details.
Except that SP2 won't allow this.
In the linked document above in my first post - updated on 20 Feb 04 - no explanation is offered about how to avoid this. So I'll wait.
Nothing too serious, you understand, but I got fed up with the start-up error message telling me that the VirusScan Console hadn't started.
But it also knackered my e-mail procedure across the LAN.
With a minimum of three workstations in a P2P LAN, BoxA is the sender/receiver of e-mails. On BoxB and BoxC, to send e-mails they are composed as normal and placed in the Outbox. The Outbox is then "moved" to overwrite the Outbox in BoxA using a batch file.
BoxA sends the e-mail using the same Account details.
Except that SP2 won't allow this.
In the linked document above in my first post - updated on 20 Feb 04 - no explanation is offered about how to avoid this. So I'll wait.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop whinging.
...Network protection. These security technologies help to provide better protection against network-based attacks, like MSBlaster, through a number of innovations, including enhancements to Windows Firewall. The enhancements include turning on Windows Firewall in default installations of Service Pack 2, closing ports except when they are in use, improving the user interface for configuration, improving application compatibility when Windows Firewall is on, and enhancing enterprise administration of Windows Firewall through Group Policy...
"Experts" should RTFM, and be aware that this is BETA under discussion...
Yep, I've made a mental note to take some leave when it goes into production - I particularly do not like the fact that it switches the firewall on by default - do you know if it warns you first? ...
amowf
amowf
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Geriatrica, UK
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SP2 Delayed Again
...from one of my Newsgroups by e-mail so can't post a link; slightly edited to shorten it:
Service Pack 2 for Windows XP, which Microsoft had previously said would be out in June, is going to be delayed. Press reports state that Microsoft has delayed the service pack till July, but I know that internally there's already talk that it will most likely be August before SP2 will be released, and possibly later!
Now, some people are all getting exited [sic!] about this, and I agree, it has taken WAY to long for Microsoft to come out with this service pack.
The first delays occurred because Microsoft decided that SP2 should have a whole set of new security features. This is of course a good thing. The latest delays are caused because SP2 is breaking some software functionality with Microsoft products (would they have delayed it if the problems would have been with other developer's products?). Apparently ASP.NET & Visual Studio 2003 are among some of the products having problems, but there are also reports of Outlook 2003 & Outlook Express "hang-ups" when opening messages.
Lets just hope that Microsoft does a thorough job in beta testing this Service Pack, and will only release it if they are confident that it is "good to go", and not because of some arbitrary date that was set by someone.
SP2 for Windows XP will most likely be causing problems for some users. There's no way around it. You cannot test for all the variations in software & hardware installed on users systems, but Microsoft should take its time to minimize it as much as possible.
End of quote.
Service Pack 2 for Windows XP, which Microsoft had previously said would be out in June, is going to be delayed. Press reports state that Microsoft has delayed the service pack till July, but I know that internally there's already talk that it will most likely be August before SP2 will be released, and possibly later!
Now, some people are all getting exited [sic!] about this, and I agree, it has taken WAY to long for Microsoft to come out with this service pack.
The first delays occurred because Microsoft decided that SP2 should have a whole set of new security features. This is of course a good thing. The latest delays are caused because SP2 is breaking some software functionality with Microsoft products (would they have delayed it if the problems would have been with other developer's products?). Apparently ASP.NET & Visual Studio 2003 are among some of the products having problems, but there are also reports of Outlook 2003 & Outlook Express "hang-ups" when opening messages.
Lets just hope that Microsoft does a thorough job in beta testing this Service Pack, and will only release it if they are confident that it is "good to go", and not because of some arbitrary date that was set by someone.
SP2 for Windows XP will most likely be causing problems for some users. There's no way around it. You cannot test for all the variations in software & hardware installed on users systems, but Microsoft should take its time to minimize it as much as possible.
End of quote.
I wonder whether the upgrade will do something clever - such as detecting and destroying illegitimate copies of MS software.
That'd wipe the smile of those smug so-and-sos who think that they're sooo clever to have acquired pirate versions of genuine software!
That'd wipe the smile of those smug so-and-sos who think that they're sooo clever to have acquired pirate versions of genuine software!
The Oracle
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Naples, Florida U.S.A.
Posts: 2,902
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle,
The only Pirated software, are old cracked versions of WinXP Betas. Those were never able to download updates to begin with.
Then there are abused CD-Keys like the one that starts FCKGW...... Which had be shut off my M$ with the release of SP1.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the release of SP2.
Take Care,
Richard
The only Pirated software, are old cracked versions of WinXP Betas. Those were never able to download updates to begin with.
Then there are abused CD-Keys like the one that starts FCKGW...... Which had be shut off my M$ with the release of SP1.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the release of SP2.
Take Care,
Richard
'nough said
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Raynes Park
Age: 58
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
