Windows XP SP3 Postponed Until 2008 259
Rockgod quotes an article saying "With Microsoft now saying that its next major service pack for Windows XP will not ship until 2008, some Windows users are wondering whether the software upgrade will ever be released." and then later "Michael Cherry, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, agrees that Microsoft may very well decide to drop XP Service Pack 3. "It absolutely could happen. Microsoft is under no obligation to produce any service packs, ever," he explains. "They feel that because these fixes are available through the auto-update that there's less need to create a service pack."
Available from autoupdate? (Score:2, Informative)
Oh well, I still don't use XP, and I am still confuzzled by MS.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Since people's machines are nominally downloading and applying these updates automatically, there's less of a need to release a "catchup" package, sin
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Available from autoupdate? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It goes to show that one shouldn't listen to the Anti Malware manufacturers scare stories!
Re: (Score:2)
I was trying to recover a machine for someone who didn't have a router installed between them and their modem, and within a couple of minutes of it being on, it was infected. My solution, take it out, put it behind my firewall and do a clean insta
Re:Available from autoupdate? (Score:4, Insightful)
When I was in college we had our own removal hard drives and it wasn't that uncommon for the students to bring them home, get infected with EVERYTHING and then bring it to the lab.
Sometimes being secure out of the box, even for the box, is important.
Tom
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
See how long it takes to get rooted/malware. Answer? It NEVER will. Because the router blocks...
i did this with a system i had on dial-up. The installation media was a MS Windows XP disc prior to SP 1. I set up the dial-up connection and went immediately to download updates from windowsupdates.com. After half an hour or so, I noticed it was going really slow (even for dial-up). I was already infected with some worm (slammer IIRC). I just let it go and woke up the next day to install the updates /
Could they at least... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Could they at least... (Score:4, Informative)
Slipstream SP2 into your installation CD.
I don't understand how, but installing SP2 over a fresh SP0 install of XP causes the boot process to slow down to nothing compared to SP0's boot time, but if you slipstream SP2 onto an install CD and install from there, the boot process is now just as fast as SP0's. WTF? I still don't get how such an improvement is possible, but I'm swearing by slipstreaming now...
Plus it's convenient, since you have most of the updates already (By most I mean you'll only find 70 some items on Windows Update instead of 200).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's why we want SP3, so that it can be slipstreamed in and vastly reduce that number.
Re:Could they at least... (Score:5, Informative)
nlite [nliteos.com] integrates ALL patches, fixes, hotfixes, etc... into a windwos install CD. hell I can even automate the de-xpify process so I dont have to do it on every machine.
Service packs and traditional slipstreaming is very old hat as microsoft does not care anymore.
Re:Could they at least... (Score:4, Informative)
Windows XP SP2 - Critical Updates
KB873339: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB885835: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB885836: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB886185: Critical Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB887742: Critical Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB888302: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB890046: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB890859: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB891781: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB893756: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB896358: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB896422: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB896423: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB896424: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB896428: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB899587: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB899589: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB899591: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB900725: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB901017: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB901190: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB901214: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB905414: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB905749: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB908519: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB908531: Security Update for Windows XP (v2) (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB911280: Security Update for Windows XP (v2) (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB911562: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB911564: Security Update for Plug-in do Windows Media Player (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB911567: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB911927: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB912919: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB913580: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB914388: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB914389: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB917422: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB917537: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB917953: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB918439: Security Update for Internet Explorer for Windows XP SP2 (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB918899: Cumulative Update for Internet Explorer for Windows XP SP2 (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB919007: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB920214: Security Update for Outlook Express for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB920670: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB920683: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra text for lameness filter...)
KB920685: Security Update for Windows XP (...extra t
Go one step further (Score:3, Informative)
I did a reinstall last night (Score:2, Informative)
Why should we want a new SP anyway? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds sensible (Score:3, Insightful)
The only thing I can see that will be missed is that SPs often slipped in a new feature or two but no doubt someone somewhere thought it would be good business to stop that and insist people plonk down the $ for Vista. As per usual with suits, that's short term thinking. If you're being obliged to do a full OS upgrade you may as well consider other options like Linux.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Sounds sensible (Score:5, Informative)
Because you can read the SP from a CD and have the fixes installed before you connect the computer to the internet at all.
