Posted on 05/24/2008 10:49:03 AM PDT by my right
Just a couple of questions to people who have installed xp service pack 3. Is it worth the installation? What benifits are they? I did a little research and found a ton of info and a lot of people complaining about problems, would you recommend a person with mediocore pc problem solving skills install this?
I didnt know SP3 was out yet..
I had read somewhere about it, so I hit windows update and it popped up.
I’ve heard bad things about this.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13554_3-9929300-33.html
Go to the above link for more info.
installed it on my laptop, no issues. tried on my desktop, cant get it to boot, so i used system restore and im back to sp2, and it runs fine.
My neighbor installed it and now he has a bunch of problems with his system...some things will not work at all...
If your currently up to date with security and your machine runs fine I would hold off.
As such, it's a convenience for folks like me who configure large number of computers for business, and waiting hours for 60+ patches is a pain.
But if your XP is already fully-patched to current, SP3 is hardly a big deal. The 2 or 3 additional "new" features are miminal. Unless you haven't already upgraded to IE7, in which case lots of settings change.
I've done it on my machines, nary a hiccup.
I had no problems with it, and it seemed to speed things up slightly. However, I have mad computer skills, and I keep my machines up to date and never run “junk” SW. If your machine has no problems whatsoever (and by that I mean no quirks or flaky behavior), then it is probably OK to upgrade.
Some HP computers using AMD processors have an incorrect configuration, and SP3 will have problems, like causing a reboot-loop. That's not really an SP3 problem, that's an HP mis-configuration problem. Nevertheless, be aware...
There are a few other incompatibilities known, but MS ways that SP3 refuses to download and install om machines whose driver set has known problems. So unless you somehow override that lockout, you should be okay.
oops... “ways” => “says”
Exactly. SP3 doesn't add anything of note. It's just a configuration convenience roll-up.
OTOH, it'll be VERY handy the next time you have to bring a fresh XP/SP2 installation up to current patches.
yes I have too, I will definitely wait at least a few months before I install.
I downloaded SP3 to a USB drive and installed it to 7 computers at work....no problems
I installed SP3 about a week before MS’s official release date. Installed on desktop X 2 and Laptop X 2 without any problems or performance issues.
ping
IF you do it, don’t take it from Microsoft Update/Windows Update.
Download the full CD version. Burn it, THEN run the upgrade.
The CD version has all the drivers, especially important if you’re running on an AMD processor and not an Intel . . .
Wait for a while. The auto-update is a safer route to take.
Read a little bit about SP3 and received the update notice couple weeks ago. Waited about a day or so, then clicked on the update notice. Absolutely nothing happened. The notice went away, and my system still shows SP2.
Anyone know what happened here?
Most likely the systems are busy I've seen this happen many times. At some point you will get the files downloaded and the your computer will let you know it is ready.
One thing to keep in mind is this service pack isn’t cumulative. Most service packs in the past were but not this one. You would think it would be after all the iso image is over half a gig in size.
Kirby
Thanks for the info, I would never have thought of the systems being busy as a possibility.
Since I was up to date before SP3 I figured there wouldn’t be alot there, but I had read that I might be able to run a newer level of security for wireless operations.
What about a restore prior to installing SP3?
.ISO files require a CD Burning program such as Roxio or Nero to convert the image into a CD-ROM. . .
I’ve installed SP3 at least 30 times at this point. No issues. Go forth and multiply! (I’m an IT guy, quite up on these things, SP3 is solid)
That's darned curious. First I've heard of all those disappearing solely due to SP3.
I might hazard a guess that those peripherals were previously running on OEM or specialized drivers, and perhaps the SP3 roll-up installed more recent MS drivers "over" the right ones.
> AMD users simply drop into a coninuous reboot cycle.
Not all AMD users. Only those who had an AMD in a box from HP (possibly others) who had MISCONFIGURED the CPU patches, and were patching for the INTEL CPU INSTEAD OF THE AMD CPU.
That's hardly Microsoft's fault. THE OEM MADE THE ERROR. Worse, the OEM knew about it in advance and ignored the warnings. Cheap and lazy.
> We have seen proof once again that Windows users are really Microsoft QA testers.
Well, that's not news.
I'm hardly a Microsoft fan -- I prefer Mac, Linux, and Unix boxes, both at home and at work (I'm a System Admin). Nevertheless, not everything that happens in a Windows system in necessarily Microsoft screwing up. The OEMs who lap up the scum at the feet of the Lords of Redmond screw up on their own pretty often too.
If it's able to run VGA mode, then XP can, in fact see the hardware, it just doesn't know how to deal with it. That does sound like a clobbered video/graphics driver. I've had that symptom before.
> I cannot install updated drivers because the hardware does not exist according to the OS.
I would try repeating whatever procedure installed the graphics and video drivers originally, since those would recognize the hardware, even if the OS does not. For example, there are video cards that aren't recognized by early releases of XP, and it comes up in VGA mode, but if you re-run the video install, it works even though XP didn't see it, and then the video works under XP (and XP sees it).
> I do not disagree with your sentiments. I have written software and managed software development teams for 25 years. We are about to spend $250K on MS Team Foundation Server because it is the best fit for our business. I am just frustrated knowing the extent to which I have our software regression tested for our customers and then seeing something like this.
Yep, I concur completely. Here's how I look at it:
Microsoft is not in the business of making and selling good software. They are in the business of making and selling software to maximize profits for their shareholders. To claim otherwise is disingenuous. They do a very good job -- their shareholders make money every year, often beyond their wildest dreams. They do it by testing only enough to allow them to release something that people will buy. Microsoft spokesmen have been quoted as saying, "It's not bug-free, but it's good enough for you."
I have no quarrel with that -- that's business, and the buyer should beware.
The onerous thing about it is the fact that Microsoft ALSO owns the marketplace.
Which (aside from technical and stylistic preferences) is another reason why I lean towards Mac, Linux, and Unix. Somebody has to provide competition against the juggernaut.
Sonofabeotch. That's a new one for me with SP3. Sorry you had to be the guinea pig.
Is Microsoft going to compensate you for your time and frustration as a beta production tester for SP3?
I didn't think so...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.