In the past, there have been some security holes that could be exploited as soon as your PC is on the net, making it a race between the malware and the patches which gets to your PC first. Loading the SP from a CD removes this problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't have to be that way (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
See http://unattended.msfn.org/unattended.xp/ [msfn.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Why bother? I'll tell you why. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Sounds sensible - for Microsoft (Score:2)
Now larger ships can slipstream these fixes into their installation source thus reducing the pain but adding the pain to build a new slipstreamed image every so often.
Of course Microsoft (and many users) will say that any new deployments should be on Vista but many many organizations don't want to run a mixed environment and many more will wait a while to see how stable Vista is (i.e.
Re: (Score:2)
Because some people are still running modems?
Or because you can't install XP clean and get it patched up unless you're either behind a firewall, or are willing to be pwned before you finish the install? As I recall, the latest statistic is less than 3 minutes on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another good aspect of having SP's is that it's a lot easier to say that "Our software requires WinXP SP2 or later" than "Our software requires WinXP with all security updates through at least kb1048482393". Likewise, having fixed "snapshots" in the form of S
But but but (Score:2)
What about the people who make their own install media with the service packs already integrated?
Is there a need for a Service Pack? (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, no. I shouldn't have said that.
Personally I think they will kill it (Score:5, Interesting)
They killed Windows 2000 SP5 in the pre-ßeta stage
Given this track record of killing off Service Packs shortly before they are released, as some (including me) might suspect in an effort to drive adoption of their newer software (which makes them money unlike a service pack) I'll be extremely surprised if Windows XP SP3 is ever released.
IMO, what they are saying now is just lip service/stalling and they have already made the decision.
Re:Personally I think they will kill it (Score:5, Interesting)
What is a Betaeta process/stage?
Or do you bank at an ATM machine?
I happen to agree with you, though, that SP3 is dead in the water -- unless Vista bombs and there is a lot of Linux switchover. Announcing a delay allows MS to change their mind later, if necessary, so that they can release SP3 if it becomes a good decision to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed and my computer has a NIC card :-)
The sad thing is I was aware of the redundancy when I wrote it, it's just what I'm used to writing, a bad habit I started many moons ago.
Re:Personally I think they will kill it (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And extrapolating out, Vista SP1 will also be delayed indefinitely, as will the release candidate for whatever comes next.
Better sell those Microsoft shares now, this company doesn't look like its got much life left in it!
Re: (Score:2)
NT4: SP7 killed in Beta
2000: SP5 killed pre-Beta
XP: SP3 killed before Alpha
so if we continue
Vista: Some people might expect SP1 but it's never going to come
Blackcomb/Vienna or any other Vista-follow-up might just never come... watch the signs and heed my prophecy.
Why would they even bother is right (Score:2, Insightful)
Companies requiring high security (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, much more fun for all those admins at high secure locations (without internet access). It is almost impossible to install a new Windows machine using XP, since you will have to do a lot of updating after the installation itself. Even if you have a dedicated server this is a real pain, since you will have to wait for all the tiny updates to complete. It's hard enough to get Internet Explorer or DirectX installed as it is.
And those with only a modem will really enjoy this. Previously you just bought a CD-ROM with the service pack. Not anymore it seems.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's written for 2k, but works for XP too...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downloads/se
Re: (Score:2)
And what about people buying Windows in the first place? Last I checked, they don't update the CDs every time there's a security patch, and many OEMs don't patch before they send the machine out the door--they just install the latest service pack and let the user install the updates.
Unless Microsoft is going to be releasing operating systems more frequently, you'll need some sort of versioning to allow for enitre stable builds after the gold-master, so that they'll be releasing updated retail versions and
Service Pack vs. Hotfixes (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It might also be possible to manually replace individu
Well technically you can slipstream hotfixes too (Score:2)
Almost all hotfixes released in the past few years have also been slipstreamable.
We use this for our XP and Windows 2003 media.
For XP you start with a clean (virgin) XP SP2 media, install it, then run Microsoft Update to determine what fixes Microsoft thinks that system needs. You manually download all those fixes and do a slipsream setup to integrate into your installation media.
The process is the same with Windows 2003 only we start with Windows 2003 R2 media.
The problem is that you pretty much h
It's obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Everybody knows that Win XP has more holes than swiss cheese. And it started to get Joe User. So they will upgrade just because of being scared of 'all those viruses, you know...'. So they'll be effectively forced to buy new system. And Miscosoft will be able to withdraw support for XP faster - which is good for them - they don't earn any cash from supporting it and it costs a lot.
I think they'll not make the same mistake like with Win2000 that is still quite alive and kicking because of good compatibility with XP and SP3 they released for it.
We can expect that Vista will quite fast become quite 'not exactly' compatible with XP. And without SP3 situation will get only worse. That's called strategy. On a big scale.
Re: (Score:3)
No , but they earn a lot of goodwill and god knows they need it right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Linux might not be ready for Joe Sixpack, but he might buy a Mac ("I hear it can run windows too", "they sure do have good ads on TV", "timmy swears BY his. All I've done is swear AT my computer.")
Making people feel "warm and fuzzy" about their OS (i.e. releasing a big update like a service pack to show yo
But they just said vista was coming out in january (Score:3, Funny)
Win2K SP5 all over again (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it just me or does it seems like if MS just did scurity roll-u
Obligation?? How about pleasing your customers! (Score:3, Informative)
You crack me up. (Score:3, Interesting)
Hardly.
If Microsoft wanted to maximise their profits they would have jumped at the chance to split the company up so the Windows team wouldn't be able to piss in everyone else's milk, and all the other products they've had to drop or cripple because they couldn't be turned into life-support for Windows or Office could be created and sold. Microsoft is desperate for a way to get people to Buy More Windows, everything they've
Long Live Windows XP! (Score:2)
Windows genuine advantage (Score:3, Insightful)
M$ doesn't want you to be able to do that. They want you to use the network updater so they can test the validity of your license.
Whether you are in a highly secure setting without internet access or behind a modem in a 3rd world country, they don't care. They want to check your license.
Re:Windows genuine advantage (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice conspiracy theory, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Need XP SP3? Just let these guys do it. (Score:2)
www.autopatcher.com [autopatcher.com]
Updates vs Service Packs (Score:2)
I guess they dont want customers that arent 'on-line', where they can maintain control.
For those who are worried about their darknets ... (Score:4, Informative)
Most people who are responsible for such systems are presumably intelligent enough to slipstream [vorck.com] the latest Service Pack AND all current security patches onto a WinXP installation CD which can then be used to install a machine - in fact, this would be the recommended procedure, as it results not only in the machine having the latest SP from the start but also all the miscellaneous security updates which have been published since the last SP.
Remember, a fresh install of Windows XP + Service Pack 2 is still vulnerable to known exploits. Being able to incorporate all the security updates which are available at the time the machine is brought online results in a signifigantly more secure situation (although Microsoft's well-documented history of ignoring certain inconvenient security holes until they get their collective nose rubbed in them would still make me nervous, personally).
Of course, this only works for i386 versions of Windows - from what I can gather, it's not possible to slipstream the x86_64 version. If I've got that wrong, somebody please correct me (and provide a link to instructions).
Microsoft keeps screwing up (Score:3, Informative)
Microsoft doesn't seem to want to make it easy. If you want to get your patches from Microsoft, you have to either use Windows Update on every single machine, or sift through hundreds of pages to individually download the updates you need. It shouldn't be that hard.
I have four computers running Windows. I want to download updates ONCE for all of them, without wasting bandwidth and without all the hassle that Microsoft wants to put you through to do that. AutoPatcher does this (and hats off to those guys for doing so) so why can't Microsoft get their act together and start putting out something similar?
Re: (Score:2)
You should try using Windows XP. They have this cool thing called Windows Automatic Update. You don't even do anything. Once it's turned on (in Control Panel), it ju
Why not? based on risk analysis it makes sense (Score:2)
Sadly... (Score:2)
The need for a service pack (Score:2)
Downloading a whole bucket of patches for each machine is a waste of network bandwidth, instead the SP can be downloaded once and applied to all machines.
But of course M$ wants everyone to switch to Vista instead and one way is to make life miserable for the users of earlier OS versions.
they are going to have to figure a way to charge (Score:3, Interesting)
We've been in serious talks with 2 or 3 unamed Linux providers for some BIG TIME migration *crosses fingers but doesn't hold breath*.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:They're right, you know (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, I'm sure Joe Sixpack is going to switch to Apple/Linux because SP3 for XP wasn't released...
Unlikely, but the previous poster did not mention who he thought might be motivated. Johnny Systems Engineer might be more motivated to migrate his enterprise to Linux if SP3 is never released and he must choose between upgrading all machines and replacing many of them outright, or finally funding that Linux migration the junior sysadmin has been trying to sell him on.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That's true, but only to a certain extent. Will the training/problems that arise...
That is a different question entirely. The parent post did not claim that a lack of SP3 would mean everyone will switch to Linux. He said it would provide additional motivation for people (all or some?) to switch. It does provide motivation, although how much and what effect that will have in any given enterprise is still a matter of debate.
Re:They're right, you know (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Let's say a company upgrades its machines to vista. Sure, the users will have to learn the new tricks of vista compared to xp but it still is basically the same. Icons on the desktop, start button, menu similiar to the xp-style menu. There's not that much of a learning curve other than to accept the new colors and fonts (and loading times) vista has. As well, the company can
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's one of those things that get glossed over by most slashdotters, but a good portion of people that use computers for their jobs do not like them and absolutely hate it when anything is changed. Where a lot of us will dual or triple boot different OSes, and spend hours tweaking things to just like we want, only to reformat and start over with something else, these people have invested time to learn how to use a tool and don't want to have to learn
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is obvious planning by MS to not cannibalize their Vista sales by giving an "incentive" to "upgrade" to Vista.
Re: (Score:2)
You're completely missing the fact that this means that SP3 will come out a year after Vista ships.
Umm, this entire line of discussion presupposes that SP3 will be delayed for an unreasonable amount of time, or that it will never be released (making Vista, Linux, and other candidates more attractive). Are you sure you're responding to the right post?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The fact is, Microsoft is making dumb decisions. Threatening to cripple Vista and now this. Personally, I hope they do everything they have said they will do.
Maybe people
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I d
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They're right, you know (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a lot of IFs, and I don't expect a huge number of people to fall within those cracks, but I think the numbers will increase and become rather noticable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, and the price of a MacMini is very competitive, and lets him use his existing Video, Keyboard and Mouse, and get all the "latest" hardware bells and whistles in a small package.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, Let's get drunk and install this CD.
Perhaps a distro called "Six-Pack Linux"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
IMO the service packs are mainly for corporate clients; tradition has been that they don't put the stuff in service packs that will get them in trouble with their security minded corporate customers, like the WGA tools, or the draconian DRM that you get from Windows Update, or the ridiculously draconian drm update that is going to be packaged with media player 11.
However, now that they have gotten the federal government to "drink the coolaid" by even allowing WindowsXP i
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Not informative, sorry.
Re: (Score:2)
With Linux, you need to do an "RPM" and then check dependencies, etc. That is way, way, way too much for the average user. Think of your car. Most people only know how to stick the key in the ignition and
Migration tools (Score:3, Insightful)
Then the linux installer would take over, move you from FAT32/NTFS to ext3, restore enough windows config settings to make your linux install look the same. Screen background, saver, favourites, all those thing
Re: (Score:2)
Sun is seriously supporting x86 architecture that's on the HCL -- they have to, their Opteron boxes are both "the new way" and effectively x86.
Will Sun support all the myriad consumer crap that M$ does? Not a chance! And why would they want to??
Now... does Solaris make sense on the desktop? It barely did in 1992, and it sure as hell doesn't any more. If I were a major corporation looking to deredmondify, I would look square at OS X on x
Broken? (Score:2)